I have just had an altercation with a bloke in charge of a portable
speed sign. The type that light up and "show" your speed and then either
give a happy or sad face.

It showed me as doing 32 MPH and so I pulled up to have a word with the
bloke operating the device.

Me "Is this device calibrated because it has just shown me as doing
32MPH, my speedo said 27MPH and my satnav said 25MPH"

Him" Yes, so you were obviously speeding"

"Got any proof it's working correctly"

"No"

"Care to jump into my car (the van has broken down again) and drive
toward your sign to confirm my evidence?"

"No I cannot get into your car you might be a pervert"

"I am a pervert but I am not going to bum you, I am just going to prove
that your machine is wrong"

"I am sorry I did not mean to call you a pervert"

"You did not call me a pervert, you alleged that I could be a pervert. I
am a pervert so free to call me one"

"That would not be correct"

"Oh but I am a pervert, and you can call me one if you want I will not
object"

"I don't want to"

"But you were happy to allege that I was a pervert before I told you I
actually was one"

"I'm calling the police you are scaring me"

"Do what you ****ing want, just make sure that you get their speed when
they arrive in three weeks time, it will give you something to have a
wank over later".

Made my day.





"
--
Adam

In message , ARW
writes

Made my day.

grin Love it. Phone rang this morning. Some Indian sounding tart
selling, when we got to it, bitcoins. Sounds like fun. Lots of
questions, lots of spiel, lots of me sounding amazed. Eventually, she
wanted me to go to some web site. Told me to use my phone. Told her I
didn't know how to do that, the only phone I had was the one she was
calling me on (land line number). Told me I didn't know I could use it
for the Internet. She tried to get me to use a computer. Told her I
didn't have one. She asked what I used to connect to Internet. Said I
didn't, and had never used it. Oh well, wasted 15 minutes of her time,
and I was only sitting here drinking tea.
--
Graeme

On 29/09/2017 19:48, ARW wrote:

I have just had an altercation with a bloke in charge of a portable
speed sign. The type that light up and "show" your speed and then either
give a happy or sad face.

It showed me as doing 32 MPH and so I pulled up to have a word with the
bloke operating the device.

We have one not far from here that flashes up a (way too bright) "Slow
Down" message if you dare approach it at an indicated 27 mph (so less in
reality)

Since its so obviously incorrectly set, everyone ignores it conpletely -
which does make you wonder why anyone bothers!

Me "Is this device calibrated because it has just shown me as doing
32MPH, my speedo said 27MPH and my satnav said 25MPH"

Him" Yes, so you were obviously speeding"

"Got any proof it's working correctly"

"No"

"Care to jump into my car (the van has broken down again) and drive
toward your sign to confirm my evidence?"

"No I cannot get into your car you might be a pervert"

"I am a pervert but I am not going to bum you, I am just going to prove
that your machine is wrong"

"I am sorry I did not mean to call you a pervert"

"You did not call me a pervert, you alleged that I could be a pervert. I
am a pervert so free to call me one"

"That would not be correct"

"Oh but I am a pervert, and you can call me one if you want I will not
object"

"I don't want to"

"But you were happy to allege that I was a pervert before I told you I
actually was one"

"I'm calling the police you are scaring me"

"Do what you ****ing want, just make sure that you get their speed when
they arrive in three weeks time, it will give you something to have a
wank over later".

Made my day.

That probably ought to go in the book called "how to freak out a speed
control anorak!" ;-)


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Sat, 30 Sep 2017 02:01:16 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

We have one not far from here that flashes up a (way too bright) "Slow
Down" message if you dare approach it at an indicated 27 mph (so less in
reality)

Since its so obviously incorrectly set, everyone ignores it conpletely -
which does make you wonder why anyone bothers!

On Wednesday I was walking towards one of these but on the opposite side of
a wide raod. When I was about 30 deg. off it started to flash. I couldn't
hear any traffic so looked back - no traffic, moving or parked. Obviously I
walk faster than I thought.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

On Friday, 29 September 2017 22:55:58 UTC+1, Graeme wrote:
In message , ARW
writes

Made my day.

grin Love it. Phone rang this morning. Some Indian sounding tart
selling, when we got to it, bitcoins. Sounds like fun. Lots of
questions, lots of spiel, lots of me sounding amazed. Eventually, she
wanted me to go to some web site. Told me to use my phone. Told her I
didn't know how to do that, the only phone I had was the one she was
calling me on (land line number). Told me I didn't know I could use it
for the Internet. She tried to get me to use a computer. Told her I
didn't have one. She asked what I used to connect to Internet. Said I
didn't, and had never used it. Oh well, wasted 15 minutes of her time,
and I was only sitting here drinking tea.
--
Graeme

So, obviously you lied.
Well, I suppose it's on form for you.

