New speeding rules next week, don't forget....
- Thread starter Ducklakeview
- Start date
mj2k said:
Salary for pauper sole traders like me
Mike
Cruise control has saved me lots of cash. I use it all the time, even in town when near school districts.
Don't worry... They will change it all back once they realise it's not as lucrative, not enough people work.
pvr said:Ducklakeview said:mj2k said:
Salary for pauper sole traders like me
Mike
I am on minimum wage as well and have pay slips to prove it. :lol:
Me too. oldest trick in the 'Company Owner/Director's' book.. :lol:
you should know this Mike or do we need to educate you? My 'consultant fee' is €200/hr if you would like to submit an application.....
North West Surrey
Chris_D said:pvr said:Ducklakeview said:Salary for pauper sole traders like me
Mike
I am on minimum wage as well and have pay slips to prove it. :lol:
Me too. oldest trick in the 'Company Owner/Director's' book.. :lol:
you should know this Mike or do we need to educate you? My 'consultant fee' is €200/hr if you would like to submit an application.....
Excellent news, and yes my pay slips show the same.
Chris_D said:pvr said:Ducklakeview said:Salary for pauper sole traders like me
Mike
I am on minimum wage as well and have pay slips to prove it. :lol:
Me too. oldest trick in the 'Company Owner/Director's' book.. :lol:
you should know this Mike or do we need to educate you? My 'consultant fee' is €200/hr if you would like to submit an application.....
I was being sarcastic Chris. No one manipulates thre system like me, or rather "my accountant works surprisingly hard for his money"
Mikej
Ducklakeview said:Chris_D said:
I was being sarcastic Chris. No one manipulates thre system like me, or rather "my accountant works surprisingly hard for his money"
Mikej
Ah reet.
We're all going to hell if we get bubbled tho. You can bet some sallow-faced twonk down at the treasury has sent a memo around advising of potential loopholes. B@stards. I'm never comin back to the UK! :lol:
With the new guidelines it seems to me that with no 10%+2 allowance then I might as well just pluck for the upper end of band A. So instead of 79 on the motorway there's no no incentive to not push 90.
Another stealth tax...
Mike
Mike
mmm-five said:ACPO doesn't exist anymore (nor do the guidelines).Ducklakeview said:
It was replaced by the NPCC in 2015 after the Parker Review gave ACPO a drubbing (e.g. unaccountable, disregard for their own guidelines, lack of transparency, fraud, etc.).
Don't commit a 'crime' and you won't have to take the punishment - after all, none of our speedos under-read, so we can't really use the excuse that we didn't know we were driving over the limit
In defence of the above poster, most people choose which laws apply to them rigidly and those which they find socially acceptable to break just a little bit. Speeding is one of them. The law is explicit in respect of theft, burglary, rape, assault etc. There is no difference with road traffic offences. If you speed.....even just a tiny bit.....there is no excuse. If you are caught cough up and get on with it. I have done it 3 times over the years....and not by a huge margin at all. More fool me. I have no problem with speed cameras....hand held or static. Now, as to whether the police will come out in force to catch those doing .000001 mph over the limit? Don't bet on it. They are all under incredible financial strain and the income they might gain from enforcement is not going to touch it. The police are having to sell off part of their estate (i.e. close down police stations and sell them off to Burger King or MacDonalds etc) to reduce costs in the face of these cuts. Yep, like everyone else they are having to fight leaner and fitter....more bangs for less buck just like the NHS and local government. In fact....things are so bad that the Met Police (in the face of a decline of applicants for a detective role) is allowing PCSO/Specials or whatever they are called these days....to apply to be a detective directly. Probationers will be able to do the same as well.
I have had to knock on doors and ruin the lives (FOR EVER) of the people answering when I have had to impart the worst news (murder AND RTA's) I remember each with a clarity that it seems like only yesterday.
petach said:mmm-five said:ACPO doesn't exist anymore (nor do the guidelines).Ducklakeview said:
It was replaced by the NPCC in 2015 after the Parker Review gave ACPO a drubbing (e.g. unaccountable, disregard for their own guidelines, lack of transparency, fraud, etc.).
