On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 18:34:42 GMT, Jaques d'Alltrades
wrote:

The message
from "Bob Hobden" contains these words:

How about the 62 year old who has gone to Jail for two weeks because he
wouldn't pay a speeding fine of £60. Caught doing 38 in a 30 limit at 5 am
when the limit signs had been vandalised or stolen!

Well, if the 30 limit signs weren't there, or the wrong size even, the
law *USED TO* state that the limit was unenforceable. I haven't heard
that it has changed.

Did you know there are 3 drivers in jail for every 2 burglars! World's gone
mad.

Are you surprised? I'd guess there are a few more drivers than there are
burglars, and some of them indulge in the sort of driving where the
public should be damned pleased they are out of the way - under the
influence of drink or drugs, stealing vehicles, impossibly high speeds
in built-up areas, dangerous driving, driving without insurance etc.,
and that's not counting failure to pay fines.

Some of the drivers are burglars too, so be doubly grateful :-)
--
Martin

In message , Bob Hobden
writes

--

How about the 62 year old who has gone to Jail for two weeks because he
wouldn't pay a speeding fine of £60.

Well maybe he should have paid it then.

Caught doing 38 in a 30 limit at 5 am
when the limit signs had been vandalised or stolen!

I've not seen reports of the case. I'm pretty sure that if the signs
aren't visible as they should be then that is a defence. Obviously for
whatever reason, the court upheld the prosecution.

Did you know there are 3 drivers in jail for every 2 burglars! World's gone
mad.

Indeed it has, many thousands of people thinking it's ok to break all
sorts of laws, that 'don't really matter' just because they happen to
be driving a car.

--
Chris French and Helen Johnson, Leeds
urg Suppliers and References FAQ:
http://www.familyfrench.co.uk/garden/urgfaq/index.html

In message , Bob Hobden
writes

--

How about the 62 year old who has gone to Jail for two weeks because he
wouldn't pay a speeding fine of £60.

Well maybe he should have paid it then.

Caught doing 38 in a 30 limit at 5 am
when the limit signs had been vandalised or stolen!

I've not seen reports of the case. I'm pretty sure that if the signs
aren't visible as they should be then that is a defence. Obviously for
whatever reason, the court upheld the prosecution.

Did you know there are 3 drivers in jail for every 2 burglars! World's gone
mad.

Indeed it has, many thousands of people thinking it's ok to break all
sorts of laws, that 'don't really matter' just because they happen to
be driving a car.

--
Chris French and Helen Johnson, Leeds
urg Suppliers and References FAQ:
http://www.familyfrench.co.uk/garden/urgfaq/index.html

"Jaques wrote in message How about the 62 year old who has gone to
Jail for two weeks because he
wouldn't pay a speeding fine of £60. Caught doing 38 in a 30 limit at 5
am
when the limit signs had been vandalised or stolen!

Well, if the 30 limit signs weren't there, or the wrong size even, the
law *USED TO* state that the limit was unenforceable. I haven't heard
that it has changed.

Judge said there were lights on the road and no limit signs so the driver
should have known it was a 30mph zone.
You and I are paying to keep this chap in jail for two weeks, which will
achieve nothing, when what he should have is some driver retraining (at the
most).
--
Regards
Bob

Use a useful Screen Saver...
http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/
and find intelligent life amongst the stars
368 data units completed.

The message
from "Bob Hobden" contains these words:

Well, if the 30 limit signs weren't there, or the wrong size even, the
law *USED TO* state that the limit was unenforceable. I haven't heard
that it has changed.

Judge said there were lights on the road and no limit signs so the driver
should have known it was a 30mph zone.
You and I are paying to keep this chap in jail for two weeks, which will
achieve nothing, when what he should have is some driver retraining (at the
most).

'Ought to have known' has no weight in law. My retort to that would have
been: "There were no restriction signs, so I knew there was no limit."

--
Rusty
Open the creaking gate to make a horrid.squeak, then lower the foobar.
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/

They're doing just that not far from here. Noticed a headline on the
front
of
one of the local rags on the news stand of our local garage/shop. Just
saw
it
in passing so I don't know any details. Seems the mayor of a small town
is
suing the N Wales chief constable - yes the one who's famous for
clobbering
speeding motorists.(traffic through our villages is noticably slower -
safer?
too soon to tell)
--

Don't equate slower speed with safety Rod, since this campaign "Speed
Kills"
started and took over from the old driving campaigns the reduction in
accident rates has slowed and now I understand it's going the other way.
Speed is only ever a factor in any accident and a lot more are actually
caused by in-car distraction.

I played a gig in a bikers' pub once, and they had a big sign on the wall
saying, "SPEED KILLS - so get out of the way!"

Andrew

In article , Bob Hobden
writes

"Sacha" wrote in message .net

Go there at night with a rifle, wait for them, and take them out
one-by-one
as they break in. When the police arrive say that you thought they were
dangerous terrorists trying to steal your fertiliser to make explosives
for
a "dirty bomb" plot, which necessitated the use of such force.


Have you all read the papers today - about the chap who 'drove' a young
yob
to the local police station, using a fork to do so and ended up getting
charged himself? Unbelievable stupidity!
--

How about the 62 year old who has gone to Jail for two weeks because he
wouldn't pay a speeding fine of £60. Caught doing 38 in a 30 limit at 5 am
when the limit signs had been vandalised or stolen!

