Following up to Chris Bacon

I think you may have completely misread this thread as your
comments don't seem to make sense but I'll reply as best I can.

The same goes for people who *choose* not to go faster. There are
other reasons, apart from "not feeling able to cope" for going
slower than the limit.

I don't think anyone thinks otherwise. Speed limits are not
targets.

Unfortunately they don't, probably partly lack of skills, lack of
thought and in the case of a person I discussed it with in real
life, laziness and selfishness.

This is true for many people.

Not sure what you are getting at?

Yes, people like that should be done for careless driving.

dangerous driving IMHO.

Rubbish. People who want to drive faster should be able to
deal with slower drivers in a safe manner. If they can't,
they should not be on the road.

Who said otherwise?
Perhaps you should understand what you're reading before you
comment, to clarify, we are speaking of those who undertake and
cut in, not fast drivers meeting slower drivers.

ISTR an experiment where cars "raced" between two junctions of a busy
motorway. The car that hopped lanes arrived something like 30 seconds
ahead of the drivers who stayed in the same lane. i.e. was it worth it?

No. The Highway Code says you shouldn't do this. A following
policeman will Have Words.

for racing on public roads you may well be arrested. But "racing"
was in quotes in this "experiment".
--
Mike Reid
Walk-eat-photos UK "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" -- you can email us@ this site
Walk-eat-photos Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" -- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

In article ,
Mike Barnes wrote:
Is it possible that he was doing something else wrong? From ACPO's
guidelines:

No.

The guidance to police officers is that it is anticipated that,
other than in the most exceptional circumstances, the issue of
fixed penalty notices and summonses is likely to be the minimum
appropriate enforcement action as soon as the following speeds have
been reached:

Limit Fixed Penalty Summons
20 mph 25 mph 35 mph
30 mph 35 mph 50 mph
40 mph 46 mph 66 mph
50 mph 57 mph 76 mph
60 mph 68 mph 86 mph
70 mph 79 mph 96 mph

In this case it was a speed camera. Twenty metres before an unrestricted sign,
late at night, no pedestrians, no other vehicles, clear road, clear weather.

--
John Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com 0845 006 8822
Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com
Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing

"The Reid" wrote in message
...
Following up to John Cartmell

the safety cameras will I think do you for 70 + 10% + 2 = 82.
Your "indicated" is likely to be very slightly more.
A patrol car probably doesn't want the aggro for 83 mph.
100mph (30+) will earn serious aggro.

I know of someone getting a ticket for 32mph in a 30mph limit.

that's very unusual as the chief constables recommendation for
the margin gives (thinks)......35 mph. Or probably an indicated
36+.
--
It can happen here if they have one of their selective enforcement
campaigns, i.e., they blitz motorists for a week on some item such as a dead
tail-light or they apply the speed limits very strictly.
A speed cop once told me that he added 5% to the setting on the camera which
annoyed me when I got a ticket in the mail for 103kph in a 100kph zone. At
least here they treat speed camer tickets as 'property' offences (they send
the ticket to the owner of the vehicle) and you don't get points.
Graham

On Fri, 12 May 2006 16:59:03 +0100 someone who may be John Cartmell
wrote this:-

In this case it was a speed camera. Twenty metres before an unrestricted sign,
late at night, no pedestrians, no other vehicles, clear road, clear weather.

Excellent news. The more of these criminals that are caught and
punished the better.

Most criminals whine about how they are not real criminals, the law
should be enforced against someone else and they are being picked
upon.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

"The Reid" wrote in message
...
Following up to Dave Plowman (News)

They all deny that it has any effect, and also swear blind that they are
*not* alcoholics.

A heavy drinker isn't necessarily an alcoholic. Addiction means you simply
*can't* stop without external help.

Dave (the other one I assume your making the mistake of talking
to) works with alkies and cant see that the majority of people
are not like that.
For the record Dave F, I dont think alcohol has no effect and Ive
never met anybody who did, however the small amount you mentioned
doesnt, but why am I bothering? Youre too pig headed to ever hear
anything you didnt already "know".
--
Mike Reid
"Think on lad, tha' can always tell a Yorkshireman, but not much"

Oi!!!