Don't commit a 'crime' and you won't have to take the punishment - after all, none of our speedos under-read, so we can't really use the excuse that we didn't know we were driving over the limit
In defence of the above poster, most people choose which laws apply to them rigidly and those which they find socially acceptable to break just a little bit. Speeding is one of them. The law is explicit in respect of theft, burglary, rape, assault etc. There is no difference with road traffic offences. If you speed.....even just a tiny bit.....there is no excuse. If you are caught cough up and get on with it. I have done it 3 times over the years....and not by a huge margin at all. More fool me. I have no problem with speed cameras....hand held or static. Now, as to whether the police will come out in force to catch those doing .000001 mph over the limit? Don't bet on it. They are all under incredible financial strain and the income they might gain from enforcement is not going to touch it. The police are having to sell off part of their estate (i.e. close down police stations and sell them off to Burger King or MacDonalds etc) to reduce costs in the face of these cuts. Yep, like everyone else they are having to fight leaner and fitter....more bangs for less buck just like the NHS and local government. In fact....things are so bad that the Met Police (in the face of a decline of applicants for a detective role) is allowing PCSO/Specials or whatever they are called these days....to apply to be a detective directly. Probationers will be able to do the same as well.
I have had to knock on doors and ruin the lives (FOR EVER) of the people answering when I have had to impart the worst news (murder AND RTA's) I remember each with a clarity that it seems like only yesterday.
Fair points. But I can't accept 81 on a motorway as a risk; the punishment for it is so out of context. The long old argument I know, but if you are going reduce leeway and increase fines, then motorway speeds should be increased. Instead we are lowering them. totally bonkers. Modern cars almost idle at 70
-Tom- said:petach said:mmm-five said:ACPO doesn't exist anymore (nor do the guidelines).
It was replaced by the NPCC in 2015 after the Parker Review gave ACPO a drubbing (e.g. unaccountable, disregard for their own guidelines, lack of transparency, fraud, etc.).
Don't commit a 'crime' and you won't have to take the punishment - after all, none of our speedos under-read, so we can't really use the excuse that we didn't know we were driving over the limit
In defence of the above poster, most people choose which laws apply to them rigidly and those which they find socially acceptable to break just a little bit. Speeding is one of them. The law is explicit in respect of theft, burglary, rape, assault etc. There is no difference with road traffic offences. If you speed.....even just a tiny bit.....there is no excuse. If you are caught cough up and get on with it. I have done it 3 times over the years....and not by a huge margin at all. More fool me. I have no problem with speed cameras....hand held or static. Now, as to whether the police will come out in force to catch those doing .000001 mph over the limit? Don't bet on it. They are all under incredible financial strain and the income they might gain from enforcement is not going to touch it. The police are having to sell off part of their estate (i.e. close down police stations and sell them off to Burger King or MacDonalds etc) to reduce costs in the face of these cuts. Yep, like everyone else they are having to fight leaner and fitter....more bangs for less buck just like the NHS and local government. In fact....things are so bad that the Met Police (in the face of a decline of applicants for a detective role) is allowing PCSO/Specials or whatever they are called these days....to apply to be a detective directly. Probationers will be able to do the same as well.
I have had to knock on doors and ruin the lives (FOR EVER) of the people answering when I have had to impart the worst news (murder AND RTA's) I remember each with a clarity that it seems like only yesterday.
Fair points. But I can't accept 81 on a motorway as a risk; the punishment for it is so out of context. The long old argument I know, but if you are going reduce leeway and increase fines, then motorway speeds should be increased. Instead we are lowering them. totally bonkers. Modern cars almost idle at 70
Yup, agree regarding people choosing which laws to break, however as I said, I really CAN see PCSO's and the like moved away from "other" traffic duties, and sent out with their newly acquired laser guns..