Classic redirection of conversation.
So now he has no problem running his sign.
I have to say that really, in a residential street given all the parked
cars these days, the safe speed should be 20 mph anyway. It so easy to hit a
person trying to cross the road with sightlines obscured by cars for both
the driver and pedestrian until its far too late.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"ARW" wrote in message
news
I have just had an altercation with a bloke in charge of a portable speed
sign. The type that light up and "show" your speed and then either give a
happy or sad face.

It showed me as doing 32 MPH and so I pulled up to have a word with the
bloke operating the device.

Me "Is this device calibrated because it has just shown me as doing 32MPH,
my speedo said 27MPH and my satnav said 25MPH"

Him" Yes, so you were obviously speeding"

"Got any proof it's working correctly"

"No"

"Care to jump into my car (the van has broken down again) and drive toward
your sign to confirm my evidence?"

"No I cannot get into your car you might be a pervert"

"I am a pervert but I am not going to bum you, I am just going to prove
that your machine is wrong"

"I am sorry I did not mean to call you a pervert"

"You did not call me a pervert, you alleged that I could be a pervert. I
am a pervert so free to call me one"

"That would not be correct"

"Oh but I am a pervert, and you can call me one if you want I will not
object"

"I don't want to"

"But you were happy to allege that I was a pervert before I told you I
actually was one"

"I'm calling the police you are scaring me"

"Do what you ****ing want, just make sure that you get their speed when
they arrive in three weeks time, it will give you something to have a wank
over later".

Made my day.





"
--
Adam

Brian Gaff wrote

Classic redirection of conversation.

Adams wasn’t a conversation, it was a ****ing over of a ****wit.

So now he has no problem running his sign.

He never did have, he is that terminal a ****wit.

I have to say that really, in a residential street given all the parked
cars these days, the safe speed should be 20 mph anyway.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

It so easy to hit a person trying to cross the road with sightlines
obscured by cars for both the driver and pedestrian until its far too
late.

Just not feasible to restrict everyone to 20 mph, or have
some fool with a red flag walking in front of every car either.

"ARW" wrote in message
news
I have just had an altercation with a bloke in charge of a portable speed
sign. The type that light up and "show" your speed and then either give a
happy or sad face.

It showed me as doing 32 MPH and so I pulled up to have a word with the
bloke operating the device.

Me "Is this device calibrated because it has just shown me as doing
32MPH, my speedo said 27MPH and my satnav said 25MPH"

Him" Yes, so you were obviously speeding"

"Got any proof it's working correctly"

"No"

"Care to jump into my car (the van has broken down again) and drive
toward your sign to confirm my evidence?"

"No I cannot get into your car you might be a pervert"

"I am a pervert but I am not going to bum you, I am just going to prove
that your machine is wrong"

"I am sorry I did not mean to call you a pervert"

"You did not call me a pervert, you alleged that I could be a pervert. I
am a pervert so free to call me one"

"That would not be correct"

"Oh but I am a pervert, and you can call me one if you want I will not
object"

"I don't want to"

"But you were happy to allege that I was a pervert before I told you I
actually was one"

"I'm calling the police you are scaring me"

"Do what you ****ing want, just make sure that you get their speed when
they arrive in three weeks time, it will give you something to have a
wank over later".

Made my day.





"
--
Adam

On 30/09/17 06:45, PeterC wrote:
On Sat, 30 Sep 2017 02:01:16 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

We have one not far from here that flashes up a (way too bright) "Slow
Down" message if you dare approach it at an indicated 27 mph (so less in
reality)

Since its so obviously incorrectly set, everyone ignores it conpletely -
which does make you wonder why anyone bothers!

On Wednesday I was walking towards one of these but on the opposite side of
a wide raod. When I was about 30 deg. off it started to flash. I couldn't
hear any traffic so looked back - no traffic, moving or parked. Obviously I
walk faster than I thought.

In one village near here it used to be a 40mph limit, but being
Cambridgeshire, they started up with a warning flasher. Set to *30mph*.

Well they couldnt admit they were wrong, so they then put a 100 metres
or so of 30mph just to validate the radar thing.

And chicanes, to make accidents more likely...



--
The biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with
what it actually is.

On 30/09/2017 09:24, Brian Gaff wrote:
Classic redirection of conversation.
So now he has no problem running his sign.
I have to say that really, in a residential street given all the parked
cars these days, the safe speed should be 20 mph anyway. It so easy to hit a
person trying to cross the road with sightlines obscured by cars for both
the driver and pedestrian until its far too late.
Brian



No problem running his sign?

