Speeders Expensive Lies

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,175-1826978,00.html

A couple who claimed that a non-existent Bulgarian had been driving
their car when it was caught twice by speed cameras pleaded guilty to
perverting the course of justice.

"They appeared before Judge Bernard Lever on Thursday at Manchester
Crown Court, where they pleaded guilty to two charges of perverting the
course of justice. They were ordered to pay a total of £9,200 in fines
and £1,900 costs.

Judge Lever said: "The best place to hit people like these is in
their pockets. Had they not pleaded guilty, I would almost certainly
have sent them to prison.""

Iain

What's this got to do with cycling???

Quoted message said:

What's this got to do with cycling???

It's to titilate the sense of justice of the anti car element of this
newsgroup.

Quoted message said:

"vernon" <[email hidden]> sd / msg
<[email hidden]> dtd Sat, 15 Oct 2005 20:02:30
+0100:

Quoted message said:

It's to titilate the sense of justice of the anti car element of this
newsgroup.

Anti-car? I don't think so. Most of us own at least one car, after
all. But it is an interesting counterpoint to the slipperiness of a
certain driver in evading meaningful punishment for killing a cyclist
and fleeing to avoid being delayed for an all-important bowls game.

There is a dual standard at work.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

you know? said:

"vernon" <[email hidden]> sd / msg <[email hidden]>
dtd Sat, 15 Oct 2005 20:02:30 +0100:

Quoted message said:

It's to titilate the sense of justice of the anti car element of this
newsgroup.

Anti-car? I don't think so. Most of us own at least one car, after all.
But it is an interesting counterpoint to the slipperiness of a certain
driver in evading meaningful punishment for killing a cyclist and fleeing
to avoid being delayed for an all-important bowls game.

I agree. I am still shocked that these days it is considered acceptable to
run off from the scene of an accident. Whether or not to report car as
stolen, and burn it out, or to get it repaired and claim 'it was a
glancing blow'. Shocking. (I'm not talking about only bike-related
accidents here).

ian henden said:

What's this got to do with cycling???

AS cyclist are especialy vulnerable to death and serious injury from
speeding drivers I think as a group they take a particular interest in
lawbreakers of this kind being properly punished. I posted this story
as a counterbalance to the frequent posts where lawbreaking motorists
have not been dealt with adequately by the courts.
I did consider prefixing the title with OT but for the reason given
above decided that on balance it was not off topic. I can see why you
might think it has nothing to do with cycling but we'll just have to
disagree then.
Iain

Not sure if anyone else feels the same way as me about speeding... but I'm
an ex speeder ... and they are the worst types. I got over my speeding vice
purely on an educational basis:

a) lived on a main road and saw regular, frequent, utterly inappropriate
speed (regular 70+ in a 40 zone)
b)used to ride motorcycles and have seen and experienced the mess it makes
when cars don't see you(mostly the bikes fault as we always speeded..
always)
c) do loads of cycle miles and see how it makes no sense to use a bike on
the road if you want to live a long life

So the point is that, these guys deserve all they get, due to their speeding
vice. A better fine might have been to force them on a bike for a couple of
months. Then if they had half a brain they would soon adapt their driving
habits

BTW I own 2 cars and never speed in 30 and 40 zones... honest!

"ian henden" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,175-1826978,00.html

A couple who claimed that a non-existent Bulgarian had been driving
their car when it was caught twice by speed cameras pleaded guilty to
perverting the course of justice.

"They appeared before Judge Bernard Lever on Thursday at Manchester
Crown Court, where they pleaded guilty to two charges of perverting the
course of justice. They were ordered to pay a total of £9,200 in fines
and £1,900 costs.

Judge Lever said: "The best place to hit people like these is in
their pockets. Had they not pleaded guilty, I would almost certainly
have sent them to prison.""

Iain

What's this got to do with cycling???

Robin Smith said:

c) do loads of cycle miles and see how it makes no sense to use a bike on
the road if you want to live a long life

Is the one I suspect most here would strongly disagree with. Cycling on
the road is not dangerous.

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

Quoted message said:

AS cyclist are especialy vulnerable to death and serious injury from
speeding drivers I think as a group they take a particular interest in
lawbreakers of this kind being properly punished. I posted this story
as a counterbalance to the frequent posts where lawbreaking motorists
have not been dealt with adequately by the courts.
I did consider prefixing the title with OT but for the reason given
above decided that on balance it was not off topic. I can see why you
might think it has nothing to do with cycling but we'll just have to
disagree then.
Iain

Hummm, chatting with an *advanced motorist* this evening who'd been
undertaken by a cyclist doing he estimated 40+ mph in a 30 zone, speed
limits seem to be only much use if everyone stays within them, or only
overtakes (cyclists that is) as the sudden unexpect passing on the wrong
side really freaks some drivers out.

