Toff doing 113mph - NO Ban

Jack Ouzzi composed the following;:

Quoted message said:

'....A decision not to ban a Tory peer caught speeding for the third
(3rd - YEP THAT'S THREE)time has been criticised by safety campaigners.
Lord Howard, 63, of Castle Rising, Norfolk, was doing 113mph on the A47
at Terrington St John in February......'

That confirms then, one rule for us and one for 'them' as we all knew.

No it doesn't.

I didn't get banned when my licence went from 11 to 14 points, over the 12
point threshold, then again when it went to 20 point from that 14, I still
didn't get banned.

There are sometimes reasons that some people need to keep their licences,
despite what others think. Judges, when handing out bans, sometimes take
these reasons into consideration and ban, or not, on the basis of the
general public good, I guess.

Quoted message said:

Make him cycle to all his 'commitments', for 3 years to match the
number of offences.

Not usually the most practical, or even feasible, solution in a mostly rural
area.

--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!!

Jack Ouzzi said:

That confirms then, one rule for us and one for 'them' as we all knew.

Whereas The People's Champion gets his chauffeur to do the speeding and
makes sure they don't even get prosecuted.

"A policeman stopped for speeding while driving Home Secretary Jack
Straw in his official car will not face prosecution"

Tony

"Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Not usually the most practical, or even feasible, solution in a mostly

rural

Quoted message said:

area.

All the more reason to take care of your licence then.

Pete

Peter B composed the following;:

Quoted message said:

"Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Not usually the most practical, or even feasible, solution in a mostly

rural

Quoted message said:

area.

All the more reason to take care of your licence then.

LOL, as mine is now almost 'clean' again (three points left on) I have
demonstrably changed my driving style, speed and mode of travel. Mind, I've
also changed my lifestyle completely too, and am now so much more relaxed
and stress free ...

I THINK I AM, ANYWAY, WANNA ARGUE ABOUT IT ?!?!

😉
--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!!

"Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

There are sometimes reasons that some people need to keep their licences,
despite what others think. Judges, when handing out bans, sometimes take
these reasons into consideration and ban, or not, on the basis of the
general public good, I guess.

Here's a novel thought: perhaps the onus should be on the driver who is in
such desparate need of a driving licence to actually drive within the rules
which will ensure they don't risk losing their licence?

Cheers, helen s

Quoted message said:

No it doesn't.

OK fine, If you are happy with that!

Quoted message said:

I didn't get banned when my licence went from 11 to 14 points, over

the 12

Quoted message said:

point threshold, then again when it went to 20 point from that 14, I

still

Quoted message said:

didn't get banned.

Not really believable. If your points went over the 12 threshold (a
mandatory 6 months ban) You would have had to 'prove' to a court
'exceptional circumstances' and that you would suffer hardship etc etc
etc. so 11 to 14 is feasable, JUST. However you would have been legally
unable to use ANOTHER exceptional circumstances plea when you allegedly
went from 14 to 20 points to escape a ban. In any case, in my opinion,
if you had 20 points on your licence, you should not really be driving
full stop. Some of the points MUST have been already spent and out of
date !!

wafflycat said:

"Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

There are sometimes reasons that some people need to keep their
licences, despite what others think. Judges, when handing out bans,
sometimes take these reasons into consideration and ban, or not, on
the basis of the general public good, I guess.

Here's a novel thought: perhaps the onus should be on the driver who is
in such desparate need of a driving licence to actually drive within the
rules which will ensure they don't risk losing their licence?

Cheers, helen s

You'd have thought so, wouldn't you.

I'd imagine it's fairly rare that you'd clock up that many points in a
week or two suddenly. And if you're a new driver, well, you've gone
from not having a licence to having one fairly recently, going back to
not having one shouldn't be that massive a change in lifestyle.

If someone is so stupid as to drive in a way that is going to get them
enough points to lose their licence over a very short period, then
that's the sort of person daft enough that shouldn't have a licence to
start with, IMO... I would seriously question their ability to make
decisions in other areas of driving skills.

I need to speed because... I need to disobey this red light because... I
need to park in a cycle lane because... I need to ignore this left turn
ban sign because.... I need to drive up the bus lane and then push in
because....

I have thus far been unable to square the need for a licence because of
your work/home situation and needs, with the apparently more important
need break the rules such that you end up with points on your licence.
Perhaps someone would like to explain how it is that such things *are*
more important than retaining said apparently critical licence.

