Speeding fines change/increase TODAY, Monday 24/4/17

[peterb]

Yes.

And Police and fire services - and even under non-emergency conditions? So one law for one set of people and one for another?

,sadly for you all those people who have their earnings abroad,and keep them abroad won't be paying a percentage of their income,just whatever they earn here.

That is an issue for the jurisdiction where the earnings are kept. Junkers, as finance minister for Luxembourg, set up Luxembourg as a tax haven )before he became President of the European Commission)

So if the PM's motorcade breaks the speed limit,they give her state car a ticket and expect them to pay - LMAO.

- well no, because her car is operating under a police escort engaged in authorised State business. However, were she to be caught speeding under other circumstances, she would be liable for prosecution (As Princess Anne was in 2001 https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/mar/13/2)

so the last couple of decades of the police and council getting into trouble,when found out about various things never happened - you mean all those famous high profile cases when all the crap comes out.

Exactly - when it came out, legal action followed when there were valid grounds for prosecution.

love how you seem to trust councils,the police and the government 100% and will never question them - you mean the same country where we invaded Iraq on made up stuff and not a single person has been taking to task criminally for 1000s of dead and injured soliders,billions of pounds of destroyed and worn out equipment and the radicalisation of Muslims in this country.

Indeed, Tony Blair is an example of a politician who perhaps has been slippery enough not to be held to account. However, I find it easier to trust aGovernment where the politicians are elected, and the business of Government is conducted by ordinary people in the civil service.

What about diesel cars - the government pushed those for years,and now suddenly they are all bad,buy something else.

They did - because at the time the evidence showed that the solution problems were less. However new research - and the improvement in petrol engines means that the earlier assumptions have been challenged - I think its called scientific advance. Id rather an organisation adapted its position in the light of emerging information than stubbornly clung to ideas hate proven false.

all about rooking people,and making a fast buck - this is why we have crap public transport which is not even affordable for many people,and not even flexible enough so people buy cars,but then its the wrong type of cars....

Running a car is probably more expensive than using public transport - however, outside London, (and some other metropolitan areas) public transport is poor.

No,no never ever question the government or anybody they have shown over the last 40 years,they always have the best interests of the public,

Government is (or should be) challenged by the opposition on a daily basis and is held to account by the public every election.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

This is the thing - for all those who are in love with the ridiculous stealth tax which this is(well TBH it does not really affect me,but accepting them only makes it easier for others to pop up) - if the government really BELIEVED going 1% above the speed limit even on a motorway is instantly going to kill millions of people,they could make it law to electronically limit the speed of cars to 70MPH.

Then for smaller cars only really made for town driving limit them to say 40~50MPH.

But wait,you can buy a car easily which can do 150MPH which is WAY above the speed limit of ANY road in this country. Most cars will do above 100MPH.

They could make it law,that any non-electronically or mechanically speed limited vehicle is only allowed on a private track and make it illegal to drive them on a normal road.

Oh,wait they won't do that.

Its like with house building - they could have simply build more houses in the last 20 years,to make houses more affordable,and rents cheaper but instead they help fuel the ripoff house prices and then say people are not saving enough for pensions and old age.

Its all padding to show like they are "doing something" when they really are not.

[Ttaskmaster]

Whereas,sadly for you all those people who have their earnings abroad,and keep them abroad won't be paying a percentage of their income,just whatever they earn here.

Yeah, BURRRRRRRRRRN the rich........ but the poor, self-employed people who lie on their tax returns are fine...

So if the PM's motorcade breaks the speed limit,they give her state car a ticket and expect them to pay - OK then.

Is the PM driving both cars and riding all four motorcycles at the same time, then?

I love how you seem to trust councils,the police and the government 100% and will never question them

You assume much, young Padawan....

you mean the same country where we invaded Iraq on made up stuff

They HAD weapons of mass destruction. We know because we looked at the invoice.

and not a single person has been taking to task criminally for 1000s of dead and injured soliders,

That's what we're paid for. Always have been.