AFAIK it's a DIY sign from ebay.

If I see the **** again displaying the wrong speed I have other plans to
upset him.


--
Adam

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

In one village near here it used to be a 40mph limit, but being
Cambridgeshire, they started up with a warning flasher. Set to *30mph*.

Well they couldnt admit they were wrong, so they then put a 100 metres
or so of 30mph just to validate the radar thing.

AIUI, the latest rules mean that you can't go straight from NSL
to 30, there has to be an intervening higher limit.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK


Plant amazing Acers.

On 30/09/2017 14:09, Chris J Dixon wrote:

AIUI, the latest rules mean that you can't go straight from NSL
to 30, there has to be an intervening higher limit.


That'd be a u-turn from DoT's 2013 guidance on setting speed limits
(which is the most recent I know of).

It'd also require every traffic authority to make an order setting a
limit of 40 or 50 mph, and erect and maintain the prescribed speed limit
signs, wherever a road subject to the NSL transitions to 30 mph. That
would of course include every NSL road that passes through a
town/village/hamlet with 3 or more street lamps not more than 200 feet
apart (so there is a 30 mph limit unless the contrary is prescribed and
signed). I've seen no signs of such signs.

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

Huge wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

In one village near here it used to be a 40mph limit, but being
Cambridgeshire, they started up with a warning flasher. Set to *30mph*.

No, not "being Cambridgeshire". More like "being as how ****s like you
were howling through their village at massively excessive speeds"

Surely the rational solution is enforce the 40 limit, rather than
introduce a lower one to be ignored. Unless of course 40 mph is a
massively excessive speed. Which it may be. I seem to be the only
person around here who drives through some villages at well under the
speed limit. Not popular behaviour.



--

Roger Hayter

On 30/09/2017 09:24, Brian Gaff wrote:
Classic redirection of conversation.
So now he has no problem running his sign.
I have to say that really, in a residential street given all the parked
cars these days, the safe speed should be 20 mph anyway. It so easy to hit a
person trying to cross the road with sightlines obscured by cars for both
the driver and pedestrian until its far too late.

With 20mph there will be no gaps in traffic for a pedestrian to cross!

--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 30/09/2017 09:24, Brian Gaff wrote:
Classic redirection of conversation.
So now he has no problem running his sign.
I have to say that really, in a residential street given all the parked
cars these days, the safe speed should be 20 mph anyway. It so easy to
hit a
person trying to cross the road with sightlines obscured by cars for both
the driver and pedestrian until its far too late.

With 20mph there will be no gaps in traffic for a pedestrian to cross!

We have less than that in some places like retirement villages and
the pedestrians do fine.

On 30/09/2017 02:01, John Rumm wrote:
On 29/09/2017 19:48, ARW wrote:

I have just had an altercation with a bloke in charge of a portable
speed sign. The type that light up and "show" your speed and then either
give a happy or sad face.

It showed me as doing 32 MPH and so I pulled up to have a word with the
bloke operating the device.

We have one not far from here that flashes up a (way too bright) "Slow
Down" message if you dare approach it at an indicated 27 mph (so less in
reality)

Since its so obviously incorrectly set, everyone ignores it conpletely -
which does make you wonder why anyone bothers!

Research (by TRL ?) apparently showed that signs that indicate that you
are speeding are very effective in slowing down traffic. However, it
also showed that it only worked when driver's didn't see it most of the
time - e.g. set at 35 in a 30 zone. For some reason councils and
companies carrying out roadworks have ignored the research an set them
exactly on 30mph - often lower when you allow for lack of decent
calibration.

SteveW

On 30/09/2017 17:24, Huge wrote:
On 2017-09-30, Roger Hayter wrote:
Huge wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

In one village near here it used to be a 40mph limit, but being
Cambridgeshire, they started up with a warning flasher. Set to *30mph*.

No, not "being Cambridgeshire". More like "being as how ****s like you
were howling through their village at massively excessive speeds"

Surely the rational solution is enforce the 40 limit, rather than
introduce a lower one to be ignored.

In an ideal world, sure.

Unless of course 40 mph is a
massively excessive speed. Which it may be.

It's a *limit*, not a target!

When a limit is stupidly low, it becomes a target.

I seem to be the only
person around here who drives through some villages at well under the
speed limit.

You and me, both.

Not popular behaviour.

Isn't it just.

Which just causes more problems and danger for others. One might even
say selfish behaviour. Perhaps its time to stop driving.

On 30/09/17 14:09, Chris J Dixon wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

In one village near here it used to be a 40mph limit, but being
Cambridgeshire, they started up with a warning flasher. Set to *30mph*.

