Search found 19130 matches

by meic
15 Nov 2018, 11:59pm
Forum: The Tea Shop
Topic: Speed Awareness Course
Replies: 258
Views: 10779

Re: Speed Awareness Course

al_yrpal wrote:My last speeding fine was 1972, I often speed on motorways but not on urban or country roads. Since 72 I have never been caught for anything.

The speedo inaccuracy doesnt surprise me. They fit lots of modern cars with different size tyres and I think thats why many models have overoptimistic or underoptimistic speedos.

Al


Underoptimistic speedos are not allowed, the 10% tolerances are strictly towards overoptimistic.
My present car, which is my first to not have a speedometer cable, records its mileage with an accuracy which perfectly matches Googles distances and the GPS but its speedometer reading is almost 10% over.
by meic
15 Nov 2018, 11:05pm
Forum: The Tea Shop
Topic: Speed Awareness Course
Replies: 258
Views: 10779

Re: Speed Awareness Course

mjr wrote:
meic wrote:I was no more dangerous than when I went down there the time before at 40mph legally, which isnt a judgement on what the speed limit should be, it just illustrates that the accidental speeding was not a leap from safe to dangerous, merely crossing a line drawn through a statistical scatter. I was just as dangerous perfectly legally the time before but thats fine.

It wasn't fine because driving faster than is safe was still illegal no matter what the signed limit - it's a limit not a target or recommendation. It's just much easier to punish people for exceeding a signed limit, plus too many people still driving faster than is safe is a valid reason to set a lower signed limit.

But the only place where it wasnt "safe" to do 40mph on that bit of road was in your mind.
If somebody was sitting their driving test or their advanced driving test on that bit of road and they failed to be near the present 30mph limit, or if sitting it earlier failed to be near that 40mph limit, they would fail their test for not making progress.
You would not be able to find an expert witness who would fault a driver just for driving at the posted limit for that road whether it was the older 40mph or the newer 30mph.

Of course conflating the offence of speeding with the offence of dangerous driving is Safespeed/ABD's trick.
Speeding is its own separate offence and that is the crime that you have committed and been convicted for if you are caught speeding. That it is safe is no defence, equally being unsafe because you are driving too fast for conditions doesnt mean that you are guilty of speeding.
by meic
15 Nov 2018, 7:31pm
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: The (ir)responsibily of the Media
Replies: 61
Views: 5704

Re: The (ir)responsibily of the Media

mjr wrote:Not entirely. Oxford dictionaries are often wrong and should not be trusted IMO.

Who has the authority to decide what is right or wrong? This isnt Germany with a Duden, so you can authoritatively say that something is right or wrong because the Duden says so.
In the absence of such an authoritative book the OED is as valid a determination as anything else.
They think that they are that authoritative source.
https://slideplayer.com/slide/10416612/
by meic
15 Nov 2018, 6:57pm
Forum: The Tea Shop
Topic: Speed Awareness Course
Replies: 258
Views: 10779

Re: Speed Awareness Course

Cugel wrote:
meic wrote:
in the hope that your inattention or incompetence can be excused because you were "unlucky"

This bit is entirely in your mind. This habit of yours of making up other peoples thoughts is very irritating.

You said, amongst the other items on your list:

"Some drivers obey the law to the best of their ability and get unlucky"

In other words, for a variety of reasons some drivers fail to obey the law by speeding and write that off as "being unlucky".

If a driver is caught speeding they will certainly be unlucky if that's the only time they have been speeding in years of driving but were caught. The much more likely probability is that they habitually speed but on this occasion they happened to do so when detection was possible.

I hear all sorts of excuses all the time from drivers who perform all sorts of dangerous acts, including speeding. They generally boil down to, "I am a better judge than the law". They then add, "Nothing untoward happened when I broke the law so it must be OK to do so". They have the strange logic that because they are they, the law doesn't apply: they are "special". So even if it does apply to them "technically", it shouldn't. On top of that, they believe that what didn't happen today can't happen tomorrow in similar circumstances.

But basically all of that is reasons-after-the-fact. What happens in reality is that they drive without due care and attention or in a dangerous manner because they want to and don't care about the possible consequences for the potential victims.

I'd make all you "unlucky" miscreants work in the places that have to deal with traffic "accidents", for at least one year, until you "get it".

Cugel

When you say "in other words" what you are saying is actually something quite different to what I said.
In the real words from my mouth what I am actually saying is that "ALL drivers speed at some point and the unlucky ones get caught when they do it."
Any driver who puts in any reasonable distance on unfamiliar roads will have broken the speed limit at some point just because we are mere imperfect human beings who can not get everything right all the time. Anybody who claims they are beyond reproach in that respect is showing the arrogance of illusory superiority and not admitting that they were lucky enough that nobody was watching when they did make a mistake (probably not even them themselves!).
by meic
15 Nov 2018, 6:44pm
Forum: The Tea Shop
Topic: Speed Awareness Course
Replies: 258
Views: 10779

Re: Speed Awareness Course

mjr wrote:
meic wrote:Two million drivers are caught speeding per year.
I havent had a ticket since the 1980s but it could happen to me tomorrow if I was driving somewhere new or they changed the limit on a regular route.
Some drivers get a ticket because they are always speeding.
Some drivers obey the law to the best of their ability and get unlucky
Some drivers obey the law to the best of their ability and stay lucky.
The only ones immune from getting a ticket are those who dont drive.

