Juan Kerr Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 How many seconds after a red light appears is it OK to go through and will those be your seconds or mine (one thousand, two thousand, etc)? If your into left foot braking you can go through flat tap, whilst the camera records a full set of brake lights under heavy braking. You can argue it in court that it was a poor snapshot and you were clearly braking hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stookie Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 it's those pesky saxo boy racers!! They will be the death of themselves... but how annoying are they.. very. and the age range 16-24.. the most dangerous age for the insurance companies...Had a few following my arse lately and i just feel the need to slow down to say, hey slow down we're not in a rush, but what do they do, just overtake.... grrrrrrrr Well if you will insist on being a sleeping policeman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stookie Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 If your into left foot braking you can go through flat tap, whilst the camera records a full set of brake lights under heavy braking. You can argue it in court that it was a poor snapshot and you were clearly braking hard. Nice try, but going through a red light is not up for debate - you either did it or you didn't. If you defend yourself saying you were braking, the response has to be that you should have been ready to brake when the lights were green, should have braked when they turned amber (unless you are right on top of the stop sign) and should have been stopped when on red Observation and anticipation is almost everything And left foot braking (who the hell is doing that on a public road anyway?) is irrelevant if you are bringing the car to a stop in a manual shift car - try it and you'll see what I mean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuna Sandwich Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 Rather than missing the point, you haven't answered my question. How many seconds after a red light appears is it OK to go through and will those be your seconds or mine (one thousand, two thousand, etc)? I know - let's just give up and drive like in India, ie anywhere in the road we feel like. Good example India actually, because they have a terrible mortality rate and also no respect for rules of the road. For the record, I've had a clean licence for 33 years, but that just means I haven't been caught as we all know I thought we were talking about taking a chance on an amber light, not going through red lights for the hell of it which is obviously dangerous. So you are doing 30MPH approaching a green light which turns to amber. You have a choice, you can anchor down and hope that Saxo driving, Burberry chav lad or on the phone van man does not go into the back of you, or continue on and hope that the light does not turn red, take a picture of you and charge you £60 for doing something that is not really dangerous, and certainly less so than stopping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stookie Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 I thought we were talking about taking a chance on an amber light, not going through red lights for the hell of it which is obviously dangerous. So you are doing 30MPH approaching a green light which turns to amber. You have a choice, you can anchor down and hope that Saxo driving, Burberry chav lad or on the phone van man does not go into the back of you, or continue on and hope that the light does not turn red, take a picture of you and charge you £60 for doing something that is not really dangerous, and certainly less so than stopping. So "running a red light" (your phrase) actually means "taking a chance on an amber light"? - interesting play on words there. So does the "Saxo driving, Burberry chav lad or on the phone van man" actually mean any car within 100 yards of the rear of yours? Seriously, I think you should start driving by looking through the front windscreen! It's illegal and, in spite of what you say, dangerous to think you can routinely go safely through red lights - don't get me wrong, I'm no saint, but I never go through red lights. Such actions betray an attitude that says "I'll follow the rules when it suits me" like people who overtake on pedestian crossings (or park on them for that matter!) - let's hope you don't meet too many coming the other way in the same frame of mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 Like the amber gamblers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuna Sandwich Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 Quite right too, but what's this about "may" be prosecuted? It should be mandatory - or are they trying to give themselves an 'out clause' in case the offender is a friend of the Chief Constable, MHK, Deemster, the Bobby's missus, etc? And while on the subject of policing motorists, can we have more cameras on traffic lights please? St Ninian's first, bottom of Bray Hill next, the list goes on. Again, no excuse - the amber light is a 'stop' light also IMO so any driver paying attention should have no difficulty stopping for a Red! Post no. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 Stookie was talking about amber lights, you were talking about red. (But you're now backtracking again). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 Just to get back on to the thread for a moment - I've seen several motorists pulled over by the police by Braddan School this week. I have no sympathy for them whatsoever. If you can't cope with reducing your speed to 20mph for a hundred yards or so, you really shouldn't be allowed behind a wheel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hboy Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 Just to get back on to the thread for a moment - I've seen several motorists pulled over by the police by Braddan School this week. I have no sympathy for them whatsoever. If you can't cope with reducing your speed to 20mph for a hundred yards or so, you really shouldn't be allowed behind a wheel. Speeding past Braddan school is terrible. Its a pity its on the main ambulance route outerwise they'd have stuck in traffic calming by new. Most people are well over 30 going through the school zone (most funnily enough seem to work at the hospital as they turn off at the next roundabout). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stookie Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 Just to get back on to the thread for a moment - I've seen several motorists pulled over by the police by Braddan School this week. I have no sympathy for them whatsoever. If you can't cope with reducing your speed to 20mph for a hundred yards or so, you really shouldn't be allowed behind a wheel. Speeding past Braddan school is terrible. Its a pity its on the main ambulance route outerwise they'd have stuck in traffic calming by new. Most people are well over 30 going through the school zone (most funnily enough seem to work at the hospital as they turn off at the next roundabout). While I agree speeding past Braddan School when the 20 limit is in force is out of order, speed bumps or other effective 'calming' (who thought of that name as it just winds me up!) would be pretty stupid on a normal road that has a 40 limit for about 23 hours of the day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stookie Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 Quite right too, but what's this about "may" be prosecuted? It should be mandatory - or are they trying to give themselves an 'out clause' in case the offender is a friend of the Chief Constable, MHK, Deemster, the Bobby's missus, etc? And while on the subject of policing motorists, can we have more cameras on traffic lights please? St Ninian's first, bottom of Bray Hill next, the list goes on. Again, no excuse - the amber light is a 'stop' light also IMO so any driver paying attention should have no difficulty stopping for a Red! Post no. 2 More semantics! When I said "IMO" I was indicating I treat amber as a 'stop' - that is a prudent (and safe) interpretation, but then I'm sure you're clever enough to have worked that out already Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuna Sandwich Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 More semantics! When I said "IMO" I was indicating I treat amber as a 'stop' - that is a prudent (and safe) interpretation, but then I'm sure you're clever enough to have worked that out already And quote Mr Chorizo: Stookie was talking about amber lights, you were talking about red. (But you're now backtracking again). Oh please. I have totally re-read this thread and on the subject or running red lights there are two occaisions where I mention actually driving through on a red light and on both occaisions I said I don't condone it. It is dangerous. Every other post of mine discussing running red lights refers to (so to speak) amber gambling. It is the same thing. If it goes red you have run a red light. So yes it is effectively running a red light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.