Lymington River Gets Blue Flashing Light Fever - Page 2

Hightower · 09 August 2006, 17:35

I haven't met too many snobby Yachties, most wave (in a friendly manner) as you pass them and have been gratefull after helping them. My most nasty memory to date was a motorboat that decided that he didn't want to give way to me when I had right of way. I did point this out, to which I got a very nasty reply.

BogMonster · 09 August 2006, 22:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mouldy

Is everyone black or white on this?

I love ribbing, kayaking, sailing, snorkelling, bodyboarding.
I go off roading, green laning, hill walking and trail riding (cycling).
I cycle in London but I'm also a pedestrian, driver, public transport user.

A little empathy goes a long way, what goes around comes around etc.

Couldn't agree more. If I were living in the UK and if I chose to feed Mr Brown's pocket by running a 4x4 I would have no problem with ramblers/walkers/horseriders sharing the lanes, but the reverse is rarely true. Likewise I have no problem with yachties or cyclists (well ok cyclists can be friggin irritating when they decide to re-write the Highway Code on the fly, and then whinge when somebody cuts them up or they get squished) or indeed anybody else who wants to do a pastime I don't.

But I can't help being irritated if they treat me like the spawn of Satan and display the sort of irrational dislike which is sadly far too common. Cycling, sailing and hill walking (and all the others) are fine by me, what I don't like is the people who do those things trying to tell me what I can and can't and should and shouldn't do. The anti gun lobby is another one - the "we don't like guns, we don't enjoy them and therefore YOU shouldn't be allowed to use one and we want to ban them" mentality. What I would call the "holier than thou" attitude.

Oooh I need to go and sit down with a drink now

codprawn · 10 August 2006, 01:09

You should be with me when some damn foreigners tell me I can't drive my Land Rover on my mates land in the Brecon Beacons cos I am destroying the countryside. The very same people who wreck his stone walls and drop litter everywhere - seethe!!!

Limey Linda · 10 August 2006, 01:43

Codders

The only reason they will not let you drive it is because it's a LR. Even they have have some common sense.

Jon Brooks · 10 August 2006, 07:51

I have been informed, by the police who carried out some tests, that speeds guns do not work well from boat to boat.
Due to the fact that both are moving, I think, it makes them give false readings.

Am sure there are others on here better informed than little on me on the subject but just thought I would drop it in.

Best regards

Mouldy · 10 August 2006, 08:21

Has anyone got a copy of 'The little book of calm'?

Lostboy · 10 August 2006, 08:46

NO I F**KING HAVEN'T!!!

Sorry, couldn't resist!!

havener · 10 August 2006, 10:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon Brooks

I have been informed, by the police who carried out some tests, that speeds guns do not work well from boat to boat.
Due to the fact that both are moving, I think, it makes them give false readings.

Am sure there are others on here better informed than little on me on the subject but just thought I would drop it in.

Best regards

Jon,

You are quite right. Which is why there is such controversy over the current speed "guns" used on UK's roads.

Even from a stationary, mounted platform these things are dodgy. From handheld device to passing car, there is a huge element of reflection from car surfaces, curves, windows etc which can create a false reading. Recent classics include a wall clocked at 43mph, a lampost doing 24mph and a cat (yes, cat, not a typo) clocked at....wait for it...72 mph.

And these readings were obtained by experienced traffic officers.

With an inexperienced user, or unstable platform, the chances of getting a truly accurate reading are....around nil.

Which is why the speeds quoted in courts relating to high speed pursuits are the pursuing car's speeds, therefore logically the offending car's minimum speed.

Anyone given a fine from a waterbourne speed "gun" would have no trouble having it dismissed in court, IMHO.

Simon

(ex Met Police)

Biggles · 10 August 2006, 10:56

Agreed,

I would also ask the operator when the last time the speed gun was calibrated and what qualifications he held to operate it.

I get the feeling at the moment that the courts are imposing fines because the people being prosecuted don't fully understand the implications of how large a fine they can get. They therefore go unprepared expecting a car type speeding fine then get walloped because there isn't a fixed penalty system at sea. Possible if the persons being prosecuted had taken legal advice or been legally represented in court the outcome might have been different.

IMHO anyway.

jyasaki · 10 August 2006, 16:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by havener

Which is why the speeds quoted in courts relating to high speed pursuits are the pursuing car's speeds, therefore logically the offending car's minimum speed.

The LEO's most popular line over here is, upon pulling someone over, telling them that "I had to do 70 to catch up with you!"

To which most normal people would reply "Well, if you didn't have to put down your donut and coffee before starting after me, you wouldn't have."

Seriously, this is the kind of statement that sounds horrible, but means absolutely nothing. The cop could have done any greater speed than the target and caught up, from 1/2 mph faster, up to the speed of light.

Of course, I also realize this has nothing to do with Havener's post, much less the original post, so I'll shut up now.

jky

havener · 10 August 2006, 20:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by jyasaki

The LEO's most popular line over here is, upon pulling someone over, telling them that "I had to do 70 to catch up with you!"

To which most normal people would reply "Well, if you didn't have to put down your donut and coffee before starting after me, you wouldn't have."

Seriously, this is the kind of statement that sounds horrible, but means absolutely nothing. The cop could have done any greater speed than the target and caught up, from 1/2 mph faster, up to the speed of light.

Of course, I also realize this has nothing to do with Havener's post, much less the original post, so I'll shut up now.

jky

Which is why over here the highest speed quoted has to be constant.

The widespread use of video has pretty much ruled out the "donuts" defence....anyway, we all know you would never put down your donut, you'd finish it first :-)