What about diesel cars - the government pushed those for years,and now suddenly they are all bad,buy something else.

I can't believe anyone actually thought they were good... just much better on the fuel economy.

Its all about rooking people,and making a fast buck

Err..... yeah.
Is this somehow news?

No,no never ever question the government or anybody they have shown over the last 40 years,they always have the best interests of the public.

They're the ones we voted in...

The reason why this culture of rooking people has happened here,is people just accept it and accept it and accept it.

Who did you vote for, then?
Did they win?
Yes? Your fault, then.
No? You lost, tough.

Then people are shocked when they hear so many millions are on food assistance in such a rich country.

Half of that is their own stupid fault, though, in this consumerist land.

Why is this all happening - because our lovely leaders screwed up so now all of us will be paying an increasing cost for decades.

And who put them in power in the first place?
Who voted Brexit and gave them full control of this place?

Wait until they start trying to fine more and more people for driving "too slow".

If you have any money, that just means you owe taxes, fines, bills or surcharges. No-one cares so long as you pay up and submit all your data... This is the world we have made. Enjoy.

[spacein_vader]

Yes,as nearly 99% of ambulances speeding are except anyway and all the hours wasted in filing counter claims is hours not spent actually doing what the NHS is meant to do.

Or are all the people here going to start moaning if an ambulance gets late,etc and start blaming the NHS for not seeing to their loved ones quick enough.

If that is not important then lets electronically limit all cars to not more than 60mph.



Whereas,sadly for you all those people who have their earnings abroad,and keep them abroad won't be paying a percentage of their income,just whatever they earn here.

Plus all those millionaires will still get charged a pittance relatively speaking.




So if the PM's motorcade breaks the speed limit,they give her state car a ticket and expect them to pay - OK then.




LMAO,so the last couple of decades of the police and council getting into trouble,when found out about various things never happened - you mean all those famous high profile cases when all the crap comes out.

I love how you seem to trust councils,the police and the government 100% and will never question them - you mean the same country where we invaded Iraq on made up stuff and not a single person has been taking to task criminally for 1000s of dead and injured soliders,billions of pounds of destroyed and worn out equipment and the radicalisation of Muslims in this country.

The billions wasted on public projects and rarely do we ever get someone investigated for these.

What about diesel cars - the government pushed those for years,and now suddenly they are all bad,buy something else.

Its all about rooking people,and making a fast buck - this is why we have crap public transport which is not even affordable for many people,and not even flexible enough so people buy cars,but then its the wrong type of cars....

No,no never ever question the government or anybody they have shown over the last 40 years,they always have the best interests of the public.

The reason why this culture of rooking people has happened here,is people just accept it and accept it and accept it.

Then people are shocked when they hear so many millions are on food assistance in such a rich country.

No wonder when people are hit with stealth taxes hook,line and sinker,and get less and less back.

I honestly feel sorry for the younger generation.





Do you honestly think with crashing police funding,there is no impetus to try and race more funds via other means,just like with hospitals whacking up the cost of parking.

Why is this all happening - because our lovely leaders screwed up so now all of us will be paying an increasing cost for decades.

Wait until they start trying to fine more and more people for driving "too slow".

Although you've varied wildly from the original point of this thread its clear you've made your mind up & aren't you up for seeing different viewpoints so I'll leave it there.

One final point to add to the conspiracy theory for you: I work for a local council. I'm not that high up though which is probably why I haven't been invited to the meetings where they decide how to fleece speeders (which has nothing to do with the council,) or stitch them up on parking fees (all our car parks are free.)

We do have some rooks near the offices though.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

And Police and fire services - and even under non-emergency conditions? So one law for one set of people and one for another?

- well no, because her car is operating under a police escort engaged in authorised State business. However, were she to be caught speeding under other circumstances, she would be liable for prosecution (As Princess Anne was in 2001 https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/mar/13/2)

So you agree with me - ambulances tend to go out for getting patients.