Well they couldnt admit they were wrong, so they then put a 100 metres
or so of 30mph just to validate the radar thing.

AIUI, the latest rules mean that you can't go straight from NSL
to 30, there has to be an intervening higher limit.

Chris

That is total ********.

Loads ov villages here go straight from 60 to 30



--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

On 30/09/17 14:15, Huge wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

In one village near here it used to be a 40mph limit, but being
Cambridgeshire, they started up with a warning flasher. Set to *30mph*.

No, not "being Cambridgeshire". More like "being as how ****s like you
were howling through their village at massively excessive speeds"


No, I never did actually

Next door neighbour has moved from cambridgeshire and already she has
compalined to te parish council wanting an active speed sign on a minor
road that is almost single lane and you can't do more than 30 anyway.

Its just part of the suburban mentality of that particular council that
it imposes on its inhabitants.


--
€œit should be clear by now to everyone that activist environmentalism
(or environmental activism) is becoming a general ideology about humans,
about their freedom, about the relationship between the individual and
the state, and about the manipulation of people under the guise of a
'noble' idea. It is not an honest pursuit of 'sustainable development,'
a matter of elementary environmental protection, or a search for
rational mechanisms designed to achieve a healthy environment. Yet
things do occur that make you shake your head and remind yourself that
you live neither in Joseph Stalins Communist era, nor in the Orwellian
utopia of 1984.€�

Vaclav Klaus

On 30/09/17 15:54, Roger Hayter wrote:
Huge wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

In one village near here it used to be a 40mph limit, but being
Cambridgeshire, they started up with a warning flasher. Set to *30mph*.

No, not "being Cambridgeshire". More like "being as how ****s like you
were howling through their village at massively excessive speeds"

Surely the rational solution is enforce the 40 limit, rather than
introduce a lower one to be ignored. Unless of course 40 mph is a
massively excessive speed. Which it may be. I seem to be the only
person around here who drives through some villages at well under the
speed limit. Not popular behaviour.



In this case there was a crossroads and they put up a house on te corner
and it got very poor visibility after that so I think the 30 was
probably justified...



--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

Fredxxx wrote:

On 30/09/2017 17:24, Huge wrote:
On 2017-09-30, Roger Hayter wrote:
Huge wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

In one village near here it used to be a 40mph limit, but being
Cambridgeshire, they started up with a warning flasher. Set to *30mph*.

No, not "being Cambridgeshire". More like "being as how ****s like you
were howling through their village at massively excessive speeds"

Surely the rational solution is enforce the 40 limit, rather than
introduce a lower one to be ignored.

In an ideal world, sure.

Unless of course 40 mph is a
massively excessive speed. Which it may be.

It's a *limit*, not a target!

When a limit is stupidly low, it becomes a target.

I seem to be the only
person around here who drives through some villages at well under the
speed limit.

You and me, both.

Not popular behaviour.

Isn't it just.

Which just causes more problems and danger for others. One might even
say selfish behaviour. Perhaps its time to stop driving.

I have been living here for just over 10 years. There is a village,
hamlet really, with the road about 15 to 20 feet wide through it and
front doors opening on the road with no pavement. Also invariably
parked cars. I have habitually driven through it at about 12 to 18mphs,
often annoying people behind me. Half way through this period, about 6
years ago, a toddler ran out from behind a parked car about 6-8 feet in
front of me. I didn't kill the child. I find my actions well
worthwhile, even if they don't suit car-worshippers.

If I had been going at 25mph or more and had hit the child the
conventional wisdom would be that I had 'right of way' and it was the
child's fault, not mine. I would not have agreed. That would have
been too fast for the conditions. The speed limit is 60 mph.




--

Roger Hayter

On 01/10/2017 01:37, Steve Walker wrote:
On 30/09/2017 02:01, John Rumm wrote:
On 29/09/2017 19:48, ARW wrote:

I have just had an altercation with a bloke in charge of a portable
speed sign. The type that light up and "show" your speed and then either
give a happy or sad face.

It showed me as doing 32 MPH and so I pulled up to have a word with the
bloke operating the device.

We have one not far from here that flashes up a (way too bright) "Slow
Down" message if you dare approach it at an indicated 27 mph (so less
in reality)

Since its so obviously incorrectly set, everyone ignores it conpletely
- which does make you wonder why anyone bothers!

Research (by TRL ?) apparently showed that signs that indicate that you
are speeding are very effective in slowing down traffic. However, it
also showed that it only worked when driver's didn't see it most of the
time - e.g. set at 35 in a 30 zone. For some reason councils and
companies carrying out roadworks have ignored the research an set them
exactly on 30mph - often lower when you allow for lack of decent
calibration.