I feel that's being a speeding apologist. The only good excuse which comes to mind is if it's a non-default limit (such as 40 or 20 on a single carriageway, or 30 on an unlit one), the road looked safe to travel more quickly and some limit signs were missing or obscured - but in those cases, the ticket should be rescinded anyway. Otherwise, take the punishment and don't try to suggest that it's socially acceptable because everyone does it - they don't, as you can see from how few get tickets.

If you know that you are at risk of speeding, then why haven't you taken steps to reduce it? I realised that the speedo in my latest car is badly-designed and difficult to read fast enough for modern roads, so I added a head-up display that projects the speed translucently low onto the road ahead and assists me in obeying the law. It was a bonus that I could switch it to km/h for easier legal driving abroad.

I havent had a ticket (or any other speeding related contact with the Police) for three decades, even though I spent quite a lot of those decades as a delivery driver and dispatch rider.
So I clearly have taken very effective steps to avoid the risk of speeding, it is absolutely stupid to imply that I havent.
Just as your feeling that acknowledging that any driver can have made a mistake and committed speeding is in some way apologising for it, it is merely stating a fact.
I havent made a mistake and been caught, I am certainly not apologising for the speeding convictions which I havent had when I point out that others who endeavour to drive with as much good intent as I do may still have ended up getting a ticket because they were unlucky enough to have missed something, despite their efforts.
Any body who claims they are not equally fallible as such a person who got caught, or me who hasnt been caught (but admits it is a possibility) is talking rubbish.

Otherwise, take the punishment and don't try to suggest that it's socially acceptable because everyone does it

Well here is more garbage, what punishment? I havent even been accused by anybody who knows anything only by some forum poster making stuff up for no valid reason.
No way was I claiming it was socially acceptable to speed because everybody does it, I was merely claiming that one speeding ticket doesnt prove that somebody is always doing it.
they don't, as you can see from how few get tickets.

Yes, I AM one of those who doesnt get tickets. It will probably remain that way because I dont go around speeding but you never know, it is human to err.
by meic
15 Nov 2018, 6:20pm
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Public Places Protection order bans cycling on NCN route
Replies: 50
Views: 4937

Re: Public Places Protection order bans cycling on NCN route

Personally, I feel that Sustrans should sign the best cycle-able route and not keep sending us into banned zones.

I totally agree but it happens for various reasons. Like the council arranging a ban and implementing it without telling Sustrans and the first that Sustrans knows is when a volunteer ranger happens to ride that way.
The Carmarthen Council built a very expensive cycling bridge across the river Towi and inorder to "justify" it they redirected one of the Sustrans routes (crossing the old bridge) out of its way on a diversion to the new bridge, across it and back to the old bridge the wrong way up a one way street. This was all done behind Sustrans back and the council made and erected big solid signs which rather dwarf our little stickers. Sustrans can only erect signs (on public land) with their permission.
You never see a motorway abruptly dead-ending into a no-motor-vehicles stretch for 400m.

Motorways are on the top of the pecking order, cyclists are the bottom. If work needs doing on a motorway or other main road, local cycle tracks make useful access routes and depots for the workers and their gear and can be closed for months while this happens..
by meic
15 Nov 2018, 9:26am
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Hoax Farcility.
Replies: 34
Views: 6044

Re: Hoax Farcility.

I am lingering on it because it is still on the website as farcility of the Month October 2010.
That is eight years that this hoax has remained there.
A correction, a removal, an apology?
I know I am just too hasty about this, its only eight years.
by meic
15 Nov 2018, 9:16am
Forum: The Tea Shop
Topic: Speed Awareness Course
Replies: 258
Views: 10779

Re: Speed Awareness Course

in the hope that your inattention or incompetence can be excused because you were "unlucky"

This bit is entirely in your mind. This habit of yours of making up other peoples thoughts is very irritating.
Paul Tuohy seems to have accepted his rap without complaint and so would I.
My last time where I recall catching myself speeding was on a regular route where on reaching the first repeater after having slowed down to 40mph on entering a 40 zone, I saw that the repeater said 30.
The speed limit had been changed, I was lucky and it wasnt the first days when they set up a camera to show they mean it, so I wasnt caught. If I was caught I would have said "fair cop". I was no more dangerous than when I went down there the time before at 40mph legally, which isnt a judgement on what the speed limit should be, it just illustrates that the accidental speeding was not a leap from safe to dangerous, merely crossing a line drawn through a statistical scatter. I was just as dangerous perfectly legally the time before but thats fine.
by meic
15 Nov 2018, 9:02am
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Hoax Farcility.
Replies: 34
Views: 6044

Re: Hoax Farcility.