"The Reid" wrote in message
...
Following up to Ophelia

Seems he was just tootling along just below the limit and they ran into
him.

then there's no way he can be at fault unless maybe stopping
without good reason on a no stopping allowed road.

exactly!! Anyway.. the Insurance company is paying out so that says it all!

On Fri, 12 May 2006 16:50:43 GMT, "Ophelia" wrote:

|
|"The Reid" wrote in message
.. .
| Following up to Dave Plowman (News)
|
| They all deny that it has any effect, and also swear blind that they are
| *not* alcoholics.
|
|A heavy drinker isn't necessarily an alcoholic. Addiction means you simply
|*can't* stop without external help.
|
| Dave (the other one I assume your making the mistake of talking
| to) works with alkies and cant see that the majority of people
| are not like that.

When in the RAF I did drink, but not to excess. The effects on me were
absolutely horrendous. Many of the ordinary drinkers who I knew in the
RAF were going downhill fast, but non of them could see it :-(

| For the record Dave F, I dont think alcohol has no effect and Ive
| never met anybody who did, however the small amount you mentioned
| doesnt, but why am I bothering? Youre too pig headed to ever hear
| anything you didnt already "know".

Having worked as a volunteer for the Bradford Curry Project and other local
Soup Runs for *many* years, I know all about the disastrous effects of
alcohol on people. Their lives are *very* brutal and short. The local
drunks actually greet me with "Hi Dave".

--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk
Chair, Bradford Curry Project
http://www.hyphenologist.co.uk/bradfordcurryproject

The Reid wrote in
:

Following up to graham

A few years ago, my B-I-L was pulled over for going at 91mph.
The cop told
him that if he'd been going at 90mph, they wouldn't have stopped him -
he just pushed them a bit too much. After that, he set the speed
warning thingy in his BMW to ping at 89mph. I understand that things
are more restrictive now and the cops wouldn't be so generous.

the safety cameras will I think do you for 70 + 10% + 2 = 82.

79, surely. Or is the % a mipsrint?

I heard that they allow 10% error each on your speedo and their speed
trap, so 85mph is about the level you'd likely to risk being caught.
But make sure your speedo is accurate if you try it.

Your "indicated" is likely to be very slightly more.
A patrol car probably doesn't want the aggro for 83 mph.
100mph (30+) will earn serious aggro.

And lots of kudos if it's a govt minister or a HRH.


--
Adrian
Remove packaging and take out insurance before emailing me

The Reid wrote in
:

Following up to John Cartmell

the safety cameras will I think do you for 70 + 10% + 2 = 82.
Your "indicated" is likely to be very slightly more.
A patrol car probably doesn't want the aggro for 83 mph.
100mph (30+) will earn serious aggro.

I know of someone getting a ticket for 32mph in a 30mph limit.

that's very unusual as the chief constables recommendation for
the margin gives (thinks)......35 mph. Or probably an indicated
36+.

That fits the 10% + 10% rule. Of course the person's speedo could have
been reading low.

--
Adrian

Remove packaging and take out insurance before emailing me

In article ,
Adrian Tupper wrote:
The Reid wrote in
:

Following up to John Cartmell

the safety cameras will I think do you for 70 + 10% + 2 = 82.
Your "indicated" is likely to be very slightly more.
A patrol car probably doesn't want the aggro for 83 mph.
100mph (30+) will earn serious aggro.

I know of someone getting a ticket for 32mph in a 30mph limit.

that's very unusual as the chief constables recommendation for
the margin gives (thinks)......35 mph. Or probably an indicated
36+.

That fits the 10% + 10% rule. Of course the person's speedo could have
been reading low.

32mph was the figure on the documentation and the estimate by the driver
previously (when everyone assured that driver that a ticket wouldn't be
issued).

--
John Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com 0845 006 8822
Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com
Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing

John Cartmell wrote in
:

In article ,
Adrian Tupper wrote:
The Reid wrote in
:

Following up to John Cartmell

the safety cameras will I think do you for 70 + 10% + 2 = 82.
Your "indicated" is likely to be very slightly more.
A patrol car probably doesn't want the aggro for 83 mph.
100mph (30+) will earn serious aggro.

I know of someone getting a ticket for 32mph in a 30mph limit.

that's very unusual as the chief constables recommendation for
the margin gives (thinks)......35 mph. Or probably an indicated
36+.

