Huhne

[scottycelt]

Aaah now that's one thing I DID learn on my "course" that it actually IS exact but most folk are unclear
I think there's a book with all the rules in ? (NOT THAT ONE Scotty :whistle:)

As a matter of record, Mr GG, I've never ever raised the subject of THAT ONE, and indeed, until now, have never even contributed to this thread.

The only member who ever seems to constantly raise the subject of THAT ONE, and indeed regularly quotes from it, is your very goodself.

Will we now be 'treated' to you sharing with other members the really interesting and exciting bits of text from THIS ONE?

Anyway back to Mr Huhne ... :winkeye:

[Mandryka]

I went on one of those courses late last year, and I found it extremely useful and thought-provoking.

I have always been careful not to speed-( I always use the Sat-Nav as my speedometer, being much more accurate than the dial.) Anyway, despite this, I was "done" for doing exactly 70mph in a 70mph limit-I was driving the work Transit van at the time, and had no idea that different speed limits apply to such vehicles. I was on the A3 south of Guildford, which is a 70 zone, however in a Transit or similar vehicle the limit is 60. Of all the people I work with, only one knew about it. My employers paid the cost of the course, because they were not aware of this either. They have now put a sticker in the windscreen with the correct speed limits. Lesson learnt! :blush:

I do think these courses are a very good alternative to points and a fine. If they make even a few of the participants change their driving then they will have succeeded.

Apart from my van driving, I cycle everywhere, so I'm extremely aware of how few drivers stick to the limits. It is a tiny minority. And then of course there are the idiots who drive along with a mobile phone clamped to their ear. :steam: The problem is that with so few traffic officers out and about these days, the chances of being stopped are few and far between, and whilst cameras can detect speeders, they can't do the same with mobile users.

The cameras can, I believe, and sometimes do, pick up drivers talking on their mobiles. Juliet Stevenson was one high profile 'victim', I can recall. However, I've never heard of any one being fined or prosecuted.

Since starting to ride a bike again recently, I'm very aware of how approximate drivers tend to be with regard to speed limits.

[eighthobstruction]

Did I hear somewhere that the very next week after his speeding episode, Huhne was caught talking on his phone while driving and was delivered another 3 points + fine anyway....

....his talk of "taking the responsibilty for something that happened 10 years ago" still smacks of denial....I hope he gets 12 months at least for his perjury (as have other parliamentarians who committed perjury) no matter how trivial the original offence....I hope too he is fined heavily for drawing out the court/legal process over 2 years, i.e. the full costs of the proscecution.

The Wife should too be held up ( for not putting her hands up)....she too has committed perjury, but in a much more minor way....but she too is now prolonging the legal process (for what motive/ reason goodness knows) and should too be fined heavily with heavy costs....

[jean]

...but a lot of intermediate speed limits are questionable...

It's the intermediate ones that are subjective, i.e. 40 and 50 mph limits on country roads that would otherwise be 60...

We are talking here about roads of a sort where no particular speed limit is legally set down; but once a speed limit has been decided upon by the authorities that decide these things, then whatever their reasoning in deciding upon it, it is neither questionable nor subjective.

But because of the lack of specific criteria, it's these roads that cause the most problems for otherwise careful drivers; the only guaranteed solution would be to drive at 30mph all the time, just in case.

I'm a non-driver, a terrified cyclist and frequent pedestrian, so I don't usually have much sympathy with drivers, but I was with a friend who never knowingly speeds, when she was caught in just this situation, and it really wasn't fair:

I got caught on an unfamiliar road just outside Dunstable. My impression was that I was on a dual carriageway on the open road - no street lamps, buildings or pavements or side turnings. When the camera flash went off I looked straight down at my speedometer and I was doing under 50. When I got the fixed penalty notice - the first in decades of driving - I enquired where exactly the camera was placed, geographically. From the Ordnance Survey map I worked out that I was driving through a one an a half mile cutting in the hillside - in the open countryside, but I guessed a side turning up ahead was a danger spot if vehicles on the main road were travelling fast. Of course, I must have passed a 30 or 40 mile limit sign but I didn't register it - you only have to be looking at the oncoming traffic to miss it...

