My civil liberties are challenged daily by the huge numbers of motorists who break the law on the speed limits. My freedom of movement is challenged by this. Surely in the big society communities who are terrorised by speeding motorists should be encouraged to set up their own speed cameras. It is time the majority ( 82% ) in the latest poll who support speed limits being enforced were listened to. Why is this coalition Government supporting the law breakers by talking about the war on motorists and encouraging the removal of speed cameras?
Why is this idea important?
My civil liberties are challenged daily by the huge numbers of motorists who break the law on the speed limits. My freedom of movement is challenged by this. Surely in the big society communities who are terrorised by speeding motorists should be encouraged to set up their own speed cameras. It is time the majority ( 82% ) in the latest poll who support speed limits being enforced were listened to. Why is this coalition Government supporting the law breakers by talking about the war on motorists and encouraging the removal of speed cameras?
Without much publicity driving licenses issued to new drivers are much more restrictive than those issued in years gone by. For example it is now necessary to pass a test just to tow a trailer. The cost of such tests is prohibitive and guess what, there is a high failure rate (another way of sucking more money into the govt coffers).
It is not necessary to pass a test for such activity and is reality you only become totally comfortable with maneuvering a small or medium trailer through being placed in real situations.
It is also necessary now to pass a test to drive a light lorry. Why????
These restrictions should be removed.
Without people being able to tow or drive these vehicles things like equestrian meetings will become difficult as there will be a lack of qualified drivers.
Why is this idea important?
Without much publicity driving licenses issued to new drivers are much more restrictive than those issued in years gone by. For example it is now necessary to pass a test just to tow a trailer. The cost of such tests is prohibitive and guess what, there is a high failure rate (another way of sucking more money into the govt coffers).
It is not necessary to pass a test for such activity and is reality you only become totally comfortable with maneuvering a small or medium trailer through being placed in real situations.
It is also necessary now to pass a test to drive a light lorry. Why????
These restrictions should be removed.
Without people being able to tow or drive these vehicles things like equestrian meetings will become difficult as there will be a lack of qualified drivers.
Vehicle Excise Duty, like many taxes, is disproportionately costly to administer and collect.
Many have already said as much on this site. I wish to tie three popular threads together here.
VED should be scrapped and (if necessary) the lost revenue compensated by additional fuel duty.
The disc in our car windscreen should remain, and should only be issued by an insurance company on an annual basis, once they receive an MOT receipt and are satisfied themselves that it is from a genuine company.
This could additionally have a barcode on the disc that any parking enforcement officer can scan with their handheld device to ascertain whether the disc and the car are married on the DVLA data base. This would also give them an audit trail when issuing tickets.
Why is this idea important?
Vehicle Excise Duty, like many taxes, is disproportionately costly to administer and collect.
Many have already said as much on this site. I wish to tie three popular threads together here.
VED should be scrapped and (if necessary) the lost revenue compensated by additional fuel duty.
The disc in our car windscreen should remain, and should only be issued by an insurance company on an annual basis, once they receive an MOT receipt and are satisfied themselves that it is from a genuine company.
This could additionally have a barcode on the disc that any parking enforcement officer can scan with their handheld device to ascertain whether the disc and the car are married on the DVLA data base. This would also give them an audit trail when issuing tickets.
To repeal laws that permit seizure of assets in the form of cars that they allege are parked in the wrong place or other. It should be forbidden for anyone to seize assets without due procedure and a (legal) reason. This requirement should cover all property. Parking can be controlled by the issue of parking tickets and due process thereafter in order to keep streets and public highways clear and useable.
Why is this idea important?
To repeal laws that permit seizure of assets in the form of cars that they allege are parked in the wrong place or other. It should be forbidden for anyone to seize assets without due procedure and a (legal) reason. This requirement should cover all property. Parking can be controlled by the issue of parking tickets and due process thereafter in order to keep streets and public highways clear and useable.
To simply eliminate all street (and hospital) car parking meters and the staff associated with them.
Why is this idea important?
To simply eliminate all street (and hospital) car parking meters and the staff associated with them.
Ban people modifying their cars and bikes to have louder exhausts than the ones they come with. There is no reason what so ever for these people to have loud exhausts apart from misguided vanity, yet the general public have to put up with their right to peace and quiet being removed by a few idiots. Ban this pointless modification culture now, as I'm sure it will only get worse.
Why is this idea important?
Ban people modifying their cars and bikes to have louder exhausts than the ones they come with. There is no reason what so ever for these people to have loud exhausts apart from misguided vanity, yet the general public have to put up with their right to peace and quiet being removed by a few idiots. Ban this pointless modification culture now, as I'm sure it will only get worse.
Apparently, Double Yellow Lines are there on roads for safety. If so, why are Disabled Drivers allowed to park on them? Do Disabled Drivers parking on double yellow lines make the road safer? Of course not. So, if Disabled Drivers can park on them and not cause a road obstruction, and not be fined, why can't non-disabled drivers? Conversely, if disabled drivers are legally parking on them, why have double yellow lines at all in some places?
Why is this idea important?
Apparently, Double Yellow Lines are there on roads for safety. If so, why are Disabled Drivers allowed to park on them? Do Disabled Drivers parking on double yellow lines make the road safer? Of course not. So, if Disabled Drivers can park on them and not cause a road obstruction, and not be fined, why can't non-disabled drivers? Conversely, if disabled drivers are legally parking on them, why have double yellow lines at all in some places?
It used to be a rule that a parking ticket had to be stuck on your windscreen or handed to you as the driver for it to be valid. If you drove away before either of these took place any ticket issued afterwards was not valid.
The anti-motorist organisation Transport for London decided to change this a couple of years ago. Regulation 10 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 states that in "drive away" cases an enforcement authority could issue a ticket by post if the parking warden had started to prepare or had printed out the ticket at street level. This is not only wrong, but a rather silly and largely unworkable regulation.
The drive away rule was right in principle since authorities did away with any meaningful observation time before a ticket was issued. But besides this, most enforcement authorities have decided not to use Regulation 10 because in most cases it's difficult to prove that a contravention has occurred, and because of all the caveats and exemptions that went with Regulation 10. So Transport for London have overstepped the mark with this one and Regulation 10 is a bad rule and should be repealed.
,
Why is this idea important?
It used to be a rule that a parking ticket had to be stuck on your windscreen or handed to you as the driver for it to be valid. If you drove away before either of these took place any ticket issued afterwards was not valid.
The anti-motorist organisation Transport for London decided to change this a couple of years ago. Regulation 10 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 states that in "drive away" cases an enforcement authority could issue a ticket by post if the parking warden had started to prepare or had printed out the ticket at street level. This is not only wrong, but a rather silly and largely unworkable regulation.
The drive away rule was right in principle since authorities did away with any meaningful observation time before a ticket was issued. But besides this, most enforcement authorities have decided not to use Regulation 10 because in most cases it's difficult to prove that a contravention has occurred, and because of all the caveats and exemptions that went with Regulation 10. So Transport for London have overstepped the mark with this one and Regulation 10 is a bad rule and should be repealed.
,
Put speed limiters in all road vehicles fed information by chips in the roads.
Why is this idea important?
Put speed limiters in all road vehicles fed information by chips in the roads.
As motorists we are persecuted. We pay high road tax which has been further exacerbated by the tax being levied against the type of the vehicle you drive – crazy – we all use the roads whichever vehicle we use. We are targetted continually, the speed cameras that are put are not there to save lives they are there to generate revenue for the police, we should all be insured to drive our vehicles and I do agree that motorists that are not insured should be penalised but law abiding citizens are targetted. I would hate to have a serious accident because the result would probably mean I would be in prison. They are called accidents because they are exactly that. We have a blame cultural in the UK and it has to stop. The tax on petrol must be cut, I know we owe £169 billion but if the price of petrol came down then automatically everything wlse would which would mean there will be more money in everyone's pocket so helping the economy.
Why is this idea important?
As motorists we are persecuted. We pay high road tax which has been further exacerbated by the tax being levied against the type of the vehicle you drive – crazy – we all use the roads whichever vehicle we use. We are targetted continually, the speed cameras that are put are not there to save lives they are there to generate revenue for the police, we should all be insured to drive our vehicles and I do agree that motorists that are not insured should be penalised but law abiding citizens are targetted. I would hate to have a serious accident because the result would probably mean I would be in prison. They are called accidents because they are exactly that. We have a blame cultural in the UK and it has to stop. The tax on petrol must be cut, I know we owe £169 billion but if the price of petrol came down then automatically everything wlse would which would mean there will be more money in everyone's pocket so helping the economy.