That is an issue for the jurisdiction where the earnings are kept. Junkers, as finance minister for Luxembourg, set up Luxembourg as a tax haven )before he became President of the European Commission)

So basically if you are rich pay less for your sins.

Exactly - when it came out, legal action followed when there were valid grounds for prosecution.

Which if it didn't come out would be swept under the carpet -so basically don't trust them 100%,as history as shown us.

Indeed, Tony Blair is an example of a politician who perhaps has been slippery enough not to be held to account. However, I find it easier to trust aGovernment where the politicians are elected, and the business of Government is conducted by ordinary people in the civil service.

Same as above.

They did - because at the time the evidence showed that the solution problems were less. However new research - and the improvement in petrol engines means that the earlier assumptions have been challenged - I think its called scientific advance. Id rather an organisation adapted its position in the light of emerging information than stubbornly clung to ideas hate proven false..

You mean in the past where the evidence showed the opposite beforehand?? There was enough evidence for decades showing diesels had their own share of problems anyway,so no I don't agree with you,and it also proves a point - you are basically saying not to question anything 100% whilst saying things changed so you cannot trust stuff 100% and yet you honestly think all these stealth taxes have helped this country??

Seriously??


Plus,to show you how much this is a stealth tax:

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...ssions-targets

There is going to be less and less subsidies for renewables.

If the UK was that worried about saying the environment,they could easily ban all cars over 1.8 litres,etc or tax them at like 500% if they really were that worried about emissions.

Running a car is probably more expensive than using public transport - however, outside London, (and some other metropolitan areas) public transport is poor.

Depends where and when sadly - I live outside London,so really you are preaching to the converted.Public transport is not always cheaper especially if a car share is involved. I know many on Hexus seem to own newer cars,but its not always the case in many areas.

Government is (or should be) challenged by the opposition on a daily basis and is held to account by the public every election.

This is why this silly "stealth tax" needs to be challenged at every step,since it only means even more stupid taxes will be implemented.

Now if the government were to implement alternatives in actually making public transport serve the public interest better(like you find in many other countries,and make cycling a more viable alternative,then it might be something) but I actually expect nothing much will change apart from some vague attempts to show they are doing something.

All,I see is XYZ excuses to raise the cost of people owning cars,whilst not really doing much to improve the cost,affordability and convenience of alternatives.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Although you've varied wildly from the original point of this thread its clear you've made your mind up & aren't you up for seeing different viewpoints so I'll leave it there.

One final point to add to the conspiracy theory for you: I work for a local council. I'm not that high up though which is probably why I haven't been invited to the meetings where they decide how to fleece speeders (which has nothing to do with the council,) or stitch them up on parking fees (all our car parks are free.)

We do have some rooks near the offices though.

Its clear you've made your mind up & aren't you up for seeing different viewpoints so I'll leave it there.

One final point to add to the conspiracy theory that councils never try to do dodgy stuff for you: I have worked on imaging and pattern recognition stuff before,known people who have worked in R and D in that area(basically more than what I did which was more a side project and their main work was regarding computer vision),so in your own world these things are magic,so nope these things can never get better or be improved. Yeah,right.

What do you think face recognition and smile recognition on cameras is?? A barcode reader on your phone. If there is a will there is a way.

I also love how you think that councils don't try crap - I also now understand why you are so desperate to say councils don't try to make money by overcharging,etc since you have a vested interest,so what??

How about this:

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/488...king-fine-scam
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/m...t-appeals.html

Oh now only in your world its a conspiracy.

Maybe in Northamptonshire you have honest to good decent councils - not the pile of crap ones down south where they really take the mickey.

Down here and in London they have always used parking as cash cow,and you have the whammy of paying ridiculous bus fairs for just like a 3 mile round journey(£5).

There is not even proper cycling lanes either. At least luckily this council(different place) is somewhat better than the last one - they apparently thought food waste was OK to be collected every two weeks.