That fits the 10% + 10% rule. Of course the person's speedo could
have
been reading low.

32mph was the figure on the documentation and the estimate by the
driver
previously (when everyone assured that driver that a ticket wouldn't
be
issued).


It's certainly unusual. 32mph is probably 10% below the speed he was
clocked at, but it's still less than 10% higher (only by 1mph) than a
speedo reading 30mph. This particular force must use tighter margins
than the ones I have anecdotally had told to me.

I shall make sure I never estimate my speed as being higher than the
limit!

--
Adrian

Remove packaging and take out insurance before emailing me

On 13 May 2006 08:31:43 GMT, Adrian Tupper
wrote:


|It's certainly unusual. 32mph is probably 10% below the speed he was
|clocked at, but it's still less than 10% higher (only by 1mph) than a
|speedo reading 30mph. This particular force must use tighter margins
|than the ones I have anecdotally had told to me.
|
|I shall make sure I never estimate my speed as being higher than the
|limit!

I have my speedo calibrated against my GPS, which gives me a few more MPH.
--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk Google Groups is IME the *worst*
method of accessing usenet. GG subscribers would be well advised get a
newsreader, say Agent, and a newsserver, say news.individual.net. These
will allow them: to see only *new* posts, a killfile, and other goodies.

In article ,
Dave Fawthrop wrote:
Having worked as a volunteer for the Bradford Curry Project and other
local Soup Runs for *many* years, I know all about the disastrous
effects of alcohol on people. Their lives are *very* brutal and short.
The local drunks actually greet me with "Hi Dave".

There are even more functioning alcoholics out there than there are down
and outs through drink. You'll probably know several.

The abuse of alcohol effects all social classes. The poor may end up in
the gutter, the better off probably not.

You really need to do some proper research.

--
*Why isn't 11 pronounced onety one? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Following up to Adrian Tupper

I heard that they allow 10% error each on your speedo and their speed
trap, so 85mph is about the level you'd likely to risk being caught.
But make sure your speedo is accurate if you try it.

I just use the speed limit for Gatsos etc, how can I know they
didnt change the rules since I last heard?
I had a really tedious journey across Cornwall and Devon the
other day. A patrol car doing exactly 70 with a jam behind him. I
drove at 70 too with cruise on, which resulted in a slo-mo
overtake (not comfortable with that) then when I slowed to 60 for
a series of bends he went past at 70 again (too fast IMHO) then
we repeated the whole thing again.
--
Mike Reid
Walk-eat-photos UK "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" -- you can email us@ this site
Walk-eat-photos Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" -- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

Following up to Adrian Tupper

That fits the 10% + 10% rule.

do you mean 10% +2?
--
Mike Reid
Walk-eat-photos UK "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" -- you can email us@ this site
Walk-eat-photos Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" -- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

Following up to Mike Barnes

the safety cameras will I think do you for 70 + 10% + 2 = 82

70 + 10% + 2 = 79

I knew the sums would be too hard! :-)
--
Mike Reid
Walk-eat-photos UK "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" -- you can email us@ this site
Walk-eat-photos Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" -- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

The Reid wrote in
:

Following up to Adrian Tupper

That fits the 10% + 10% rule.

do you mean 10% +2?

Absolutely not. They measure you doing 40 and say you're doing 36.
You speedo says you're doing 30 but you could be doing 33.

In this case, you still get nicked.

--
Adrian

Remove packaging and take out insurance before emailing me

The Reid wrote in
:

Following up to Adrian Tupper

I heard that they allow 10% error each on your speedo and their speed
trap, so 85mph is about the level you'd likely to risk being caught.
But make sure your speedo is accurate if you try it.

I just use the speed limit for Gatsos etc, how can I know they
didnt change the rules since I last heard?
I had a really tedious journey across Cornwall and Devon the
other day. A patrol car doing exactly 70 with a jam behind him. I
drove at 70 too with cruise on, which resulted in a slo-mo
overtake (not comfortable with that) then when I slowed to 60 for
a series of bends he went past at 70 again (too fast IMHO) then
we repeated the whole thing again.

He must have been really bored.

--
Adrian

Remove packaging and take out insurance before emailing me

Following up to Adrian Tupper

They measure you doing 40 and say you're doing 36.

I thought they measure you doing 36 and you thought you were
doing 40?