Also, again as stated, why not increase the speed limit on motorways, which are already the safest roads we have, accounting for the lowest proportion of accidents and injuries, to 80 or 90, and rigidly enforce THAT limit. At the end of the day, people who are comfortable doing 50, 60 or 70 all day won't suddenly increase to 90, BUT those that like to make "good progress" when appropriate, will be able to do so and improve the traffic flow behind them.
Just my thoughts, oh and yes, in my quest for a new (to me) X5 40d, I believe that at 100mph in 8th, it's doing something like 2,200 rpm, equating to about 1,500 rpm at 70, basically only twice it's idling speed..
Mike
"But I can't accept 81 on a motorway as a risk"
Therein is the problem. Most people (apart from thieving or perverted scum) think that theft is bad, burglary is bad, rape is bad. There is no such thing as a bit of theft, or a bit of burglary or a bit of rape. The law; including traffic law is absolute, but it chafes against our own ideas of what is ridiculous in law, against our perception of how good we are as a driver. In that case, we are happy to push at the boundary with a sticky plaster over our conscience. If everyone acted as though some laws were not applicable to them we would obviously have anarchy.
I think motoring laws are an interesting philosophical and psychological conundrum revolving around how we feel about our cars and our personal space in them. Everyone is a great driver.
Funny enough, after I wrote my original post I nipped out in the Z. On a residential street, there was a Honda Civic (trilby and blanket on parcel shelf) driven by a werthers sucking lady of a certain age. She was doing spot on 30 in a 30 limit. Hanging almost off her bumper was a Honda CRV determined to push her speed upwards or looking for room to overtake. In the end, the Civic turned off and the CRV accelerated to ooooh about 33mph! So, what was that all about? The CRV tosser thought 30 didn't apply to him and that he should be able to proceed at a little over the limit. Rank and utter driving without due care because the person in front stuck to the limit. Is the law causing the danger by frustrating drivers who want to "push on"? or is it the driver him or her self.
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. It will be interesting to see what will come to pass when these new tariffs are brought in. Will there actually be more accidents if more people stick rigidly to the limit and those who want to "push on" or "make progress" hang within a werthers breath trying to pass at a speed that THEY think is reasonable for them?
Therein is the problem. Most people (apart from thieving or perverted scum) think that theft is bad, burglary is bad, rape is bad. There is no such thing as a bit of theft, or a bit of burglary or a bit of rape. The law; including traffic law is absolute, but it chafes against our own ideas of what is ridiculous in law, against our perception of how good we are as a driver. In that case, we are happy to push at the boundary with a sticky plaster over our conscience. If everyone acted as though some laws were not applicable to them we would obviously have anarchy.
I think motoring laws are an interesting philosophical and psychological conundrum revolving around how we feel about our cars and our personal space in them. Everyone is a great driver.
Funny enough, after I wrote my original post I nipped out in the Z. On a residential street, there was a Honda Civic (trilby and blanket on parcel shelf) driven by a werthers sucking lady of a certain age. She was doing spot on 30 in a 30 limit. Hanging almost off her bumper was a Honda CRV determined to push her speed upwards or looking for room to overtake. In the end, the Civic turned off and the CRV accelerated to ooooh about 33mph! So, what was that all about? The CRV tosser thought 30 didn't apply to him and that he should be able to proceed at a little over the limit. Rank and utter driving without due care because the person in front stuck to the limit. Is the law causing the danger by frustrating drivers who want to "push on"? or is it the driver him or her self.
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. It will be interesting to see what will come to pass when these new tariffs are brought in. Will there actually be more accidents if more people stick rigidly to the limit and those who want to "push on" or "make progress" hang within a werthers breath trying to pass at a speed that THEY think is reasonable for them?
Most of the EU has a 130km/h limit on motorways. Funny that we have been so enthusiastic adopting other EU-wide directives/legislation etc but choose not to adopt that one.