[kalniel]

Rather than split the quotes, a few themes:

1) Fines for going 1mph above the speed limit.
I don't see any change here - it's unlikely they'll prosecute 1mph contraventions as there is a high onus on them proving accuracy of their measurement.

2) Ambulances etc.
Detecting ambulances isn't hard, but ones that are currently on a blues call while speeding somewhat harder. Question raised as to whether they should be allowed to speed all the time - my answer: no. Speeding forces vehicles is a trade off between risks/harm. They are only allowed to speed when the harm of them not speeding is considered greater than the considerable risk to speeding. Keeping the amount of time they speed down is both a lot safer, and reduces costs.

3) Appeals
The ability to challenge a fine is important to ensure robustness in the evidence.

4) Mis-callibration
Unlikely this would happen IMHO, but it would be found out easily in appeal procedure - they have to prove the accuracy, it's not just their word against yours.

5) It's a tax by another name
Nope - taxes are paid by law-abiding people. Fines for breaking the law won't be. In fact it's possible that fines could lower the tax burden for law-abiders. And the best thing about fines is you have the full choice whether to get them or not! Speeding to the point of getting a fine is a choice, not an obligation.

6) Politicians are corrupt/ignorant/public transport sucks/etc.
Well yes, what's new? Use your vote wisely or stand yourself if no good alternative.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

5) It's a tax by another name
Nope - taxes are paid by law-abiding people. Fines for breaking the law won't be. In fact it's possible that fines could lower the tax burden for law-abiders. And the best thing about fines is you have the full choice whether to get them or not! Speeding to the point of getting a fine is a choice, not an obligation.

OFC,it is:

This is the thing - for all those who are in love with the ridiculous stealth tax which this is(well TBH it does not really affect me,but accepting them only makes it easier for others to pop up) - if the government really BELIEVED going 1% above the speed limit even on a motorway is instantly going to kill millions of people,they could make it law to electronically limit the speed of cars to 70MPH.

Then for smaller cars only really made for town driving limit them to say 40~50MPH.

But wait,you can buy a car easily which can do 150MPH which is WAY above the speed limit of ANY road in this country. Most cars will do above 100MPH.

They could make it law,that any non-electronically or mechanically speed limited vehicle is only allowed on a private track and make it illegal to drive them on a normal road.

Oh,wait they won't do that.

Its like with house building - they could have simply build more houses in the last 20 years,to make houses more affordable,and rents cheaper but instead they help fuel the ripoff house prices and then say people are not saving enough for pensions and old age.

Its all padding to show like they are "doing something" when they really are not.

If they government really wanted to stop speeding dead in its tracks they could. Recognition and things like that have moved on massively,especially looking at the sort of stuff I saw people doing R and D(and that was years ago),and it shouldn't be hard to automate it to a sufficient degree.

The fact is that this does not affect the very rich people who own expensive 500bhp cars as much since it is capped and most of those people tend to be either tax exiles(its hinted in the name),or use ways to pay less tax.

Plus if they even wanted to stop speeding any more they could do what other countries have done and massively tax cars(like a few 100 percent) which are over a certain engine size or BHP on top of this.

The other aspect is you can probably get fined for driving too slowly I suspect - at this point where do you end.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions - I expect more silly stealth taxes as time progresses.

[Ttaskmaster]

if the government really BELIEVED going 1% above the speed limit even on a motorway is instantly going to kill millions of people,they could make it law to electronically limit the speed of cars to 70MPH.

Happily, they don't.
They do, however, believe that people who disregard the limits and/or who think they know the most appropriate speed for the conditions, when everyone around them is doing differently, are part of the problem. Hence trying to reinforce enforcement of speed limits.

Then for smaller cars only really made for town driving limit them to say 40~50MPH.

So you hate the idea of people being fleeced, yet you'd force me to buy two cars, now? One for the majority of town stuff and another for when I have to do some motorway distance?
Just get the motorway one, you say? Nah, because I mostly do town journeys so would already have been financially and ecologically pressured into getting a green solution....