You speedo says you're doing 30 but you could be doing 33.

I thought Speedos always over-read?
--
Mike Reid
Walk-eat-photos UK "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" -- you can email us@ this site
Walk-eat-photos Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" -- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

Following up to Adrian Tupper

I had a really tedious journey across Cornwall and Devon the
other day. A patrol car doing exactly 70 with a jam behind him. I
drove at 70 too with cruise on, which resulted in a slo-mo
overtake (not comfortable with that) then when I slowed to 60 for
a series of bends he went past at 70 again (too fast IMHO) then
we repeated the whole thing again.

He must have been really bored.

I would think so. I assume he's been told to follow the limits,
the police used to either potter along well below the limit or
drive above them, to avoid such situations, I suspect that has
changed and he was going round bends etc at 70 out of
frustration..
BTW campaigners who disaprove of mobile speed camera vans have
been videoing the camera vans speeding between catching other
people speeding!
--
Mike Reid
Walk-eat-photos UK "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" -- you can email us@ this site
Walk-eat-photos Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" -- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

The Reid wrote in
:

Following up to Adrian Tupper

They measure you doing 40 and say you're doing 36.

I thought they measure you doing 36 and you thought you were
doing 40?

Then you're definitely nicked.


You speedo says you're doing 30 but you could be doing 33.

I thought Speedos always over-read?

You're given the benefit of the doubt.


--
Adrian
Remove packaging and take out insurance before emailing me

The Reid wrote in
:

Following up to Adrian Tupper

I had a really tedious journey across Cornwall and Devon the
other day. A patrol car doing exactly 70 with a jam behind him. I
drove at 70 too with cruise on, which resulted in a slo-mo
overtake (not comfortable with that) then when I slowed to 60 for
a series of bends he went past at 70 again (too fast IMHO) then
we repeated the whole thing again.

He must have been really bored.

I would think so. I assume he's been told to follow the limits,
the police used to either potter along well below the limit or
drive above them, to avoid such situations, I suspect that has
changed and he was going round bends etc at 70 out of
frustration..
BTW campaigners who disaprove of mobile speed camera vans have
been videoing the camera vans speeding between catching other
people speeding!

LOL.

We have had similar stories about parking wardens stopping off to buy
their fags in restricted areas.

--
Adrian
Remove packaging and take out insurance before emailing me

Following up to Adrian Tupper

I thought they measure you doing 36 and you thought you were
doing 40?

Then you're definitely nicked.

wont that depend on the speed limit?

You speedo says you're doing 30 but you could be doing 33.

I thought Speedos always over-read?

You're given the benefit of the doubt.

I thought the margin wasn't for duff speedos but was to avoid
people staring at the speedo rather than the road (doesnt work
too well of course).
You could make the speedo misread by fitting the wrong wheels of
course. (I should say we are not talking swimwear here).
--
Mike Reid
Walk-eat-photos UK "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" -- you can email us@ this site
Walk-eat-photos Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" -- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

Following up to Adrian Tupper

BTW campaigners who disaprove of mobile speed camera vans have
been videoing the camera vans speeding between catching other
people speeding!

LOL.

We have had similar stories about parking wardens stopping off to buy
their fags in restricted areas.

Its inevitable in a culture moving towards total enforcement of
these areas the operators will get caught out. People have come
to accept that anything to do with cars will be increasingly
enforced with "no quarter", look at the London congestion charge,
about three hours to pay in the evening, no payment allowed next
day. Many people who have gone into the zone unexpectedly are
still busy with whatever when the time runs out, end up with a
penalty, but your into a 1000 post thread (elsewhere) if you
suggest next day payment would be perfectly reasonable.
--
Mike Reid
Walk-eat-photos UK "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" -- you can email us@ this site
Walk-eat-photos Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" -- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

The Reid wrote in
:

Following up to Adrian Tupper

I thought they measure you doing 36 and you thought you were
doing 40?

Then you're definitely nicked.

wont that depend on the speed limit?

The speed limit here is 30, sir. Did you not see the sign?

You speedo says you're doing 30 but you could be doing 33.

I thought Speedos always over-read?

You're given the benefit of the doubt.

I thought the margin wasn't for duff speedos but was to avoid
people staring at the speedo rather than the road (doesnt work
too well of course).
You could make the speedo misread by fitting the wrong wheels of
course. (I should say we are not talking swimwear here).

