henarchchar 64 Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 WHO WOULD BE PROSECUTED IF BOTH PEOPLE IN THE CAR BLAMED EACH OTHER WOULD THIS NOT GIVE REASONABLE DOUBT, ITS JUST A THOUGHT the name on the log book .. what if its a company car? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
henarchchar 64 Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 If you was doing that speed you deserve to be banned as only a retard would risk not only his life but the life of his passenger and any one else on the motorway at that time . Idiot. The actual speed has no reflection on safety, It is the speed in relation to the conditions. 30mph in a 50 zone round a wet roundabout may be unsafe and even stupid and reckless . Whereas 160 on a dry motorway with no junctions in a suitable car is perfectly safe. It`s fool like you who give all these "speed kills" idiots the oxygen they need. I beg to differ . Unless you know how to drive right (by that I mean advanced driving and doing high speeds on tracks ect) you should be banned and fined heavy for breaking the 100 mph . Speed and inexperience are what kills and why any one really needs to go that fast is beyond me you would get there quicker Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Chid 6,720 Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 WHO WOULD BE PROSECUTED IF BOTH PEOPLE IN THE CAR BLAMED EACH OTHER WOULD THIS NOT GIVE REASONABLE DOUBT, ITS JUST A THOUGHT the name on the log book .. what if its a company car? The owner of the company My old Boss had to take points and fine as he didn't know who was out in a works van at the time ... Started having to sign for a van after that Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rake aboot 4,936 Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 If you was doing that speed you deserve to be banned as only a retard would risk not only his life but the life of his passenger and any one else on the motorway at that time . Idiot. The actual speed has no reflection on safety, It is the speed in relation to the conditions. 30mph in a 50 zone round a wet roundabout may be unsafe and even stupid and reckless . Whereas 160 on a dry motorway with no junctions in a suitable car is perfectly safe. It`s fool like you who give all these "speed kills" idiots the oxygen they need. I beg to differ . Unless you know how to drive right (by that I mean advanced driving and doing high speeds on tracks ect) you should be banned and fined heavy for breaking the 100 mph . Speed and inexperience are what kills and why any one really needs to go that fast is beyond me You can beg all you want mate ! Fact is there are plenty on the road that are unsafe at 20, never mind 120, so again speed is irrelivent. Innapropriate speed for the conditions and carelessness are the issues. Ever wondered why other countries include high speed driving in the test ?? wake up mate. all this ROSPA bollocks has you hoodwinked. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
robbo 873 Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 you need to ask them for the picture mate. they must have one to prove it was your vehicle . he cant just write down reg plates.. it may also tell you who was driving if they can produce one. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
the_stig 6,614 Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 (edited) WHO WOULD BE PROSECUTED IF BOTH PEOPLE IN THE CAR BLAMED EACH OTHER WOULD THIS NOT GIVE REASONABLE DOUBT, ITS JUST A THOUGHT the name on the log book .. what if its a company car? if its a company car the notice goes to the name on the the log book its then upto them to name the driver .. if they cant prove whos driving and its a company name then the owner of the company gets prosecuted ..dont take much working out really . Edited April 28, 2012 by the_stig Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rake aboot 4,936 Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 You could of course, just go to court and refuse to accept the authority of the court due to the illigetimacy of the current Queens authority to rule ! This would force the Judge to prove the authity of the crown, or take the easy way out and let you off. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
paulus 26 Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 You could of course, just go to court and refuse to accept the authority of the court due to the illigetimacy of the current Queens authority to rule ! This would force the Judge to prove the authity of the crown, or take the easy way out and let you off. or send you down for contempt :laugh: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
PlasticJock 539 Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 You could of course, just go to court and refuse to accept the authority of the court due to the illigetimacy of the current Queens authority to rule ! This would force the Judge to prove the authity of the crown, or take the easy way out and let you off. If only it were that easy Worked for me before however if they say ''You're going to jail'' then you're off lol Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lab 10,979 Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 You could of course, just go to court and refuse to accept the authority of the court due to the illigetimacy of the current Queens authority to rule ! This would force the Judge to prove the authity of the crown, or take the easy way out and let you off. If only it were that easy Worked for me before however if they say ''You're going to jail'' then you're off lol You've done some stuff for 23............... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
PlasticJock 539 Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 (edited) You could of course, just go to court and refuse to accept the authority of the court due to the illigetimacy of the current Queens authority to rule ! This would force the Judge to prove the authity of the crown, or take the easy way out and let you off. If only it were that easy Worked for me before however if they say ''You're going to jail'' then you're off lol You've done some stuff for 23............... This was a military court mind you and it was their juristiction I questioned.... It worked, because of the Army's shocking organisation I got off with it. Edited April 28, 2012 by PlasticJock Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bird 10,014 Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 If you was doing that speed you deserve to be banned as only a retard would risk not only his life but the life of his passenger and any one else on the motorway at that time . Idiot. The actual speed has no reflection on safety, It is the speed in relation to the conditions. 30mph in a 50 zone round a wet roundabout may be unsafe and even stupid and reckless . Whereas 160 on a dry motorway with no junctions in a suitable car is perfectly safe. It`s fool like you who give all these "speed kills" idiots the oxygen they need. I beg to differ . Unless you know how to drive right (by that I mean advanced driving and doing high speeds on tracks ect) you should be banned and fined heavy for breaking the 100 mph . Speed and inexperience are what kills and why any one really needs to go that fast is beyond me You can beg all you want mate ! Fact is there are plenty on the road that are unsafe at 20, never mind 120, so again speed is irrelivent. Innapropriate speed for the conditions and carelessness are the issues. Ever wondered why other countries include high speed driving in the test ?? wake up mate. all this ROSPA bollocks has you hoodwinked. the thing with the speed is, and i am on about the motorway here, is when things go wrong, and even if its not your fault you got no chance over 80mph your dead . Ive been done for speeding ( 39mph -30 zone) went for that film+test center place, and kept me 3 points. When you see some of the crashes on these films, dragging dead smashed up people out , from 70- 100mph it does make you think about holding back on your speed.Dont get wrong on a clear run on a nice sunnyday, not much traffic 70-80mph alot of cars hold these speeds, but over the 70 odd mph when things go wrong your fecked .! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rake aboot 4,936 Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Not quite true Ray. Cars designed to do 170 are built to be able to it. Seems funny but 170mph does not feel that fast when you`re doing it. Everything feels just as controlled and steady as 90mph and reducing speed from that velocity is suprisingly quick as everything is trying to slow you down, not just the brakes,lol. Anyway, time and place and all that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MAACCY 105 Posted April 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 Thanks for the comment learnt a lot from it Quote Link to post Share on other sites
littlefish 591 Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 Not quite true Ray. Cars designed to do 170 are built to be able to it. Seems funny but 170mph does not feel that fast when you`re doing it. Everything feels just as controlled and steady as 90mph and reducing speed from that velocity is suprisingly quick as everything is trying to slow you down, not just the brakes,lol. Anyway, time and place and all that. Definitely not on a public highway. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.