But wait,you can buy a car easily which can do 150MPH which is WAY above the speed limit of ANY road in this country. Most cars will do above 100MPH.

So if I want to visit another country where the limit is higher, I have to own a third car???!!! Or, because manufacturers now have to do extra to make their models UK-legal, the UK variant will cost even more... which means more taxes, too.
You're pretty good at this fleecing stuff. You running for office any time soon, or you staying as CEO?

They could make it law,that any non-electronically or mechanically speed limited vehicle is only allowed on a private track and make it illegal to drive them on a normal road.

So again, you're fleecing me into buying an electric vehicle, or ruining my original collectors vehicles by lumping huge great mechanical adaptions on them?
We won't even mention motorcycles....!!

Oh,wait they won't do that.

Nope, because for reasons above and some others concerning safety (or the lack thereof), this made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

Its like with house building - they could have simply build more houses in the last 20 years,to make houses more affordable,and rents cheaper but instead they help fuel the ripoff house prices and then say people are not saving enough for pensions and old age.

Oh shut up. They contracted a load out.
The problem is that the builders underconstructed and got more money for less result, not with the councils... and it's not like you can RMA a whole housing estate, is it?

Half the villages round here were bulldozed and massively built up, and next to them they then built the largest new housing estate in Europe at one time... but we're now having to move house because our entire countryside parish is being paved over for another newer, even bigger 150,000 home housing estate less than a mile from the last one!!

How many more houses do you want?
How many more farmers are you gonna put out of business?
How many more of us are you going to force out of our quiet retirement paradises?
How much more of the countryside are you going to destroy?

Its all padding to show like they are "doing something" when they really are not.

They certainly are doing something...

[Ttaskmaster]

The fact is that this does not affect the very rich people who own expensive 500bhp cars

I own a vehicle that does 0-60 in under 3 seconds and can do over 155mph.
It cost me £950.
I'm not rich in the slightest, but I can still go faster than most things on the road...

most of those people tend to be either tax exiles(its hinted in the name)

Then they're exiles. They're not here. Who cares?

Plus if they even wanted to stop speeding any more they could do what other countries have done and massively tax cars(like a few 100 percent) which are over a certain engine size or BHP on top of this.

How would that stop you from doing 31 in a 30, or 21 in a 20 without resulting in a ridiculously slow vehicle?

The other aspect is you can probably get fined for driving too slowly I suspect - at this point where do you end.

There is no end. Tax everything, leave you with nothing, even after you're dead and even then I'm sure you can be made to make money for someone... Yul Brynner and Steve McQueen have both become commercial product advertisers a number of years after their deaths... and I bet they didn't sign release forms, either!!

The road to hell is paved with good intentions - I expect more silly stealth taxes as time progresses.

This isn't exactly a secret now, is it, though?

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Happily, they don't.
They do, however, believe that people who disregard the limits and/or who think they know the most appropriate speed for the conditions, when everyone around them is doing differently, are part of the problem. Hence trying to reinforce enforcement of speed limits.


So you hate the idea of people being fleeced, yet you'd force me to buy two cars, now? One for the majority of town stuff and another for when I have to do some motorway distance?
Just get the motorway one, you say? Nah, because I mostly do town journeys so would already have been financially and ecologically pressured into getting a green solution....


So if I want to visit another country where the limit is higher, I have to own a third car???!!! Or, because manufacturers now have to do extra to make their models UK-legal, the UK variant will cost even more... which means more taxes, too.
You're pretty good at this fleecing stuff. You running for office any time soon, or you staying as CEO?


So again, you're fleecing me into buying an electric vehicle, or ruining my original collectors vehicles by lumping huge great mechanical adaptions on them?
We won't even mention motorcycles....!!


Nope, because for reasons above and some others concerning safety (or the lack thereof), this made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

You do realise I was being sarcastic - if they are really that worried about speeding and saving lives they could actually do that.