You'd only be kidding one person, of course.

--
Adrian

Remove packaging and take out insurance before emailing me

The Reid wrote in
:

Following up to Adrian Tupper

BTW campaigners who disaprove of mobile speed camera vans have
been videoing the camera vans speeding between catching other
people speeding!

LOL.

We have had similar stories about parking wardens stopping off to buy
their fags in restricted areas.

Its inevitable in a culture moving towards total enforcement of
these areas the operators will get caught out. People have come
to accept that anything to do with cars will be increasingly
enforced with "no quarter", look at the London congestion charge,
about three hours to pay in the evening, no payment allowed next
day. Many people who have gone into the zone unexpectedly are
still busy with whatever when the time runs out, end up with a
penalty, but your into a 1000 post thread (elsewhere) if you
suggest next day payment would be perfectly reasonable.

The only problem I have with congestion charge is that it doesn't seem
as though it's intended to cut congestion as much as it is to raise
money. Cutting congestion can be done on a non-payment basis such as a
lottery for access or meddling with traffic lights etc.

Congestion charging was decisively rejected in a referendum here in
Edinburgh. Although I think it was as much a question on whether we
thought the council was competent and trusted enough to handle it rather
than on the general principle.

--
Adrian

Remove packaging and take out insurance before emailing me

Following up to Adrian Tupper

The speed limit here is 30, sir. Did you not see the sign?

Never 'appens. Nowadays its a brown envelope with a NIP in it.
The operative kipping in the van doesnt even wave as you go by.

You could make the speedo misread by fitting the wrong wheels of
course. (I should say we are not talking swimwear here).

You'd only be kidding one person, of course.

with the Speedos? No, its obvious for all to see.
--
Mike Reid
Walk-eat-photos UK "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" -- you can email us@ this site
Walk-eat-photos Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" -- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

Following up to Adrian Tupper

The only problem I have with congestion charge is that it doesn't seem
as though it's intended to cut congestion as much as it is to raise
money. Cutting congestion can be done on a non-payment basis such as a
lottery for access or meddling with traffic lights etc.

I think payment is less unfair and more workable than things like
restriction by number plate. I don't understand how the traffic
light idea might work.


Congestion charging was decisively rejected in a referendum here in
Edinburgh. Although I think it was as much a question on whether we
thought the council was competent and trusted enough to handle it rather
than on the general principle.

perhaps you don't really need it.
--
Mike Reid
Walk-eat-photos UK "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" -- you can email us@ this site
Walk-eat-photos Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" -- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

The Reid wrote in
:

Following up to Adrian Tupper

The only problem I have with congestion charge is that it doesn't seem
as though it's intended to cut congestion as much as it is to raise
money. Cutting congestion can be done on a non-payment basis such as
a
lottery for access or meddling with traffic lights etc.

I think payment is less unfair and more workable than things like
restriction by number plate. I don't understand how the traffic
light idea might work.

Reduced priority for cars heading into congested areas. Of course all
it does is to move the congestion elsewhere, but at least people can
choose.

Congestion charging was decisively rejected in a referendum here in
Edinburgh. Although I think it was as much a question on whether we
thought the council was competent and trusted enough to handle it
rather
than on the general principle.

perhaps you don't really need it.

I don't think so. Our "gridlock" is nothing compared with yours. Our
council has a history of trying to solve problems that don't exist.
Their last lot of road restrictions were ridiculed so much that they
reversed the lot, after spending £££s on them.

Didn't one city - Copenhagen perhaps - do away with traffic planning?
No more no entry nor one way signs. The result was an improved
circulation!

--
Adrian
Remove packaging and take out insurance before emailing me

Following up to Adrian Tupper

Didn't one city - Copenhagen perhaps - do away with traffic planning?
No more no entry nor one way signs. The result was an improved
circulation!

there's a theory that if you remove all banned turns, white paint
etc from a city centre cars go slowly but directly. Less
accidents, less traffic.
--
Mike Reid
Walk-eat-photos UK "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" -- you can email us@ this site
Walk-eat-photos Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" -- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

The Reid wrote in
:

Following up to Adrian Tupper

Didn't one city - Copenhagen perhaps - do away with traffic planning?
No more no entry nor one way signs. The result was an improved
circulation!

there's a theory that if you remove all banned turns, white paint
etc from a city centre cars go slowly but directly. Less
accidents, less traffic.

