Rather like those that suggest their illegal racing and speeding (only 80 and it is safe enough - even though it is still illegal) is OK. In any case I don't believe you for one second if you claim 80 is the limit of your transgression.


As I said, like those wannabe racers dragging off the line and speeding; contrary to road manners, the speed limit, and the highway code, but it is OK because it is you and you don't think you are doing anything wrong. What about the guys you race, do they also take meticulous 'care' as you do, to avoid breaking the speed limit?


BTW - there is barely a handful, if that, of people (out of 3000+ people) who have complained to the press about themselves getting caught.

At no point anywhere in the Highway Code does it say that it is acceptable to race other road users, regardless of whether or not you break the speed limit in doing so.

You might not break the speed limit, but it is still driving without due care and attention.

IMO the people ignoring the Park Way signs are chancers and idiots. But you are more so for assuming, because you might not be exceeding the speed limit, that racing others on public roads is ok.

Andy - I actually use my car for work doing 25,000 a year, my license is pretty important. So yes; I do not tend to go faster than 80 in normal cirumstances. If I need to get out of trouble, eg a string of lorries on the motorway when I'm coming down the sliproad I will go over and above this, afterwards I will return to 80mph. Just like any reasonable motorist.

Two reasons for this, partly I actually have set a speed limiter in my car at 85 (benefits of having a highline MFD, I can set a speed warning in 5mph increments) because I would not go higher than this speed in any normal circumstances, plus I have winter tyres on my car at the moment which do not particularly like high speeds. Even with my summer tyres on I still do not go more than 80 on the motorway; because this is a speed which many people travel at and is allowable in terms of policing. For the record 80mph in my car is about 74-76mph GPS confirmed; oh no, I went an average of 5mph over the speed limit. Think of the poor kittens than must be crying and being shot because of my crimes.

Yes I have raced my friends but these were under closed course conditions - So believe what you want. You clearly know me so, so well from your many hours of observing me driving. Normally you are fairly well researched but here's you're just doing a Tim Henman; hitting balls (wa-hey) but generally not getting them to go where you want.

Having the odd race away from the traffic lights is while I have ALREADY said in previous posts, while probably illegal, is not breaking any explicit rules (eg a no entry or a speed limit) or driving dangerously (after all it's a straight line and I have ESP ) then I am hurting NO-ONE other than somoene's ego (mine or their's depending who wins). Not saying it's right but I'm hardly using the road as a race track. a couple of seconds of full throttle, up to 40mph and that's it. Not exactly ragging it around the old estate against a 106 am I...in terms of my crime comparison from earlier, it's giving Timmy a nipple-cripple. Perhaps not OK but no lasting damage.

Difference is between myself and the people on the bridge I despise, I can admit what i am doing and don't pretend what I'm doing is "right", but what I do is generally acceptable (like gay rights, I support that ship too and I also believe dogs, cats and fish should be allowed to vote in general elections) - and as I said I wouldn't ***** about it on a forum or to the local paper if I got caught for my own incompetence.

As I said in a previous post, it's simply "legal" or "illegal" with you. Very narrow minded sort of like my ex girlfriend, although it wasn't her mind which was the narrow channel for communication if you get what I mean Never have I said what I do wasn't wrong or illegal (in a technical sense of the word) - for someone as hip with the legalities of life as you Andy, I'd expect you to know better. I would love to see you driving or infact see any part of your life, I'm sure you're as guilty as me on most cases; there's a little known law which states if you yourself are guilty of attrocities, big or small, then what right does that give you to complain about others? Which is sort of hypocritical given that we all make ****-ups here and there but I very much doubt you never speed and yet here you are moaning away at me. You remind me of my dead hamster. "Feed me please jay, feed me" - NO SHUT UP YOU LITTLE RUNT "please feed dobby..." and then he killed himself you are bringing back all the horrible memories

I mean why do you keep turning this back on me rather than discussing the ACTUAL problem? That is the wrongs or rights (or wrongs and wrongs) of driving across the bridge and the debate about whether it's actually illegal, immoral, stupid, or whatever; Do you have a crush on me or something? It's understandable if you do, for I am a brilliant guy and an even better lover (I pay for someone else to do it instead - I have better things to do like drive around aimlessly or play PS3)

to take the legalities a little further.

The "bureaucratic level" can only be a traffic regulation order (TRO) that has to comply the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. The TRO must state that lawful signage must be in place for the restriction to be in place.

