"Stimpy" wrote in message
...
Chris Tolley wrote:
On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 18:56:48 -0000, Martin Underwood wrote:

I reckon that the speed limit should be set at the speed that a
"safe, competant driver" would choose to drive at

I entirely agree - if, at the same time, you ensure that all the
people who do not meet this standard are disallowed from driving on
the said roads.

I've still not heard a compelling reason why mandatory periodic re-testing
isn't a good idea



We pay enough "road tax" as it is? Most people who are
incompetent/bad/dangerous drivers mange to pass tests the first time?
Indeed, many dangerous drivers are very good at taking tests of all sorts.

JB ) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

Over the years, the number of retests will go down as the irredemably
incompetent decide they just can't be arsed.

I doubt that logically follows. I know of three people who have taken
8+ tests in an attempt to get their first licence.

I'll bet they're still utterly incompetent behind the wheel. Is this good?

If they had to do that every five/ten years, do you think they'd bother?

On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 18:01:44 +0000, Paul Terry
wrote:

And http://www.benlovejoy.com/speedtrapdetectors.html ... with its
picture of "A forward-facing infra-red Gatso hidden behind a sign"

Look closely at the picture - it's NOT a Gatso. It's a Truvelo (and so
has a magenta filter over the flash - it's NOT infra-red).

--
Philip

[Don't top post. Quote selectively. Don't use HTML. Enjoy Usenet]

In article ,
Adrian wrote:
I'll bet they're still utterly incompetent behind the wheel. Is this good?

In one case I know of, they weren't utterly incompetent at any point, except
when the Scary Man With The Clipboard was in the car.

--
Mike Bristow - really a very good driver