This?

http://content.tfl.gov.uk/effectiveness-of-sids.pdf


That actually would make more sense as 35MPH is the speed at which you
can get prosecuted for when driving at in a 30MPH limit.

One of the best things about my van (when it actually works) is that I
can set the cruse control to 31MPH when in a 30 zone. That sets my real
speed to 29MPH.

A reminder that you are speeding is much better than a sign that lights
up when you are not speeding - even if it has a happy face when you are
not speeding.

Thanks for the heads up on that one Steve

--
Adam

ARW wrote:

One of the best things about my van (when it actually works) is that I
can set the cruse control to 31MPH when in a 30 zone. That sets my real
speed to 29MPH.

Yes, I often use C/C set to 31 in a 30 and 52 in motorway 50 roadworks
sections. I find most of the "flashing reminder" signs are quite
accurate compared to GPS - far more accurate than most car speedos.

A reminder that you are speeding is much better than a sign that lights
up when you are not speeding - even if it has a happy face when you are
not speeding.

Signs that have amber flashing lights and a green message thanking you
for not speeding are just ****ing annoying.

On 01/10/2017 01:37, Fredxxx wrote:
8

It's a *limit*, not a target!

When a limit is stupidly low, it becomes a target.

Only people that can't drive regard them as targets.

They are the maximum you are allowed to drive at, not the safe speed you
should be driving at which is usually lower.
Especially for those that can't drive but think they can!

On 01/10/2017 09:16, Andy Burns wrote:
ARW wrote:

One of the best things about my van (when it actually works) is that I
can set the cruse control to 31MPH when in a 30 zone. That sets my real
speed to 29MPH.

Yes, I often use C/C set to 31 in a 30 and 52 in motorway 50 roadworks
sections.Â* I find most of the "flashing reminder" signs are quite
accurate compared to GPS - far more accurate than most car speedos.

A reminder that you are speeding is much better than a sign that lights
up when you are not speeding - even if it has a happy face when you are
not speeding.

Signs that have amber flashing lights and a green message thanking you
for not speeding are just ****ing annoying.

It's like the good award badges that schools hand out to pupils for just
turning up to school.

I drove through Wold Newton a couple of days ago. Some resident had put
up a scarecrow with a hi viz jacket in what I assume is an attempt to
slow down the traffic. The next day on my way to work someone had
installed a blow up doll that was giving the scarecrow a blow job.

That really did slow down the traffic.


--
Adam

On 01/10/2017 10:16, Huge wrote:
On 2017-10-01, ARW wrote:

[32 lines snipped]

That actually would make more sense as 35MPH is the speed at which you
can get prosecuted for when driving at in a 30MPH limit.

Ummm, no. You can get prosecuted for doing 30.0000000001 mph, but the
police allow some leeway to make sure you really were speeding, probably
to make sure they get a prosecution.


ACPO guidelines.

Although it is a few years old news it was the Cleveland police that
once decided to operate a zero tolerance approach and prosecute at 31 MPH.
It was one of the crap newspapers (probably the Sun) than then caught
one of the top police officers that were strictly enforcing the 31MPH
ticket system on the public driving his own car at 32MPH in a 30MPH
limit. For some "unknown" reason the Cleveland police then decided to
use the ACPO guidelines for prosecution.

--
Adam

On 01/10/2017 09:08, Roger Hayter wrote:
Fredxxx wrote:

On 30/09/2017 17:24, Huge wrote:
On 2017-09-30, Roger Hayter wrote:
Huge wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

In one village near here it used to be a 40mph limit, but being
Cambridgeshire, they started up with a warning flasher. Set to *30mph*.

No, not "being Cambridgeshire". More like "being as how ****s like you
were howling through their village at massively excessive speeds"

Surely the rational solution is enforce the 40 limit, rather than
introduce a lower one to be ignored.

In an ideal world, sure.

Unless of course 40 mph is a
massively excessive speed. Which it may be.

It's a *limit*, not a target!

When a limit is stupidly low, it becomes a target.

I seem to be the only
person around here who drives through some villages at well under the
speed limit.

You and me, both.

Not popular behaviour.

Isn't it just.

Which just causes more problems and danger for others. One might even
say selfish behaviour. Perhaps its time to stop driving.

I have been living here for just over 10 years. There is a village,
hamlet really, with the road about 15 to 20 feet wide through it and
front doors opening on the road with no pavement. Also invariably
parked cars. I have habitually driven through it at about 12 to 18mphs,
often annoying people behind me. Half way through this period, about 6
years ago, a toddler ran out from behind a parked car about 6-8 feet in
front of me. I didn't kill the child. I find my actions well
worthwhile, even if they don't suit car-worshippers.