Perhaps if you could come up with a photo and suitably humorous caption for this bit of c**p just around the corner I could replace it:
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.6624843 ... 312!8i6656

You could if you want.
However you would continue to undermine your general case. If you ever went and cycled there you would see that the options are very limited for what they can do for people who do not wish to cycle on the very busy narrow A484. At certain times of the day I will use the cyclepath across the Lougher Bridge, even with its angler shaped hazards as the A484 isnt too pleasant.
I dont wish to take my daughter on the A484 but will let her ride on the A4240 so I enter or leave the farcility at that point with her. When she was younger we would indeed dismount at that point and cross the road to use the cyclepath on the other side because the road has to crossed anyway to follow the route and it avoids having to cross the Yaucht club's entry road.
The caption would read yet another annoying "Cyclists Dismount" sign which most people ignore.
by meic
15 Nov 2018, 8:43am
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Hoax Farcility.
Replies: 34
Views: 6044

Re: Hoax Farcility.

Pete Owens wrote:This seems to be somewhat of an obsession of yours, which presumably means you are a fan of NCN 4.

Perhaps if you could come up with a photo and suitably humorous caption for this bit of c**p just around the corner I could replace it:
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.6624843,-4.0793451,3a,15y,308.83h,80.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svdtFFpxEVaMDkJeGBXS0bw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656


No, it means that I dont like this bare faced lie staying on your website unchallenged.
There are large sections of NCN4 which I avoid having used them once. This hoax farcility is a section which not only do I use regularly, I also used it before it was part of the NCN when NCN4 was still running on the minor roads around it.

It is the lying that offends me.
by meic
15 Nov 2018, 1:14am
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Hoax Farcility.
Replies: 34
Views: 6044

Re: Hoax Farcility.

Almost six years since this hoax farcility was pointed out to them and it is still there undermining their credibility.
Here is a picture from the road on top of that "concrete wall" you can see the fence which would be on your left after turning and the back of the sign showing the way along the path.
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.6606149 ... 312!8i6656
by meic
15 Nov 2018, 1:02am
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Sustrans Report "UK Cycle Network is unsafe for children"
Replies: 53
Views: 6457

Re: UK cycle newwork unsafe for children

But they didnt make the admission it was rubbish. Those are your words.
How about the Cycling and Walking Minister.
Jesse Norman said the cycle network was a great asset for cyclists and walkers but the report showed more needed to be done to make it fully accessible.


One of the main faults which they have listed is that two thirds of the network "is on roads".
by meic
15 Nov 2018, 12:32am
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Sustrans Report "UK Cycle Network is unsafe for children"
Replies: 53
Views: 6457

Re: UK cycle newwork unsafe for children

You might think that an apology is in order but that says more about your attitude than than the cycle paths.
I have ridden many miles with my daughter on Sustrans provided paths, when otherwise we wouldnt have ridden. For which they get thanks.
I have also ridden many miles on Sustrans paths while doing long Audaxes with hardcore riders for which Sustrans deserves thanks.

If a bit of Sustrans path isnt to your liking then dont use it, others will.
There is plenty of Sustrans stuff which I will not ride on, just as there is plenty of the state provided roadway which I will not ride on. Often one of them facilitates me in avoiding the other.

Yes the crappy barriers while crossing the A40 near Whitland are abominable but I have yet to see a cyclist choosing to ride on the A40 instead.

PS: That totally dishonest listing of a bit of cyclepath in Swansea is still up on your website of crap cycling facilities. The one which I have been pointing out to you for years where you claim it ends in a concrete wall but in fact it turns left before the wall and runs alongside it.
http://wcc.crankfoot.xyz/facility-of-th ... er2010.htm
I think that at this point an apology is in order. :mrgreen:
by meic
14 Nov 2018, 11:31pm
Forum: The Tea Shop
Topic: Speed Awareness Course
Replies: 258
Views: 10779

Re: Speed Awareness Course

I never break the limits. Why would I?

Assuming that you actually drive, because you are human. You are not perfect, there are limits to your ability.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority

Rather amusingly (considering the unfathomable self-serving accusation)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-serving_bias
by meic
14 Nov 2018, 11:21pm
Forum: The Tea Shop
Topic: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'
Replies: 21765
Views: 848446

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

It does seem rather unfair that the portion of the UK that has caused the rest of us so much grief and cost so much, for so long, now benefits.

Deep down, to the Irish government, it is a part of Ireland not a part of the UK.
They never gave up on "Irish citizens" after the partition and still are not doing so.