This is not correct, there never were any signs, it was a lit road in a
built up area and as such has an automatic 30 limit, I was caught many
years ago for the same thing, it appears to be a little known fact

Did you know there are 3 drivers in jail for every 2 burglars! World's gone
mad.

Just a point though, how many people are killed on the roads every year?
--
David

In article , Bob Hobden
writes

"Jaques wrote in message How about the 62 year old who has gone to
Jail for two weeks because he
wouldn't pay a speeding fine of £60. Caught doing 38 in a 30 limit at 5
am
when the limit signs had been vandalised or stolen!

Well, if the 30 limit signs weren't there, or the wrong size even, the
law *USED TO* state that the limit was unenforceable. I haven't heard
that it has changed.

Judge said there were lights on the road and no limit signs so the driver
should have known it was a 30mph zone.

That's fair enough, isn't it? Certainly when I passed my driving test,
we were taught that where the street lights were less than a certain
distance apart was a 30mph limit - it was written into the Highway Code,
and AFAIK, also into legislation.

Besides, they don't put 30mph limits on deserted stretches of roads, and
where there are houses and shops, consideration for other road users
says he should have been limiting his speed.

Speed limits are just that - a limit, not a suggested travelling speed.

You and I are paying to keep this chap in jail for two weeks, which will
achieve nothing, when what he should have is some driver retraining (at the
most).

If he's so convinced of his own rightness that he won't pay a fine, do
you think driver re-training will help?
--
Kay Easton

Edward's earthworm page:
http://www.scarboro.demon.co.uk/edward/index.htm

In article , Jaques d'Alltrades
writes
The message
from "Bob Hobden" contains these words:

Well, if the 30 limit signs weren't there, or the wrong size even, the
law *USED TO* state that the limit was unenforceable. I haven't heard
that it has changed.

Judge said there were lights on the road and no limit signs so the driver
should have known it was a 30mph zone.
You and I are paying to keep this chap in jail for two weeks, which will
achieve nothing, when what he should have is some driver retraining (at the
most).

'Ought to have known' has no weight in law. My retort to that would have
been: "There were no restriction signs, so I knew there was no limit."

Have you read your Highways Code recently? para 103 'street lights
usually mean there is a 30 miles per hour limit unless there is a sign
showing another limit. Law RTRA sects 81 86 89 and sch6'

RTRA is the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984
--
Kay Easton

Edward's earthworm page:
http://www.scarboro.demon.co.uk/edward/index.htm

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 08:59:41 +0000, Kay Easton
wrote:

If he's so convinced of his own rightness that he won't pay a fine, do
you think driver re-training will help?

Perhaps if the course was given by the SAS it might, otherwise I think
he is a hopeless case.
--
Martin

In article ,
writes

Just a point though, how many people are killed on the roads every year?

15 years ago it was about 6 times as many as were murdered in a year.
--
Kay Easton

Edward's earthworm page:
http://www.scarboro.demon.co.uk/edward/index.htm

In article , shazzbat
writes

Although not just over my fork and spade you understand.

Steve



Ah but what about a fork, spade AND rotavotor?
--
Janet Tweedy
Dalmatian Telegraph
http://www.lancedal.demon.co.uk

"Kay Easton" wrote in message
...
Have you read your Highways Code recently? para 103 'street lights
usually mean there is a 30 miles per hour limit unless there is a sign
showing another limit. Law RTRA sects 81 86 89 and sch6'

I always thought they had to be on both sides of the road though?

--
Martin & Anna Sykes
( Remove x's when replying )
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~sykesm

"Chris French and Helen Johnson" wrote in
message ...

Indeed it has, many thousands of people thinking it's ok to break all
sorts of laws, that 'don't really matter' just because they happen to
be driving a car.



But I'm sure it would be much cheaper for society and the over-burdoned
(sp?) prison service, and a much better deterrent if the punishment for not
paying a fine was a suspension of the licence instead of a jail term.

--
Martin & Anna Sykes
( Remove x's when replying )
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~sykesm

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:15:39 +0000, Kay Easton
wrote:

In article ,
writes

Just a point though, how many people are killed on the roads every year?

15 years ago it was about 6 times as many as were murdered in a year.

In 1973 more people were killed on the Munich-Salzburg Autobahn than
in England. UK roads have always been a comparitively safe.

http://www.hippy.freeserve.co.uk/death.htm

"Government figures for 1998 show there were 3,241 fatalities caused
by accidents on Britain's roads. This is the lowest mortality rate
amongst industrial countries and the lowest number of deaths recorded
on our roads since 1926, when records were first kept. ... "

Statistics and trends, but probably not objective at

http://www.abd.org.uk/road_fatalities.htm

Govt. figures at
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pns/DisplayPN.cgi?pn_id=2003_0121

"3,431 people were killed on Britain?s roads in 2002, 1 per cent less
than in 2001. The number of people seriously injured fell to 35,976, 3
per cent lower than in 2001. Total casualties in 2002 were 302,605, 3
per cent fewer than in 2001;"
--
Martin