[jean]

...but she too is now prolonging the legal process (for what motive/ reason goodness knows)...

She's hoping to impress the jury with her claims of marital coercion.

[vinteuil]

... I think both of them should be sent dahn for being such deeply unpleasant people :yikes:

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

indeed ... perhaps a shared cell?

[handsomefortune]

a shared cell?

:laugh: justice!

but unfortunately, the tabloids would absolutely love that outcome, and go on and on and on about them. i can just imagine 'the sun' etc printing hot 'news' from their spies inside hmps....

much as i despise both of their behavior 'do not feed the tabloids' still applies. even if mr huhne does go to prison, it wouldn't surprise me if it was a posh one, with a gourmet menu, jacuzzi, & a very nice garden which leads to an unlocked gate. (i sometimes wonder precisely where other posh perjurers are locked up ...? ones like mr and mrs brooks & friends, for example...we don't hear much about them these days............or perhaps in reality they're just tagged, rather like juveniles caught petty shop lifting)?

but as a rule, 'news' tends to dry up as to the aftermath of 'exciting', much written about court appearances unfortunately.

i do hope mr huhne keeps in touch, and one day reveals his 'terrible' experiences, perhaps writes a book, and appears on progs like 'desert island discs'....perhaps he might donate some of his huge hoard of money to one (or all) of uk head injuries charities, since so many people are incapacitated by arrogant, idiotic car drivers...it'd seem churlish not to surely. meanwhile, it'd be cost effective and just that they simply give each other head injuries, trapped in a double cell together! harsh ...but extremely cost effective especially as far as the tax payer is concerned.

[Dave2002]

I was going to suggest a hypothetical scenario, but then I wondered if I might get the answers I expect!

Perjury is not good, and presumably worse for politicians. However, just suppose that you are to be sent to prison for some offence - unspecified - and I hope no-one here really takes this too seriously.

You have to share a cell.

Would you rather share a cell with a convicted murderer, or someone who'd committed perjury over driving offences committed about a decade ago.

[Mr Pee]

I was going to suggest a hypothetical scenario, but then I wondered if I might get the answers I expect!

Perjury is not good, and presumably worse for politicians. However, just suppose that you are to be sent to prison for some offence - unspecified - and I hope no-one here really takes this too seriously.

You have to share a cell.

Would you rather share a cell with a convicted murderer, or someone who'd committed perjury over driving offences committed about a decade ago.

Strange question.

[jean]

Would you rather share a cell with a convicted murderer, or someone who'd committed perjury over driving offences committed about a decade ago.

Far worse to have to share a cell with your estranged spouse after a particularly bitter divorce.

The crime that either of you had committed would be of very little significance when set against that.

[eighthobstruction]

Actually the charge is not perjury, it is perverting the course of justice....

[LHC]

Actually the charge is not perjury, it is perverting the course of justice....

Indeed, he would only have committed perjury if he had maintained that he was innocent of the charge of perverting the course of justice.

[eighthobstruction]

Indeed, he would only have committed perjury if he had maintained that he was innocent of the charge of perverting the course of justice.

Yep, indeed :smiley:

[Russ_H]

I think most people (and that dis include me) are unaware of what a "dual carriageway" actually is
but this is getting into middle aged men zone :yawn:

I think you will find that they aren't "subjective" but there are signs to tell you and the placement and pattern of the signs are rigid. The idea that all A roads have a 60mph speed limit is (as I have discovered) "received wisdom".

Despite the risk of falling completely into the middle-aged man zone, here is some information which may be useful.

Technical details about speed limits are available in documents such as this:

http://assets.dft.gov.uk/consultations/dft-2012-32/setting-local-speed-limits.pdf

Dual carriageways have to have a physical separation between the carriageways, so this is a dual carriageway:

http://tinyurl.com/9wfzz87

Physical separation does not necessarly mean a fence or barrier, so this is also a dual carriageway:

http://tinyurl.com/b68qeaw

But this isn't:

http://tinyurl.com/bajp5v6