If I had been going at 25mph or more and had hit the child the
conventional wisdom would be that I had 'right of way' and it was the
child's fault, not mine. I would not have agreed. That would have
been too fast for the conditions. The speed limit is 60 mph.

Much of the irresponsibility goes to the parents living in a house with
a child with no safe zone to a gate or similar.

There are more suitable properties in which to bring up a child.

On 01/10/2017 10:19, Huge wrote:
On 2017-10-01, Roger Hayter wrote:
Fredxxx wrote:

[46 lines snipped]

If I had been going at 25mph or more and had hit the child the
conventional wisdom would be that I had 'right of way' and it was the
child's fault, not mine. I would not have agreed. That would have
been too fast for the conditions. The speed limit is 60 mph.

Selfish arrogant ****s like "Fredxxx", who can't drive worth a damn, think
that 40mph through a tiny village is "stupidly slow". Hopefully he'll be
killed in an RTA soon.

That says more about your driving ability than you'll ever understand,
and the consequences of it.

On 01/10/2017 10:17, Huge wrote:
On 2017-10-01, Fredxxx wrote:

snip

Perhaps its time to stop driving.

Perhaps it's time for you to stop being a ****? Oh, hang on, it's congenital,
isn't it? Perhaps you better top yourself, you selfish, arrogant ****.

Is truth too painful to bear?

On 01/10/2017 12:07, Huge wrote:
On 2017-10-01, ARW wrote:
On 01/10/2017 10:16, Huge wrote:
On 2017-10-01, ARW wrote:

[32 lines snipped]

That actually would make more sense as 35MPH is the speed at which you
can get prosecuted for when driving at in a 30MPH limit.

Ummm, no. You can get prosecuted for doing 30.0000000001 mph, but the
police allow some leeway to make sure you really were speeding, probably
to make sure they get a prosecution.


ACPO guidelines.

Indeed. But they are only guidelines.

Although it is a few years old news it was the Cleveland police that
once decided to operate a zero tolerance approach and prosecute at 31 MPH.
It was one of the crap newspapers (probably the Sun) than then caught
one of the top police officers that were strictly enforcing the 31MPH
ticket system on the public driving his own car at 32MPH in a 30MPH
limit. For some "unknown" reason the Cleveland police then decided to
use the ACPO guidelines for prosecution.

Quelle surprise.


Are you saying that cops are ****s or am I saying it on my own or are we
both going to say it together?

I am happy to say "cops are ****s - especially traffic officers"

I get the added advantage of having South Yorkshire police as my local
constabulary. Only the Met are worse in terms of corruption.


--
Adam

On 30/09/2017 14:52, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 22:55:50 +0100, Graeme wrote:

In message , ARW
writes

Made my day.

grin Love it. Phone rang this morning. Some Indian sounding tart
selling, when we got to it, bitcoins. Sounds like fun. Lots of
questions, lots of spiel, lots of me sounding amazed. Eventually, she
wanted me to go to some web site. Told me to use my phone. Told her I
didn't know how to do that, the only phone I had was the one she was
calling me on (land line number). Told me I didn't know I could use it
for the Internet. She tried to get me to use a computer. Told her I
didn't have one. She asked what I used to connect to Internet. Said I
didn't, and had never used it. Oh well, wasted 15 minutes of her time,
and I was only sitting here drinking tea.

That's 15 minutes she's not scamming anyone else ... well done sir !

+1, and two fingers to Harry

Fredxxx wrote:

On 01/10/2017 09:08, Roger Hayter wrote:
Fredxxx wrote:
snip

Which just causes more problems and danger for others. One might even
say selfish behaviour. Perhaps its time to stop driving.

I have been living here for just over 10 years. There is a village,
hamlet really, with the road about 15 to 20 feet wide through it and
front doors opening on the road with no pavement. Also invariably
parked cars. I have habitually driven through it at about 12 to 18mphs,
often annoying people behind me. Half way through this period, about 6
years ago, a toddler ran out from behind a parked car about 6-8 feet in
front of me. I didn't kill the child. I find my actions well
worthwhile, even if they don't suit car-worshippers.

If I had been going at 25mph or more and had hit the child the
conventional wisdom would be that I had 'right of way' and it was the
child's fault, not mine. I would not have agreed. That would have
been too fast for the conditions. The speed limit is 60 mph.

Much of the irresponsibility goes to the parents living in a house with
a child with no safe zone to a gate or similar.