--

Velvet

"Jack Ouzzi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Not really believable. If your points went over the 12 threshold (a
mandatory 6 months ban) You would have had to 'prove' to a court
'exceptional circumstances' and that you would suffer hardship etc etc
etc. so 11 to 14 is feasable, JUST. However you would have been legally
unable to use ANOTHER exceptional circumstances plea when you allegedly
went from 14 to 20 points to escape a ban. In any case, in my opinion,
if you had 20 points on your licence, you should not really be driving
full stop. Some of the points MUST have been already spent and out of
date !!

Maybe Paul should gives us more detail of how he got off.
The only reason I can think of is that he was driving emergency vehicles
(paramedic?) and was caught on camera with it's inability to distinguish
types of vehicle.

Pete

wafflycat said:

"Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Here's a novel thought: perhaps the onus should be on the driver who

is in

Quoted message said:

such desparate need of a driving licence to actually drive within the

rules

Quoted message said:

which will ensure they don't risk losing their licence?

EXACTLY... which is why I get annoyed at the 'speed cameras - only to
raise revenue' whinge. They are only raising revenue because of you
idiots who drive in such a manner to activate the bloody thing, and
'give' your money away !!

And if you are 'unlucky' (which I suppose converts into not really
paying attention) as we all are at times, then accept it and move on
.......... don't whine about it.

Jack Ouzzi said:

EXACTLY... which is why I get annoyed at the 'speed cameras - only to
raise revenue' whinge. They are only raising revenue because of you
idiots who drive in such a manner to activate the bloody thing, and
'give' your money away !!

Although I read this interesting statement about a new parking scheme
under consideration for Bath

"There is the potential for a loss in penalty charge notice (PCN) income
through the removal of accidental and deliberate misuse of permits, and
overstays in car parks and on-street," the report stated.

i.e We might prefer a system that allows us to collect more fines over
one that encourages more compliance.

Tony

If he has been caught 3 times how many times has he done it without getting
caught.
He was caught on the 'A47' not a motorway, but a road that could have been
carrying cyclists or pedestrians[shudder]. At 113 mph which if you take
into consideration the 10% the police knock off for error, the true speed
could have been in excess of 120mph. He should never again be allowed
behind the wheel of a car again, ever, he should be made to ride a bicycle
along similar roads and feel what it is to be passed at close quarters at
speed whilst riding a bike. Legal speeds are enough to leave the normal
rider traumatised never mind 113mph.

Thanks............ seethe over!

Dave C

"Jack Ouzzi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

'....A decision not to ban a Tory peer caught speeding for the third
(3rd - YEP THAT'S THREE)time has been criticised by safety campaigners.
Lord Howard, 63, of Castle Rising, Norfolk, was doing 113mph on the A47
at Terrington St John in February......'

That confirms then, one rule for us and one for 'them' as we all knew.
Make him cycle to all his 'commitments', for 3 years to match the
number of offences.

in message <[email hidden]>, Paul - [censored]

(') said:

Jack Ouzzi composed the following;:

Quoted message said:

That confirms then, one rule for us and one for 'them' as we all
knew.

No it doesn't.

I didn't get banned when my licence went from 11 to 14 points, over
the 12 point threshold, then again when it went to 20 point from that
14, I still didn't get banned.

Well, you should have been. And not temporarily, for life. Driving is
_not_ a right, and you had already demonstrated that you could not
behave responsibly.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Make him cycle to all his 'commitments', for 3 years to match the
number of offences.

Not usually the most practical, or even feasible, solution in a mostly
rural area.

I live in a 'remote rural' area; I know just how 'practical and
feasible' it is to get around on a bike. If you can't do it, don't
drive irresponsibly and lose your license. If you've lost your license
and can't manage with just a bicycle, move.

Oh, and, I managed perfectly well with just a bicycle and trailer for
ten years. It is, after all, only eight miles to the nearest town.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

[ This .sig intentionally left blank ]

wafflycat composed the following;:

Quoted message said:

"Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

There are sometimes reasons that some people need to keep their licences,
despite what others think. Judges, when handing out bans, sometimes take
these reasons into consideration and ban, or not, on the basis of the
general public good, I guess.

Here's a novel thought: perhaps the onus should be on the driver who is in
such desparate need of a driving licence to actually drive within the
rules which will ensure they don't risk losing their licence?

I never felt at risk of losing my licence.

--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!!

Velvet composed the following;:

Quoted message said:

wafflycat said:

"Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

There are sometimes reasons that some people need to keep their
licences, despite what others think. Judges, when handing out bans,
sometimes take these reasons into consideration and ban, or not, on
the basis of the general public good, I guess.

Here's a novel thought: perhaps the onus should be on the driver who is
in such desparate need of a driving licence to actually drive within the
rules which will ensure they don't risk losing their licence?

You'd have thought so, wouldn't you.