Badger said:

Hummm, chatting with an *advanced motorist* this evening who'd been
undertaken by a cyclist doing he estimated 40+ mph in a 30 zone

Overtaking on the left (I hate the term "undertaking"!) is foolish and
probably illegal; for a cyclist to do 40 in a 30 zone is provocative but
not illegal.

What's an advanced motorist? I've seen plenty of poor driving with an
IAM sticker on the car...

--
Mark.
http://tranchant.plus.com/

"Mark Tranchant" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

What's an advanced motorist? I've seen plenty of poor driving with an IAM
sticker on the car...

There was a case a couple of years ago near here where a newly passed IAM
driver (test was the day before) decided that giving way on a mini
roundabout wasn't for him and knocked a cyclist off.

(I think the cyclist was hurt, but not badly)

cheers,
clive

"Tony Raven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Robin Smith said:

c) do loads of cycle miles and see how it makes no sense to use a bike on
the road if you want to live a long life

Is the one I suspect most here would strongly disagree with. Cycling on
the road is not dangerous.

Is not *excessively* dangerous. It is more dangerous than it should be, but
still safe enough to be a very reasonable thing to do.

--
Ambrose

Mark Tranchant <[email hidden]> whizzed past me shouting

Quoted message said:

Overtaking on the left (I hate the term "undertaking"!) is foolish and
probably illegal; for a cyclist to do 40 in a 30 zone is provocative
but not illegal.

I thought it was?
We don't have to carry speedometers, but we are required to keep to
speed limits.

--
Sue ]🙁🙂

You have to be 100% behind someone to stab them in the back

Ambrose Nankivell <[email hidden]> whizzed past me shouting

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Cycling on the road is not dangerous.

Is not *excessively* dangerous. It is more dangerous than it should be,
but still safe enough to be a very reasonable thing to do.

How dangerous ought it to be?
It's safer than sitting in front of a computer all day!

--
Sue ];(🙂

And your cry-baby whiny-assed opinion would be... ?

Sue White said:

I thought it was?
We don't have to carry speedometers, but we are required to keep to
speed limits.

Nope. With the notable exception of the Royal Parks (bylaw IIRC), speed
limits apply to motorised vehicles only.

Jon

Sue White said:

Mark Tranchant <[email hidden]> whizzed past me shouting

Quoted message said:

Overtaking on the left (I hate the term "undertaking"!) is foolish and
probably illegal; for a cyclist to do 40 in a 30 zone is provocative
but not illegal.

I thought it was?
We don't have to carry speedometers, but we are required to keep to
speed limits.

Wrong on two counts then. Its not illegal to cycle up the inside on a
bicycle nor is it illegal to exceed the speed limit on a bicycle.

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

Tony Raven said:

Sue White said:

Mark Tranchant <[email hidden]> whizzed past me shouting

Quoted message said:

Overtaking on the left (I hate the term "undertaking"!) is foolish and
probably illegal; for a cyclist to do 40 in a 30 zone is provocative
but not illegal.

I thought it was?
We don't have to carry speedometers, but we are required to keep to
speed limits.

Wrong on two counts then. Its not illegal to cycle up the inside on a
bicycle nor is it illegal to exceed the speed limit on a bicycle.

In fact, I don't think it's blanket illegal to overtake on teh left in
any vehicle.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

Ian Smith said:

Tony Raven said:

Sue White said:

Mark Tranchant <[email hidden]> whizzed past me shouting
> Overtaking on the left (I hate the term "undertaking"!) is foolish and
> probably illegal; for a cyclist to do 40 in a 30 zone is provocative
> but not illegal.
I thought it was?
We don't have to carry speedometers, but we are required to keep to
speed limits.

Wrong on two counts then. Its not illegal to cycle up the inside on a
bicycle nor is it illegal to exceed the speed limit on a bicycle.

In fact, I don't think it's blanket illegal to overtake on teh left in
any vehicle.

It depends. Overtaking on the left(i.e. switching lanes to overtake) is
usually treated as reckless or dangerous driving whereas passing on the
left (i.e continuing in your lane past slower moving traffic on the
right) is not. See
http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld199697/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds04/text/40209-03.htm

As for bicycles passing on the left is filtering not overtaking. On
motorbikes its taught and the examiner will expect you to do it if
appropriate in your test.

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

Tony Raven said:

Ian Smith said:

Tony Raven said:

Wrong on two counts then. Its not illegal to cycle up the inside on a
bicycle nor is it illegal to exceed the speed limit on a bicycle.

In fact, I don't think it's blanket illegal to overtake on teh left in
any vehicle.

It depends.

Exactly. If it depends, then it can't be blanket always illegal.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 14:02:28 +0100, "Ambrose Nankivell"
<[email hidden]> said in <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Cycling on the road is not dangerous.

Quoted message said:

Is not *excessively* dangerous. It is more dangerous than it should be, but
still safe enough to be a very reasonable thing to do.

No, cycling on the road is unusually safe. Driving, on the other
hand, is very dangerous, especially to cyclists...

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken