Toff doing 113mph - NO Ban

'....A decision not to ban a Tory peer caught speeding for the third
(3rd - YEP THAT'S THREE)time has been criticised by safety campaigners.
Lord Howard, 63, of Castle Rising, Norfolk, was doing 113mph on the A47
at Terrington St John in February......'

That confirms then, one rule for us and one for 'them' as we all knew.
Make him cycle to all his 'commitments', for 3 years to match the
number of offences.

Jack Ouzzi composed the following;:
'....A decision not to ban a Tory peer caught speeding for the third
(3rd - YEP THAT'S THREE)time has been criticised by safety campaigners.
Lord Howard, 63, of Castle Rising, Norfolk, was doing 113mph on the A47
at Terrington St John in February......'

That confirms then, one rule for us and one for 'them' as we all knew.

No it doesn't.

I didn't get banned when my licence went from 11 to 14 points, over the 12
point threshold, then again when it went to 20 point from that 14, I still
didn't get banned.

There are sometimes reasons that some people need to keep their licences,
despite what others think. Judges, when handing out bans, sometimes take
these reasons into consideration and ban, or not, on the basis of the
general public good, I guess.

Make him cycle to all his 'commitments', for 3 years to match the
number of offences.

Not usually the most practical, or even feasible, solution in a mostly rural
area.

--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!!

Jack Ouzzi wrote:


That confirms then, one rule for us and one for 'them' as we all knew.


Whereas The People's Champion gets his chauffeur to do the speeding and
makes sure they don't even get prosecuted.

"A policeman stopped for speeding while driving Home Secretary Jack
Straw in his official car will not face prosecution"

Tony

"Paul - xxx" wrote in message
...
Not usually the most practical, or even feasible, solution in a mostly
rural
area.

All the more reason to take care of your licence then.

Pete

Peter B composed the following;:
"Paul - xxx" wrote in message
...
Not usually the most practical, or even feasible, solution in a mostly
rural
area.

All the more reason to take care of your licence then.

LOL, as mine is now almost 'clean' again (three points left on) I have
demonstrably changed my driving style, speed and mode of travel. Mind, I've
also changed my lifestyle completely too, and am now so much more relaxed
and stress free ...

I THINK I AM, ANYWAY, WANNA ARGUE ABOUT IT ?!?!


--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!!

"Paul - xxx" wrote in message
...

There are sometimes reasons that some people need to keep their licences,
despite what others think. Judges, when handing out bans, sometimes take
these reasons into consideration and ban, or not, on the basis of the
general public good, I guess.


Here's a novel thought: perhaps the onus should be on the driver who is in
such desparate need of a driving licence to actually drive within the rules
which will ensure they don't risk losing their licence?

Cheers, helen s

No it doesn't.

OK fine, If you are happy with that!


I didn't get banned when my licence went from 11 to 14 points, over
the 12
point threshold, then again when it went to 20 point from that 14, I
still
didn't get banned.


Not really believable. If your points went over the 12 threshold (a
mandatory 6 months ban) You would have had to 'prove' to a court
'exceptional circumstances' and that you would suffer hardship etc etc
etc. so 11 to 14 is feasable, JUST. However you would have been legally
unable to use ANOTHER exceptional circumstances plea when you allegedly
went from 14 to 20 points to escape a ban. In any case, in my opinion,
if you had 20 points on your licence, you should not really be driving
full stop. Some of the points MUST have been already spent and out of
date !!

wafflycat wrote:

"Paul - xxx" wrote in message
...


There are sometimes reasons that some people need to keep their
licences, despite what others think. Judges, when handing out bans,
sometimes take these reasons into consideration and ban, or not, on
the basis of the general public good, I guess.


Here's a novel thought: perhaps the onus should be on the driver who is
in such desparate need of a driving licence to actually drive within the
rules which will ensure they don't risk losing their licence?

Cheers, helen s


You'd have thought so, wouldn't you.

I'd imagine it's fairly rare that you'd clock up that many points in a
week or two suddenly. And if you're a new driver, well, you've gone
from not having a licence to having one fairly recently, going back to
not having one shouldn't be that massive a change in lifestyle.

If someone is so stupid as to drive in a way that is going to get them
enough points to lose their licence over a very short period, then
that's the sort of person daft enough that shouldn't have a licence to
start with, IMO... I would seriously question their ability to make
decisions in other areas of driving skills.

I need to speed because... I need to disobey this red light because... I
need to park in a cycle lane because... I need to ignore this left turn
ban sign because.... I need to drive up the bus lane and then push in
because....

I have thus far been unable to square the need for a licence because of
your work/home situation and needs, with the apparently more important
need break the rules such that you end up with points on your licence.
Perhaps someone would like to explain how it is that such things *are*
more important than retaining said apparently critical licence.


--


Velvet

"Jack Ouzzi" wrote in message
oups.com...
Not really believable. If your points went over the 12 threshold (a
mandatory 6 months ban) You would have had to 'prove' to a court
'exceptional circumstances' and that you would suffer hardship etc etc
etc. so 11 to 14 is feasable, JUST. However you would have been legally
unable to use ANOTHER exceptional circumstances plea when you allegedly
went from 14 to 20 points to escape a ban. In any case, in my opinion,
if you had 20 points on your licence, you should not really be driving
full stop. Some of the points MUST have been already spent and out of
date !!

Maybe Paul should gives us more detail of how he got off.
The only reason I can think of is that he was driving emergency vehicles
(paramedic?) and was caught on camera with it's inability to distinguish
types of vehicle.

Pete

wafflycat wrote:
"Paul - xxx" wrote in message
...

Here's a novel thought: perhaps the onus should be on the driver who
is in
such desparate need of a driving licence to actually drive within the
rules
which will ensure they don't risk losing their licence?


EXACTLY... which is why I get annoyed at the 'speed cameras - only to
raise revenue' whinge. They are only raising revenue because of you
idiots who drive in such a manner to activate the bloody thing, and
'give' your money away !!

And if you are 'unlucky' (which I suppose converts into not really
paying attention) as we all are at times, then accept it and move on
.......... don't whine about it.