There are more suitable properties in which to bring up a child.

I totally refuse to be trolled!

--

Roger Hayter

On 01/10/2017 13:39, Huge wrote:
On 2017-10-01, ARW wrote:

Are you saying that cops are ****s or am I saying it on my own or are we
both going to say it together?

Well, the ACPO are certainly morally dubious.


Your diplomatic skills serve you well.

The best thing about getting arrested these days is that you can make
comments such as "I've got a kettle that's older than you" as they are
putting on the handcuffs.

That proves that you do not need an extended warranty from Argos or Currys.



--
Adam

"dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 01/10/2017 01:37, Fredxxx wrote:
8

It's a *limit*, not a target!

When a limit is stupidly low, it becomes a target.

Only people that can't drive regard them as targets.

They are the maximum you are allowed to drive at, not the safe speed you
should be driving at

Yes.

which is usually lower.

Even sillier than you usually manage, which is saying something.

Especially for those that can't drive but think they can!

On 01/10/2017 09:10, ARW wrote:
On 01/10/2017 01:37, Steve Walker wrote:
On 30/09/2017 02:01, John Rumm wrote:
On 29/09/2017 19:48, ARW wrote:

I have just had an altercation with a bloke in charge of a portable
speed sign. The type that light up and "show" your speed and then
either
give a happy or sad face.

It showed me as doing 32 MPH and so I pulled up to have a word with the
bloke operating the device.

We have one not far from here that flashes up a (way too bright)
"Slow Down" message if you dare approach it at an indicated 27 mph
(so less in reality)

Since its so obviously incorrectly set, everyone ignores it
conpletely - which does make you wonder why anyone bothers!

Research (by TRL ?) apparently showed that signs that indicate that
you are speeding are very effective in slowing down traffic. However,
it also showed that it only worked when driver's didn't see it most of
the time - e.g. set at 35 in a 30 zone. For some reason councils and
companies carrying out roadworks have ignored the research an set them
exactly on 30mph - often lower when you allow for lack of decent
calibration.



This?

http://content.tfl.gov.uk/effectiveness-of-sids.pdf

That's not the one I saw, but it is of a similar nature, although it
seems to concentrate on temporary placement rather than permanent
placement and a slightly high setting. It was very likely research at
around the same time.

"Fredxxx" wrote in message
news
On 01/10/2017 09:08, Roger Hayter wrote:
Fredxxx wrote:

On 30/09/2017 17:24, Huge wrote:
On 2017-09-30, Roger Hayter wrote:
Huge wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

In one village near here it used to be a 40mph limit, but being
Cambridgeshire, they started up with a warning flasher. Set to
*30mph*.

No, not "being Cambridgeshire". More like "being as how ****s like
you
were howling through their village at massively excessive speeds"

Surely the rational solution is enforce the 40 limit, rather than
introduce a lower one to be ignored.

In an ideal world, sure.

Unless of course 40 mph is a
massively excessive speed. Which it may be.

It's a *limit*, not a target!

When a limit is stupidly low, it becomes a target.

I seem to be the only
person around here who drives through some villages at well under the
speed limit.

You and me, both.

Not popular behaviour.

Isn't it just.

Which just causes more problems and danger for others. One might even
say selfish behaviour. Perhaps its time to stop driving.

I have been living here for just over 10 years. There is a village,
hamlet really, with the road about 15 to 20 feet wide through it and
front doors opening on the road with no pavement. Also invariably
parked cars. I have habitually driven through it at about 12 to 18mphs,
often annoying people behind me. Half way through this period, about 6
years ago, a toddler ran out from behind a parked car about 6-8 feet in
front of me. I didn't kill the child. I find my actions well
worthwhile, even if they don't suit car-worshippers.

If I had been going at 25mph or more and had hit the child the
conventional wisdom would be that I had 'right of way' and it was the
child's fault, not mine. I would not have agreed. That would have
been too fast for the conditions. The speed limit is 60 mph.

Much of the irresponsibility goes to the parents living in a house with a
child with no safe zone to a gate or similar.

There are more suitable properties in which to bring up a child.

But there may well not be enough of those in that hamlet.

The obvious solution is a child proof front door.

(Roger Hayter) Wrote in message:
Fredxxx wrote:

On 30/09/2017 17:24, Huge wrote:
On 2017-09-30, Roger Hayter wrote:
Huge wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

In one village near here it used to be a 40mph limit, but being
Cambridgeshire, they started up with a warning flasher. Set to *30mph*.

No, not "being Cambridgeshire". More like "being as how ****s like you
were howling through their village at massively excessive speeds"

Surely the rational solution is enforce the 40 limit, rather than
introduce a lower one to be ignored.