I'd imagine it's fairly rare that you'd clock up that many points in a
week or two suddenly. And if you're a new driver, well, you've gone
from not having a licence to having one fairly recently, going back to
not having one shouldn't be that massive a change in lifestyle.

If someone is so stupid as to drive in a way that is going to get them
enough points to lose their licence over a very short period,

My accumulation of points occurred over a four year period, which I wouldn't
say is a very short period, especially as at the time I was driving about
37k to 45k miles a year, not all of it in this country.

Quoted message said:

I have thus far been unable to square the need for a licence because of
your work/home situation and needs, with the apparently more important
need break the rules such that you end up with points on your licence.
Perhaps someone would like to explain how it is that such things *are*
more important than retaining said apparently critical licence.

Who said it's more important to break the rules? I never felt that I was
ever going to lose my licence due to speed or points build-up.

But speed is an intoxicating thing ... and can be achieved oh so easily.

--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!!

Jack Ouzzi composed the following;:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

No it doesn't.

OK fine, If you are happy with that!

Quoted message said:

I didn't get banned when my licence went from 11 to 14 points, over

the 12

Quoted message said:

point threshold, then again when it went to 20 point from that 14, I

still

Quoted message said:

didn't get banned.

Not really believable. If your points went over the 12 threshold (a
mandatory 6 months ban) You would have had to 'prove' to a court
'exceptional circumstances' and that you would suffer hardship etc etc
etc. so 11 to 14 is feasable, JUST. However you would have been legally
unable to use ANOTHER exceptional circumstances plea when you allegedly
went from 14 to 20 points to escape a ban. In any case, in my opinion,
if you had 20 points on your licence, you should not really be driving
full stop. Some of the points MUST have been already spent and out of
date !!

Nope. I was on 14 points and about four months or so later the licence got
took to 20.

Exceptional hardship was proved for others, not for me, if I lost my
licence. It's been posted about many times in the last four years on
Usenet, I'm not going over it yet again.

All I meant was that there aren't hard and fast rules for all drivers and
that all cases of people speeding are not simply people getting a kick out
of speeding, though the last line in another post of mine a moment ago might
suggest this is true also .. 😉

--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!!

Paul - censored said:

But speed is an intoxicating thing ... and can be achieved oh so easily.

That's why we've got the current cars we have. If I had a sports car
again I would drive it a lot faster, overtake a lot more.... ditto a big
engined car. Deliberately choosing something without much poke in it
but that cruises happily at motorway speeds means I am not tempted to do
silly things that I might otherwise. A bit like that HG Wells quote on
bicycles only its cars. String back gloves and flat cap anyone?

Tony

Tony Raven composed the following;:

Quoted message said:

Paul - censored said:

But speed is an intoxicating thing ... and can be achieved oh so easily.

That's why we've got the current cars we have. If I had a sports car
again I would drive it a lot faster, overtake a lot more.... ditto a big
engined car. Deliberately choosing something without much poke in it
but that cruises happily at motorway speeds means I am not tempted to do
silly things that I might otherwise. A bit like that HG Wells quote on
bicycles only its cars. String back gloves and flat cap anyone?

Yup, the Landrover I have, albeit a Discovery, nowadays is not a 'fast' car
by any means. 😉

--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!!

Simon Brooke composed the following;:

Quoted message said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Paul - [censored]

(') said:

Jack Ouzzi composed the following;:

Quoted message said:

That confirms then, one rule for us and one for 'them' as we all
knew.

No it doesn't.

I didn't get banned when my licence went from 11 to 14 points, over
the 12 point threshold, then again when it went to 20 point from that
14, I still didn't get banned.

Well, you should have been. And not temporarily, for life. Driving is
_not_ a right, and you had already demonstrated that you could not
behave responsibly.

That's your point of view, not mine.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Make him cycle to all his 'commitments', for 3 years to match the
number of offences.

Not usually the most practical, or even feasible, solution in a mostly
rural area.

I live in a 'remote rural' area; I know just how 'practical and
feasible' it is to get around on a bike. If you can't do it, don't
drive irresponsibly and lose your license. If you've lost your license
and can't manage with just a bicycle, move.

I haven't lost my licence and never felt at danger of doing so. I never
drove 'irresponsibly' despite what you appear to think.

Quoted message said:

Oh, and, I managed perfectly well with just a bicycle and trailer for
ten years. It is, after all, only eight miles to the nearest town.

Good for you.

--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!!

Paul - censored said:

I never felt at risk of losing my licence.

Perhaps you were a bit stupid.

--
Andy Morris

AndyAtJinkasDotFreeserve.Co.UK

Love this:
Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes
http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/