judith wrote:
On Tue, 8 May 2007 23:12:13 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On 2007-05-08 22:53:23 +0100, judith said:

On Tue, 8 May 2007 19:34:08 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On 2007-05-08 19:06:59 +0100, "dennis@home"
said:

So assuming there are warning signs for a blind entrance/exit is it now the
fault of the driver on the main road for driving too fast?
If he isn't exceeding the speed limit and there are no other signs or
visual clues then no.

You seem to persist that you cannot be driving *too fast* if you are
driving at the speed limit.
Read what I wrote rather than what you think I wrote.

I said "not exceeding" I didn't say "at"

In terms of the application of speed limits, one is either driving
within it or one is not - that is clear.


You are wrong
No. Within the terms of what I said (as opposed to what you think I
said) I am perfectly correct.

- there are many circumstances where you can be.
That's a different issue.

Once you extend the definition of "too fast" to mean "too fast for the
road surface, the vehicle, the weather conditions and any of umpteen
other criteria" then the judgment becomes a subjective one and you are
entering into a circular argument.

One can always say that an accident wouldnt have happened if the driver
had been traveling more slowly. On the same argement you can argue
that it wouldn't have happened had he reached the point of the accident
at a different time by a couple of seconds.

However, one cannot say that this means that speed is the *cause* of
the accident. It isn't.

The only non-arguable definition of "too fast" is whether or not the
vehicle was exceeding the speed limit. That can be precisely measured.
Everything else is subjective.


Just for interest how many times have you been caught for speeding,
and how many times for other motoring offences?

Countless times for speeding, and once when they couldn't prove it, they
followed me for miles and decided I had a 'below minimum tread tyre'

The next time they tried that one I drove into the next county.

Oh and once for crossing a white line. For the same reason. It was a
convenient excuse that was a question of their word against mine.

Oh, and one speeding offence at least was on evidence that they
concocted. It simply wasn't true, and demonstrably so.

You are. it seems, guilty of whatever two police officers decide to
charge you with if you are alone in a car.