In an ideal world, sure.

Unless of course 40 mph is a
massively excessive speed. Which it may be.

It's a *limit*, not a target!

When a limit is stupidly low, it becomes a target.

I seem to be the only
person around here who drives through some villages at well under the
speed limit.

You and me, both.

Not popular behaviour.

Isn't it just.

Which just causes more problems and danger for others. One might even
say selfish behaviour. Perhaps its time to stop driving.

I have been living here for just over 10 years. There is a village,
hamlet really, with the road about 15 to 20 feet wide through it and
front doors opening on the road with no pavement. Also invariably
parked cars. I have habitually driven through it at about 12 to 18mphs,
often annoying people behind me. Half way through this period, about 6
years ago, a toddler ran out from behind a parked car about 6-8 feet in
front of me. I didn't kill the child. I find my actions well
worthwhile, even if they don't suit car-worshippers.

If I had been going at 25mph or more and had hit the child the
conventional wisdom would be that I had 'right of way' and it was the
child's fault, not mine. I would not have agreed. That would have
been too fast for the conditions. The speed limit is 60 mph.

Shurely if you had been doing 25mph you wouldn't have killed or
even touched the child either, as you would have been far far
away miles nearer where you were going.... :-)

A 12mph kerb crawl would attract suspicious attention at our local
school...
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Huge Wrote in message:
On 2017-10-01, Fredxxx wrote:
On 30/09/2017 17:24, Huge wrote:
On 2017-09-30, Roger Hayter wrote:
Huge wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

In one village near here it used to be a 40mph limit, but being
Cambridgeshire, they started up with a warning flasher. Set to *30mph*.

No, not "being Cambridgeshire". More like "being as how ****s like you
were howling through their village at massively excessive speeds"

Surely the rational solution is enforce the 40 limit, rather than
introduce a lower one to be ignored.

In an ideal world, sure.

Unless of course 40 mph is a
massively excessive speed. Which it may be.

It's a *limit*, not a target!

When a limit is stupidly low, it becomes a target.

I seem to be the only
person around here who drives through some villages at well under the
speed limit.

You and me, both.

Not popular behaviour.

Isn't it just.

Which just causes more problems and danger for others. One might even
say selfish behaviour. Perhaps its time to stop driving.

Perhaps it's time for you to stop being a ****? Oh, hang on, it's congenital,
isn't it? Perhaps you better top yourself, you selfish, arrogant ****.



Splutter
Hehe, pots & kettles :-D
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On Sunday, October 1, 2017 at 9:16:59 AM UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
ARW wrote:

One of the best things about my van (when it actually works) is that I
can set the cruse control to 31MPH when in a 30 zone. That sets my real
speed to 29MPH.

Yes, I often use C/C set to 31 in a 30 and 52 in motorway 50 roadworks
sections. I find most of the "flashing reminder" signs are quite
accurate compared to GPS - far more accurate than most car speedos.

A reminder that you are speeding is much better than a sign that lights
up when you are not speeding - even if it has a happy face when you are
not speeding.

Signs that have amber flashing lights and a green message thanking you
for not speeding are just ****ing annoying.

Wimps. I set mine at 33, 44 and 77(i.e) speed limit plus 10%. A car I once owned allowed multiple presets of the cruise control. Quite useful. Been replaced by cruise control with active braking.

fred wrote:

Wimps. I set mine at 33, 44 and 77(i.e) speed limit plus 10%. A car I once owned allowed multiple presets of the cruise control. Quite useful. Been replaced by cruise control with active braking.

What is your experience of that? Do you get sudden braking when
somebody pulls into your braking space?

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK


Plant amazing Acers.

"fred" wrote in message
...
On Sunday, October 1, 2017 at 9:16:59 AM UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
ARW wrote:

One of the best things about my van (when it actually works) is that I
can set the cruse control to 31MPH when in a 30 zone. That sets my real
speed to 29MPH.

Yes, I often use C/C set to 31 in a 30 and 52 in motorway 50 roadworks
sections. I find most of the "flashing reminder" signs are quite
accurate compared to GPS - far more accurate than most car speedos.

A reminder that you are speeding is much better than a sign that lights
up when you are not speeding - even if it has a happy face when you are
not speeding.

Signs that have amber flashing lights and a green message thanking you
for not speeding are just ****ing annoying.

Wimps. I set mine at 33, 44 and 77(i.e) speed limit plus 10%. A car I once
owned allowed multiple presets of the cruise control. Quite useful. Been
replaced by cruise control with active braking.

How accurate are those settings in terms of actual speed? I bet you have no
idea.
--
Dave W