Also,as time progresses they might very well introduce new laws to push people onto newer vehicles. Even with current electric vehicles,it will be interesting to see how long they will be allowed to stay on the road!

Plus since we are leaving the EU,I doubt a number care about how easy it will to drive in Europe - I suspect trying to get the new flight regulations we need to fly into Europe might take precedent first!

Oh shut up. They contracted a load out.
The problem is that the builders underconstructed and got more money for less result, not with the councils... and it's not like you can RMA a whole housing estate, is it?

Half the villages round here were bulldozed and massively built up, and next to them they then built the largest new housing estate in Europe at one time... but we're now having to move house because our entire countryside parish is being paved over for another newer, even bigger 150,000 home housing estate less than a mile from the last one!!

How many more houses do you want?
How many more farmers are you gonna put out of business?
How many more of us are you going to force out of our quiet retirement paradises?
How much more of the countryside are you going to destroy?


They certainly are doing something...

Why should I shut up - the fact of the matter is they made the decision to contract out and they made the decision to allow less new houses to be build. They made the decision to not try and rebuild more old houses,etc. They made the decision to not improve public transport,etc so they could spread things out.

They made the decision to not invest more in other areas of the country for decades(so we could basically spread things out a bit more).

House building is at one of the lowest rates since WW2,with an increasing population.

Its fine for all the older generation who could afford a house easier,all it is now doing is pushing up prices massively,so they could push more people into higher stamp duty bands and more debt(due to larger mortgages). Plus with more expensive houses it makes renting more expensive.

I live down south,if you think Reading is bad....!

Most of the "new" housing developments are not affordable at all,and the ripple effect from London is not really helping either.

I own a vehicle that does 0-60 in under 3 seconds and can do over 155mph.
It cost me £950.
I'm not rich in the slightest, but I can still go faster than most things on the road...

Yet,the funny thing is that person who owns an expensive car and speeds will still probably pay a lower percentage of their income(not sure if you are being sarcastic here though).

Then they're exiles. They're not here. Who cares?

The ones who have a second house here,and still speed?? So is the court going to fine a percentage of the money they add here as a monthly remittance or everything. The same goes with people who work in the EU too,is it going to be based on their income of their job in another country or any remittances sent here??

How would that stop you from doing 31 in a 30, or 21 in a 20 without resulting in a ridiculously slow vehicle?

It would certainly stop all those people doing 80 mph in a 30 zone,or even 71mph on a motoway especially if it can just about do 70mph(sarcasm)!




If the government mandated that British classic as the only car we could use,more jobs in the country and people would be so scared driving that fast,most might actually slow down.

There is no end. Tax everything, leave you with nothing, even after you're dead and even then I'm sure you can be made to make money for someone... Yul Brynner and Steve McQueen have both become commercial product advertisers a number of years after their deaths... and I bet they didn't sign release forms, either!!


This isn't exactly a secret now, is it, though?

This is why it is another stupid tax - wait a few more years it will be between 25 to 30MPH in a 30 zone(unless you need to stop at a crossing),or something silly,since you will be going too slow otherwise and being a traffic risk.

[peterb]

Wearing my moderators hat, this thread is now in danger of going well off topic, and descending into the realms of the ridiculous.

The original post was to warn drivers that the penalties for exceeding the statutory speed limits was being increased - ands it has achieved that aim. (in spades! )

[Ttaskmaster]

You do realise I was being sarcastic - if they are really that worried about speeding and saving lives they could actually do that.

Speed is not the killer. It is merely one factor and often not the primary cause anyway.
Far more people fail to look, but they can't really enforce anything around that.

the fact of the matter is they made the decision to contract out

As opposed to what, building it with their own hands?
They're councils, not builders.

They made the decision to not try and rebuild more old houses,etc.

Most of which were no longer fit for purpose or sufficient in number.
Here we're losing a few hundred houses and loads of farming land, to make way for 150,000 houses.

They made the decision to not improve public transport,etc so they could spread things out.