The TRO will have been published in the NWN by the way - another part of the RTRA 1984 requires that both the proposal and the order must be published publicly. (that's what all those traffic notices are in the classified section of NWN)

Because people who live in glass houses (you know the rest)...

I have glass windows, but the walls are made of a brick-concrete mix with some sort of insulation. I do not need heating at all in the winter, infact I need the windows open. There is a Glass house in the garden, but I don't use it. Nevertheless you obviously have a problem with me doing 80 on the motorway so we will never come to an agreement on that (probably because you come past doing 900 in the outside lane.
Does not deserve metaphorical stones to be thrown at my metaphorical house. Because if you do my metaphorical palm may be applied to my metaphorical face.

I don't have a problem with you doing 80; I do it myself. I recognise, however, that I am breaking the speed limit, and I have no excuse other than I think I'd would get away with it. I doubt you would feel comfortable doing 80 past the police.

Aww you removed the fishing picture. I liked that one
But we seem to have finally reached a truce it seems?

I have driven past the police at 80mph on the motorway, my friend can vouch for that!
He drives everywhere at 2mph under the speed limit because he's very scared about police because they pulled him over once and made him poo his pants. They also shoved a batton up his backside but that's another story.
So I did it purely to show him the police aren't going to do you for doing 80. And they didn't. I was at a car meet and some poleece were there testing cars exhaust noise (no problem on my diesel ha ha ha) and I said "what speed you would need to be doing before you did me on a motorway?".
There were 2 cops, one nice and one nob, and it was to the nobby one because the nice one was looking at some guys banging stereo.
The nobby one replied "wouldn't do you unless it 10%+2 over the limit and even then we don't normally go for people doing under 85" - the 10%+2 which is obviously 79. Which would be laser/GPS speed. 80mph indicated on your dials is about 75mph, generally your car speedo will over-read by about 5-10% - you would need to be doing an indicated 85-90 before you got any trouble.

I drive past police at 80 while wearing nothing but bungie smuglers, now that's comfortable.

I wonder if insurance companies would be as accommodating in the event you are involved in an accident while breaking the speed limit.

Doesn't matter; insurance does not require you to be driving within the speed limit. All that it would do would possibly affect the "Blame" in an accident in which blame is disputed.

So you are saying that an insurance company wont refuse a claim if they know you were speeding just like if you modify a car and dont inform them?

I think you will find the opposite is true

Also regarding the speed limit on motorways i would be carefull carrying on overtaking police at 80 as 1 might take exception

Indeed. Try using the "everyone else does it" excuse for speeding with a traffic officer and see how far that gets you.

True about the exception. One of the jobsworth could be having an off day or be filiming an episode of traffic cops. That would be embarrassing have me pop up on telly. "ALRIGHT LADS IM ON THE TELLEH MAI GOT SOODENLEH SCAWTESH OCKNIE AYE THE NOO". Although you can say you were simply keeping up with traffic. (if you are) plus CPS guidelines will not prosecute for doing 80mph indicated.

If you were speeding they will still pay out in the event of a crash - legally they are required to cover third party costs regardless of liability or lack of announcing modifications or speeding. The worst they could do (in the event of not declaring mods) is refuse to pay out for you and then cover the third party costs.
Anyway as my mods are declared I think I'm pretty safe. Besides if I crash at 70 on the motorway, the damage will be pretty much the same as if I crash at 80 so it's all fawnky. Say that like faaaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwnkkkkkkkkky.

Exactly.

All this debate has rather waylaid the question of how the council got the signage wrong in the first place?
Another notch on our councils count of serious gaffs methinks?

If little billy pulls out infront of you and it's his fault, no your speed does not matter

I'm bored of this discussion pages ago. You don't mind law breaking when it suits you, that was the point I was making.


Nuff said.

Oh well, who doesn't. Although I do not smoke it I think weed should be legalised. There, for the benefit of others.

Methinks you're wrong....

Having looked at the signs and road markings, there's nothing 'wrong' with the signage. Once they persuade someone from Southern Electric to turn up and connect the blue and brown wires that supply the lamps then it would seem to be watertight.

Let's put it this way, after all the fuss that's been made I don't think you'll be seeing the Council making any changes to the signs in the near future. Whether motorists are more familiar with a red 'NO ENTRY' sign or not, the blue signs are the only ones which can legally be used.

Exactly! Why did our local council allow the bridge to reopen with signs that did not comply with the law?
How difficult is it to arrange an electricity supply to a couple of signs. Which they knew were going to be installed and a good idea when.

Definitely another major gaff by our local council methinks!