My speed choice course experience

I got nicked some weeks back for doing 37 mph in a 30 mph zone by a speed camera. I was given the option to attend a 3 hour course for the same cost as the fine, 60UKP, but wouldn't have the 3 points on my license.

Well, as requested, I'm reporting how it went. It was fine, basically. The staff made an effort to be friendly from the moment people entered the room, tea and biscuits and good humour were laid on. There wasn't any judgement, or attitude, and it was quite an informative 3 hours.

Apparently if I'd done 40 mph I'd have had no choice and automatically been dealing with our friends in blue.

So for what its worth - it gets my vote, even with the 100 mile round trip.

Better still, don't get nicked. :)

All the best, Angus Manwaring. (for e-mail remove ANTISPEM)

I need your memories for the Amiga Games Database: A collection of Amiga Game reviews by Amiga players

formatting link

Reply to
Angus Manwaring
Loading thread data ...

I would suggest a new sight test too, this might help for next time! How did you miss a speed camera? They are painted yellow, have warning signs in the area and the vans are fairly obvious. I hope they mentioned on the course that it is only inappropriate speed that can kill rather than simply saying "speed kills". Do the police really think this course will alter driver behaviour! Look at the amount of police cars that speed when not on their way to a documented emergency or incident. Their driving is terrible.

Reply to
GT

I think the Tiscali idiot may have been banned from Tiscali...

Reply to
DanB

Not always true! Where I live, there's a camera sign about a mile below the brow of a hill, and the van parks just over the other side of that brow -and if you go over it at more than the legal limit then.... time to contact Mr loophole :-)

What would you describe as "inappropriate speed" and where/when would that apply?

Why shouldn't it alter a driver's behaviour? I attended a 4 hour course some years ago (not as part of a 'speeding punishment' but arranged by the firm I was working for at the time for all of their 300 or so drivers) given by a class 1 police-driver instructor - and it was one of the most informative courses I have ever attended and it certainly changed my view (and that was the predominant response from those drivers) - but admittedly, there are some (dense) drivers who think that they are the "best in the land" and believe that they will learn nothing from *any* such courses whether taken voluntarily or as part of a court judgement - from your 'handle' I wonder which catagory you fall into?

How do you know they are not documented - have you ever tried to investigate these?

And have you ever reported those alleged "speeding offences or terrible driving" to the Chief Constable of your area, and if not, why not?

I have, with a reasonable response from the 'plod' - but let's face it, if every driver stayed within the speed limits, then there would be no 'income' for the various camera partnerships and there would then be no need for those cameras - would there?

BRG

Reply to
BRG

If its the standard gatso or specs with a brightly painted yellow camera, my question is how can you not know? Even if I am not concentrating or a lorry blocks my view of the camera, there are those very long tell-tail signs painted on the road. I'll admit to braking hard once or twice when I am in lane 3 and traffic in the other lanes has shielded my view of the camera, but I could never miss the lines painted on the road approaching. This is a

40 camera I am thinking of and I'd have to be doing 50 plus not to brake in time. Another dead giveaway is all the other cars slowing down.

I am just an average driver and I know this sounds harsh, but if you get knicked by a standard gatso/specs camera, you really need to sort your driving attention out or drive more within the limits of your ability/reaction time.

Graham

Reply to
Graham

On 31-Mar-08 10:48:20, Graham said

Well fair enough, but I always think its a brave man that can't envisage himself making a mistake.

All the best, Angus Manwaring. (for e-mail remove ANTISPEM)

I need your memories for the Amiga Games Database: A collection of Amiga Game reviews by Amiga players

formatting link

Reply to
Angus Manwaring

Will you speed again though ? :)

And did you speed on the way there and way back ?

Reply to
James

I say well done to you for doing the course, quite brave I would say.

Reply to
James

On 31-Mar-08 21:36:28, James said

Well, I am making an effort not to.

Most definitely not. :)

I felt stupid enough as it was, I didn't want to feel a complete idiot.

All the best, Angus Manwaring. (for e-mail remove ANTISPEM)

I need your memories for the Amiga Games Database: A collection of Amiga Game reviews by Amiga players

formatting link

Reply to
Angus Manwaring

The word "speed" or Speeding has overtones of driving recklessly and zooming everywhere with no regard for the road or set limits, so I am sure you didn't "speed", but you would have exceeded the speed limit. We all do, everytime we drive a car and anyone who says they don't is either a liar or about to breakdown. There is nothing wrong with that at all, I am just pointing out the difference between exceeding the speed limit and "Speeding".

Graham

Reply to
Graham

Graham ("Graham" ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

There IS no difference.

"Speeding" is, pure and simple, exceeding the posted limit. It is NOT the same as "driving recklessly and zooming everywhere with no regard for the road".

That's a different, more serious offence - which it is ENTIRELY possible to do WITHOUT speeding.

Reply to
Adrian

I don't speed and I'm not lieing and proud to admit it. If you can't keep yuor vehicle at a certain speed the law states your crap.

Theres plenty wrong with exceeding the limit and speeding imo.

Sounds interesting this course idea, thats as close to one as I'll ever get. ;)

Reply to
maxi

Would you, as matter of interest, draw the same distinction between exceeding the blood alcohol limit and "Drink driving"?

Ian

Reply to
Ian

I disagree. The common understand of "speeding" is someone driving too fast for the conditions/safety and that could mean driving well under the posted legal limit, but still too fast. I thought we all understood that its not speed that is the problem, but inappropriate or ill judged speed.

Graham

Reply to
Graham

Ridiculous analogy. Exceeding the speed limit does not make driving less safe. If that were true, all motorways would be set at 30 too. Impairing judgment and reaction time by taking drink or drugs (or even too tired or not having woken up fully) does certainly increase risk of an accident.

Graham

Reply to
Graham

Really?

So you claim, do you, that

a) it's ridiculous to claim that 69mph on the motorway is safe but

71mph isn't

b) it's reasonable to claim that 79mg/100ml on the motorway is safe but 81mg/100ml isn't?

Both 70mg and 80g/100ml are numbersonnastick. You cannot decry one without decrying the other.

Ian

Reply to
Ian

Ian (Ian ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Not forgetting that both are very dependent on the individual driver, too.

Reply to
Adrian

Of course. But for simplicity, is it not reasonable to choose a cut- off blood alcohol level at which an unacceptably high proportion of drivers are unacceptably dangerous, and to choose a cut-off speed limit in the same way?

Note - I think the current non-urban speed limits are substantially too low, and I'd prefer 90mph on dual carriageways and 75mph on single, but I'm not against speed limits as such. I'd much rather be able to look at my speedometer to work out what's legal than have to second guess a policeman in another car or by the roadside.

Ian

Reply to
Ian

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.