Public transport is privately run. Nothing to do with the council.

House building is at one of the lowest rates since WW2,with an increasing population.

There's almost no point, since many developments are bought by overseas investors, anyway.

Plus with more expensive houses it makes renting more expensive.

Renting is so expensive because so many people default on their rent money.

I live down south,if you think Reading is bad(....!

Go on, then... My house is valued at just over £550,000. I have no sewerage or gas and barely any internet. The 4-bed round the corner from us is valued in excess of £3,500,000.
Your turn.

Most of the "new" housing developments are not affordable at all,and the ripple effect from London is not really helping either.

Two years ago you could get a starter home for £180, as a friend of mine did. He just sold it for £290.
Affordable housing, like everything else, is down to whatever the market will bear and with banks lending people far too much money, the prices went up and up and up.
If people weren't so irresponsible and banks so stupid, prices would have fallen when no-one was buying...

Yet,the funny thing is that person who owns an expensive car and speeds will still probably pay a lower percentage of their income.

You can speed just as much in a cheap car.....!!

The ones who have a second house here,and still speed?? So is the court going to fine a percentage of the money they add here as a monthly remittance or everything. The same goes with people who work in the EU too,is it going to be based on their income of their job in another country??

How should I know? Do I look like the government?
And why are you using this as a Richhunt? What about all the not-rich people who similarly hide their incomes?

It would certainly stop all those people doing 80 mph in a 30 zone,or even 71mph on a motoway especially of it can just about do 70mph(sarcasm)!

But it won't stop human mistakes, so long as humans have control of a vehicle.

This is why it is another stupid tax - wait a few more years it will be between 25 to 30MPH in a 30 zone(unless you need to stop at a crossing),or something silly,since you will be going too slow otherwise and being a traffic risk.

If you don't like it, vote for someone else...

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Speed is not the killer. It is merely one factor and often not the primary cause anyway.
Far more people fail to look, but they can't really enforce anything around that.

Then basically you are saying its a pointless - this is not going to do anything. If they want people to be better drivers they should have a better driving test and have it more frequently.

As opposed to what, building it with their own hands?
They're councils, not builders.

You mean like in the decades past when we built more houses - stop excuse making for poor decision making. They are part of the government - stop being apathetic.

Most of which were no longer fit for purpose or sufficient in number.
Here we're losing a few hundred houses and loads of farming land, to make way for 150,000 houses.

So who let them go that way - instead of excuse making for decades of not building houses,maybe you should be asking why they are panic building them now??

Public transport is privately run. Nothing to do with the council.

So who privatised the public transport - other countries seem to be able to make public transport more affordable,yet in the UK it seems some massive task.

This is what happens when an important public utility is sold off for short term gain and not used for the public interest.

There's almost no point, since many developments are bought by overseas investors, anyway.

So whose fault is that?? The government can stop foreign property speculation if they wanted - they could have pushed more building of "less luxury" homes and more affordable ones.

Renting is so expensive because so many people default on their rent money.

Why do you think they default on their rent money - why are the rents so high?? Lack of housing,meaning high mortgages and an underclass of millions of people who are trapped in relatively low paid jobs due to way the job market is orientated.

Its not shocking that populists are gaining so much sway.

Do you not think,that us posting on a tech forum about our hobbies,makes us someone better off in some ways??

Go on, then... My house is valued at just over £550,000. I have no sewerage or gas and barely any internet. The 4-bed round the corner from us is valued in excess of £3,500,000.
Your turn.

So what?? I have mates who live in Cambridge,Oxford and London - try places outside of the place you live,and see how affordable housing is relative to pay for a lot of people.

Oh I also did live in Surrey too - Runnymede is very nice.

Two years ago you could get a starter home for £180, as a friend of mine did. He just sold it for £290.
Affordable housing, like everything else, is down to whatever the market will bear and with banks lending people far too much money, the prices went up and up and up.
If people weren't so irresponsible and banks so stupid, prices would have fallen when no-one was buying...