Less polution...

--
Adrian

Remove packaging and take out insurance before emailing me

In article , Adrian Tupper
URL:mailtoackadrian.tupperaging@zetnetinsurance .co.uk wrote:

Didn't one city - Copenhagen perhaps - do away with traffic planning?
No more no entry nor one way signs. The result was an improved
circulation!

But there you have the key. Road planning in this country is done mostly by
anti private motorist councils. Therefore, the whole point is to cause
congestion for at least two reasons:

1) They hope that people will get frustrated and revert to the horse and
cart, (stops the proles getting about so easily you see).

2) They can point to the congestion and say "Oh dear, look at that.
Something must be done. How about screwing the motorist a little more?"

--
AJL

On Fri, 12 May 2006 16:59:03 +0100, John Cartmell
wrote:

In this case it was a speed camera. Twenty metres before an unrestricted sign,
late at night, no pedestrians, no other vehicles, clear road, clear weather.

Since everyone seems to be offtopic here, I would just comment that
since you are not alone on the road, also during the night, it might
happen that someone else do think the same, it's no danger in driving
in 110 mph during the night, then bypass someone not driving that fast
on a twolane road with no barring btw. opposite direction and then
meet you, also driving in 110 mph, in front of you.

Well, it happens, and until E18 in Vestfold, Norway, this happened
almost weekly :-( About 100-250 killed every year over a distance of a
few km :-( Now, that road is history as E18 and killed are reduced to
about 1 in a year (declared a very safe road, it took only 3 months
before a lady crashed into a tunnel wall at about 130 mph (almost 200
km/h :-( ) (Limit is 100 km/h). It is generally known that Norwegian
drivers love speed running their cars, and is the most fined
population in Sweden, seldomly caught at lower speeds than 130-140
km/h in zones with 100 km/h etc.
(I think many of them are also caught in US, but then there is very
luttle that police can do due to lack of regulations)

In article , Alf Christophersen
wrote:
In this case it was a speed camera. Twenty metres before an unrestricted
sign, late at night, no pedestrians, no other vehicles, clear road, clear
weather.

Since everyone seems to be offtopic here, I would just comment that since
you are not alone on the road, also during the night, it might happen that
someone else do think the same, it's no danger in driving in 110 mph during
the night, then bypass someone not driving that fast on a twolane road with
no barring btw. opposite direction and then meet you, also driving in 110
mph, in front of you.

But this was 32mph on a road just before a 70mph area. Your extrapolation went
beyond stretching limits! ;-)

--
John Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com 0845 006 8822
Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com
Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing

Following up to Andy Luckman (AJL Electronics)

But there you have the key. Road planning in this country is done mostly by
anti private motorist councils.

I think its mostly done by traffic planners who have exhausted
what can usefully be done and are just carrying on spending a
road improvement budget.
--
Mike Reid
Walk-eat-photos UK "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" -- you can email us@ this site
Walk-eat-photos Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" -- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

The Reid wrote in
news
Following up to Andy Luckman (AJL Electronics)

But there you have the key. Road planning in this country is done
mostly by anti private motorist councils.

I think its mostly done by traffic planners who have exhausted
what can usefully be done and are just carrying on spending a
road improvement budget.

I think it is done by traffic planners creating jobs for themselves.

--
Adrian

Remove packaging and take out insurance before emailing me

On Fri, 19 May 2006 11:16:28 +0100, John Cartmell
wrote:

But this was 32mph on a road just before a 70mph area. Your extrapolation went
beyond stretching limits! ;-)

If you try to speed the car even 1m before the limit changes, you are
caught over here. Also in the night. Police need money from fining
you.

In article , Alf Christophersen
wrote:
On Fri, 19 May 2006 11:16:28 +0100, John Cartmell
wrote:

But this was 32mph on a road just before a 70mph area. Your extrapolation
went beyond stretching limits! ;-)

If you try to speed the car even 1m before the limit changes, you are
caught over here. Also in the night. Police need money from fining you.

I won't pick up the political point - just point out that you have entirely
missed the point I was making.

--
John Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com 0845 006 8822
Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com
Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing