“Speed Cameras have now become the golden goose for the Government
believe that we should only have fines without the imposition of penalty
because far too many people are losing their licenses for speeding.
And this interferes with the ability of people to retain employment.
I also firmly believe that only the physical presence of Police vehicles
deterrent effect upon motorists.
Further I believe that
speeding which results in accidents should of course retain their penalty of
points deduction but not otherwise.
Help me by writing or faxing your local
mp. You can do
this using the web without having a fax machine by going to
The above is an article that I found on the BBC iCAN website and it really made me laugh.
It just goes to show the ignorance of some people who are so blinded by their own belief, that they can’t see how wrong they are, or how wrongly they have attempted to put their point across.
I’m not in total disagreement with his point of view, but rather the way that he attempts to put it forward.
“But I believe that we should only have fines without the imposition of penalty
points because far too many people are losing their licenses for speeding.”
So far too many people are losing their licenses because of points? Why does that not read, far too many people are losing their licenses because they are breaking the law, or more accurately, repeatedly breaking the law.
“…this interferes with the ability of people to retain employment.?
They are interfering with themselves. It is nobody else’s fault that they got caught speeding. They were either speeding so excessively that they lost their license in one go, or, they were a repeat offender.
“I also firmly believe that only the physical presence of Police vehicles
has a deterrent effect upon motorists.”
So taking away penalty points will improve this? Those who consider themselves above the law will just pay a fine which gives them effectively gives them a licence to speed? So because they think they can get away with it, they will try to.
Incidently, have you ever sat at 75mph on the M25 in the speed camera section and watched the car next to you speed up to 80/90MPH, get towards the next camera, and slam the breaks on, you pull level with them again, you pass the camera and off they speed, you get to the next speed camera and pull level again. Do you think they ever realize? I wonder how long their brakes last? (And for those that say 75mph is speeding, it is sort of, you are allowed the speed limit + 10% + 3mph, anything less is outside the tolerance within which they can get a safe conviction. But if you are doing 80mph in the pouring rain, or fog, then you’ll get knicked regardless!!).
“Further I believe that speeding which results in accidents should of course
retain their penalty of points deduction but not otherwise.”
So those that avoid an accident when speeding should get away with it. Or is it that some people are better drivers than others, so they should be allowed to speed. It is just luck that those who speed haven’t had an accident. When they do, it will be a lot more severe than one they would have had when travelling at the designated limit. Ok, there are some areas where say a 30MPH limit does seem rather low for an area, but we could hardly have limits that vary every 200yards. Why can we not take the above argument further and say, “People should be allowed to drive while extremely intoxicated and only be punished when stopped by the police and found to be over the limit”.
If you want higher speed limits because you think the current ones are too low, then provide evidence that shows to the contrary.
I have no sympathy for those people who consider themselves outside of the law. I don?t include these people with serial killers, or rapists and such like, but I can?t understand peoples angst when they know that they are breaking the law.
15 years ago when I was based in Jarrow, Tyne & Wear but living in Portsmouth I was travelling down each weekend via hire car, most often taking it turns with other guys from the ship. During a 12month period I reached 9 points on my licence. It was no fault of anyone else other than my own. I was trained as the ships driver which included doing exactly the same training as most traffic police, and included pursuit and escape training given by certain other military groups.
But none of that training gave me the right to exceed the speed limit; none of it gave me the right to break the law. The same year the first 3 points expired and came off my licence, I picked them up again for doing 40mph in a 30mph zone. Again my bad and I had no excuses. Those were the last 3 points I have ever had on my licence and was partly due to me getting a motorbike. This taught me better respect for the road and its other users. (Despite it being a 155mph, 160BHP. And I am not saying that I never exceeded the speed limit either). When I wanted to do 155mph, I saved it for when I went on track days. (If I wanted to do 90MPH on the motorway, I just made sure no one was looking, but it doesn?t make it right, and I wouldn?t moan if I had been caught!!).
If you disagree with the “Golden Goose” government income, then campaign for that money to be used by the police forces to help prevent speeding, or for using the money for “Road Funding”. Or better still; put the money from fines into a fund to pay for all the victims of speed related accidents.
I bet the next campaign will be, “No insurance for those who don’t have accidents”…