Posting the tweet rather than screenshot so people can follow the conversation back for context
for those on tapatalk or whatever, this is West Mids traffic police saying that in 20/30mph zones, 78% of drivers speed, and would be 90%+ if not for congestion, and that they did one rural speed check where not a single driver managed to keep within the speed limit.
The 20mph are really a problem, no one seems to give a rats arse especially the police, its just not enforced in London. If you drive at 20mph in these areas in London you'll have traffic crawling all over your arse trying to overtake.
As for the rural stuff, well that's always been a problem. I've always loved the little signs (hand drawn by the local primary school kids) requesting people slow down in the village whilst the locals all speed around the place mostly drunk.
GMP stopped rolling out 20 mph zones because it's a waste of everyone's time. Quite right IMO - the blanket implementation produced a disconnect between authority and drivers.
Not quite sure what the sentence was as headline says 6 years and there are severl references in the text to 3 years. That is neither here nor there.
Chap pootling down the A3 enjoying a refreshing can of Kronenbourg... Driver swigging can of beer at the wheel caught on police camera
He's not breaking the law but it's absolutely guaranteed to get you a pull if the OB see it, therefore fucking stupid.Assuming he's not over the limit is he actually breaking the law? A dumb thing to do for sure but which law is he breaking?
'Driving without due care & attention', the legal catch-all.He's not breaking the law
Then , quite obviously, the speed limits need to be raised to a more appropriate level.for those on tapatalk or whatever, this is West Mids traffic police saying that in 20/30mph zones, 78% of drivers speed, and would be 90%+ if not for congestion, and that they did one rural speed check where not a single driver managed to keep within the speed limit.
They still have to show that the actual driving fell below the required standard which in this blokes case, it didn't apparently. If he's not over the limit and not driving badly it's no different (legally) to having a swig from a bottle of water and I think we've all done that, haven't we?'Driving without due care & attention', the legal catch-all.
. . . it's no different (legally) to having a swig from a bottle of water and I think we've all done that, haven't we?
Wasn't that about someone using a phone?I seem to remember several years ago a case popping up under the heading of "Outraged of BlahBlah" where someone did, in fact, get nicked for doing just that, whilst stationary, in a queue of traffic, with the hand brake on