Currently you can spend an enormous time sitting in a jam on the motorway when the hard shoulder is clear. Motorists should be allowed to use the hard shoulder from the 300metre countdown markers to exit the motorway.
Why is this idea important?
Currently you can spend an enormous time sitting in a jam on the motorway when the hard shoulder is clear. Motorists should be allowed to use the hard shoulder from the 300metre countdown markers to exit the motorway.
In Wandsworth there are numerous spots where cameras are focused on unfair cash raising schemes through fining motorists unfairly.
They do this by passing local legislation to making it an offence parking on a particular road for example Smugglers Way or Balham High Road and many others.
But should it be an offence at 5PM on a Sunday afternoon? When there is no one about ah but a warden will soon be along to place a ticket on your car as this is how they make their money.
There are a number of other spots and Wandsworth deliberately creates confusion to catch unsuspecting drivers.
The process is simple firstly up goes a camera for managing a particular spot supported by plausible health a safety, management reasons then the camera is trained on aparticular spot for the purposes of fining individuals.
Why is this idea important?
In Wandsworth there are numerous spots where cameras are focused on unfair cash raising schemes through fining motorists unfairly.
They do this by passing local legislation to making it an offence parking on a particular road for example Smugglers Way or Balham High Road and many others.
But should it be an offence at 5PM on a Sunday afternoon? When there is no one about ah but a warden will soon be along to place a ticket on your car as this is how they make their money.
There are a number of other spots and Wandsworth deliberately creates confusion to catch unsuspecting drivers.
The process is simple firstly up goes a camera for managing a particular spot supported by plausible health a safety, management reasons then the camera is trained on aparticular spot for the purposes of fining individuals.
Tens of thousands of tickets are issued by local councils for minor parking infringments. Many of these are issued incorrectly due to errors in signage, lack of judgment, or simply the need to meet targets.
The majority of tickets which are appealed are overturned. In these instances the issuing council should pay the driver sum equivilant to the penalty they were seeking. This will cover the costs and hassle of having to go through the appeals process.
Why is this idea important?
Tens of thousands of tickets are issued by local councils for minor parking infringments. Many of these are issued incorrectly due to errors in signage, lack of judgment, or simply the need to meet targets.
The majority of tickets which are appealed are overturned. In these instances the issuing council should pay the driver sum equivilant to the penalty they were seeking. This will cover the costs and hassle of having to go through the appeals process.
Parking of vehicles on pavements should only be permitted if a gap is left wide enough to allow a wheelchair, disabled buggy or pushchair to pass on the pavement – perhaps a gap of 4ft/1.2metres; leaving a gap of less than this would constitute an offence. At the moment, I believe obstruction has to be proved, which seems to be sufficiently difficult to rule out any prosecutions from ever being made. Motorists therefore park on pavements with impunity, forcing people to move out into the traffic. Specifying the size of gap to be left would make proof of an offence being committed quite straightforward.
Why is this idea important?
Parking of vehicles on pavements should only be permitted if a gap is left wide enough to allow a wheelchair, disabled buggy or pushchair to pass on the pavement – perhaps a gap of 4ft/1.2metres; leaving a gap of less than this would constitute an offence. At the moment, I believe obstruction has to be proved, which seems to be sufficiently difficult to rule out any prosecutions from ever being made. Motorists therefore park on pavements with impunity, forcing people to move out into the traffic. Specifying the size of gap to be left would make proof of an offence being committed quite straightforward.
It is now commonplace to see car drivers turning, changing lane and moving out into the road without using their indicators. It is a dangerous practice which seems to be more and more prevalent. Even pedestrians need to know if a motorist intends to turn.
A new law is not needed but certainly encouragement of safer driving is.
Why is this idea important?
It is now commonplace to see car drivers turning, changing lane and moving out into the road without using their indicators. It is a dangerous practice which seems to be more and more prevalent. Even pedestrians need to know if a motorist intends to turn.
A new law is not needed but certainly encouragement of safer driving is.