You must be in some weird place if you first say you have a £3000000 house and there are £180 houses.

Very little Affordable housing is down to the fact there are not enough houses,and plenty of countries in the world make sure this happens by actually building affordable houses. People need somewhere to live,and it is entirely the fault of multiple governments to try and not build more affordable houses - you seem to forget this, how many houses which are now worth loads were,council and affordable houses.

The Tory government sold off the council houses probably to get some votes,and this has massively impacted even well off areas like Oxford and Cambridge where people simply can't afford to live there any more,especially nurses,etc.

Then you have the ripple effect of Londoners moving outwards pushing local prices up even more meaning locals get pushed out even more. You want to know why so many areas voted Brexit and populist parties?? This is part of the problem.

You can speed just as much in a cheap car.....!!

Yet you get fined less as a proportion of your income if you earn above a certain amount.

OFC,what some of you don't get is that they are trying this out,ie,fines based on income,to see if it sticks. As time progresses I expect more and more digressions to have fines charged this way.

How should I know? Do I look like the government?
And why are you using this as a Richhunt? What about all the not-rich people who similarly hide their incomes?

Rich -hunt! LMAO - why are you trying so hard to deflect about the fine caps?? The fine caps only help high earners who speed more.

You do realise most of my mates are relatively well off,right - yet you seem to not really understand 50% of a poorer persons income for 1MPH extra is probably going to be more of a hit due to cap of a bigger earning person.

You seem to be strangely quiet about the cap.

But it won't stop human mistakes, so long as humans have control of a vehicle.

You just said speed does not kill -so does knocking down someone at 29mph or 31mph in a 30mph make any difference?? Whats wrong with the old rules - too cheap for you??

If anything you should be supporting stricter driving tests,and maybe driving tests to only last a few years before retaking them.

That will lead to safer drivers.

If you don't like it, vote for someone else...

Who said I didn't but apathy never solves anything and we have become too apathetic about things here.

Since peterB asked nicely for us to stop,I will, but don't think some of us have not lived around in more than one place and seen the effects of the housing shortage,or the ridiculous cost of transport in this country. I might have been more inclined to be more harder on these people a few years ago,but actually seeing what some had to go through I do actually feel sorry for them,and these kind of stealth taxes hit less well off people more than those who earn more.

[Xlucine]

2) Ambulances etc.
Detecting ambulances isn't hard, but ones that are currently on a blues call while speeding somewhat harder. Question raised as to whether they should be allowed to speed all the time - my answer: no. Speeding forces vehicles is a trade off between risks/harm. They are only allowed to speed when the harm of them not speeding is considered greater than the considerable risk to speeding. Keeping the amount of time they speed down is both a lot safer, and reduces costs.

I'm led to believe that ambulances are tracked by GPS, to aid the dispatcher keep track of which vehicle is free and where - so with that data, and a log of when any specific ambulance was on an urgent 999 call, it would be possible to create a program that would check the time and location of any speeding ticket against that ambulance's history to see if it was valid. There must be a log of what calls an ambulance was sent on and the severity of those calls somewhere in the NHS, and it's probably manually searched currently whenever an ambulance does trigger a speed trap

[kalniel]

I'm led to believe that ambulances are tracked by GPS, to aid the dispatcher keep track of which vehicle is free and where - so with that data, and a log of when any specific ambulance was on an urgent 999 call, it would be possible to create a program that would check the time and location of any speeding ticket against that ambulance's history to see if it was valid. There must be a log of what calls an ambulance was sent on and the severity of those calls somewhere in the NHS, and it's probably manually searched currently whenever an ambulance does trigger a speed trap

That's pretty much what already happens I think - it's just that the ambulance system is separate from the DVLA system so the check only happens after it's flagged up by the DVLA, rather than being integrated and saving the issue of a ticket etc. Given this country's history of trying to integrate IT systems, I don't hold a lot of hope for it improving any time soon.