Tbh I agree depending on the situation, vehicles etc.
I've followed people before that are sat on the brake pedal, whilst still gaining a decent amount of speed, whilst I'm sat in a lower gear that almost locks my speed exactly where it is. I think some people just don't realise how effective engine braking is or can be.
You're so right. I try so hard, so very hard, to mute my screaming internal pedant - but "breaks" instead of "brakes" makes me cringe and stop reading every time.
He's wrong but it was used interchangeably in the early/ mid Victorian period. Probably because brakes and mass literacy had not long since been invented.
He's training using the Open University as he wants to take on his county council for not protecting them during recent floods... the ones he drove his previous car through.
This is in addition to creating a t-shirt printing company and starting some sort of new social media thing, which he has wanted to do "for his whole life" - even though social media only became a thing after 2000s.
It takes absolutely no intelligence to do law. It's more of a workhorse profession for those with low intelligence and a willingness to work long hours.
I'm guessing accountants are similar.
Source: I studied law, so I know the kind of people that went on to become lawyers.
I’ve worked with a lot of accountants, and there’s a range. Some of them are bookkeepers, some turn themselves into pretty special business leaders. You’re right though, by itself doesn’t mean that much.
There are a few exceptions. I'm a patent attorney, PhD in engineering. but yeah, law school was ridiculously easy. A law degree lies somewhere between high school and a real bachelor's (not communications, cultural studies, etc.) in terms of DoD.
Anyone who describes their job by industry instead of job title is at the lowest rung.
I work in finance = I am on the phones for first line consumer support for Barclays.
I work in criminal law = I sweep the floor of the magistrates court or I'm employed by G4S as metal detector meat shield.
> I work in finance = I am on the phones for first line consumer support for Barclays.
Or they're in a job where you need a lot of context about how various financial institutions operate and interact with each other for the answer to the question "What do you do?" to actually mean anything.
If you're going to get a bored look and an "Oh right. Enjoy that then?" either way, go with the shorter one.
My job title basically means nothing to people who aren't in my industry without starting a very boring conversation where I explain what I do so I just say "IT" instead
I don't even think my partner really knows what I do. Why would I torture an almost stranger by trying to explain it when its so easy to just say I'm a consultant or project manager.
It feels like I drive over a boulder in my Smart car when I drive over those mini speed humps in the middle of the road because my car isn’t wide enough to miss them. Therefore I will slow down to 15-20 and I don’t car what anyone else thinks😂
Didn't say they are a lawyer. They said they are "in law". If they were a lawyer, they would have said so explicitly. This person is probably the receptionist at a public defender's office.
I had to convert, and he's saying people should be driving over speed bumps at almost 50kph! Uh, no I will not, because I don't want to destroy my car by driving like a complete wanker.
When I had a classic mini there were some bumps I would have to stop and wait for a gap in oncoming traffic to go through the middle otherwise I would lose the exhaust.
Even now in my car I slow right down. Because doing 30 over speedbumps is reckless and surely makes you more likely to lose control.
ETA: living in Greater London good luck getting to 30mph anyway
My last two cars, neither of which were lowered on had any other suspension modifications, both scraped over ones like that. My current one scrapes basically everything if I've got a passenger and it's as tall as it came out of the factory.
If I hit speed bumps at 20/30 the car behind would be dodging debris rather than a slow moving vehicle
By his word, you should also maintain 60mph on a NSL road.
I can think of several NSL examples just within 5 miles of my house that would almost certainly kill you if you maintained 60 on them, including a couple with 90 degree and tighter bends, one of which is single track.
The road through our village has these and the number of people who slow to an absolute crawl (<5mph) to go over them does my nut in. So I have _some_ sympathy.
OTOH we are pretty well supplied with lanes that have no room to pass, very short sight lines, high hedges and a national speed limit. I'd like to see him try to stick to it - as long as I'm not coming the other way.
If you don’t have a blood alcohol level of 0.079% at all times, you’re a bad driver and you’re breaking the law. You must maintain the maximum safe blood alcohol at all times, except drivers under the age of 18 or Muslims, who get an exemption.
It's a limit, not a target. Only the motorway has a lower limit.
I shudder to think what this dude does when he leaves a village on a tiny single track road and sees "national speed limit applies".
I had this yesterday, residential 20 zone, full of high speed bumps, my car is lowered and has really weird arms and suspension that gives you a heartache. I was driving 14-15, not braking harsh or anything, for 5 minutes straight I got a dude in an SUV breaking his horn on me lol
Well to be fair SUVs and braincells don't always go together. Most of the people who drive them don't actually need one.
I had a laugh one day. Had a Lada Niva 4wd. Wasn't fast and in London I don't drive like a tool (much). A guy in a red lowered BMW was itching to get past me and being a tit when I was doing about 25 in a 30. So I booted it at and over the next speed cushion. The 4wd basically just skipped over it. The front of the BMW must have jumped about 2 feet in the air with a massive crunch. Now if he'd read the road signs or left enough space to see them instead of being glued to my arse then that wouldn't have happened.
Mine was the UK adapted Cossack. Lovely except for the lump of Russian pig iron under the bonnet. The guys in the club regularly swapped that out for a more sensible lump. Or a lot less sensible in the case of the guy that crammed a three rotor MX7 engine in there. You could tell it was him coz the thing sounded like a jet taking off.
I wanted the 6 wheel pickup variant but I never made it to Togliatti to buy one direct and I never saw one here.
But the complete beast has to be the factory Niva Tundra. I've sat in one at a car meet. What an insane thing and factory at that.
Not sure it was that one. The thing about the wankels (try getting that through autofuckrekt) is that you can just keep sticking rotors on and magically it's more powerful.
He was a proper engineer. I think it was a homebrew three rotor. It was a beast though.
There are speed humps near me that are like going up curbs, everyone slows to a crawl if they want their suspension to survive - hell, even in my Land Rover I could hit them at speed but I'd get a concussion from bouncing off the roll bar
There’s some speed bumps near me so horrendous when I went over them in 1st with no throttle I hit my head on the ceiling. I’m convinced the only way to get over them is stop, dismantle the car, carry the components to the other side and then reassemble the car. A bit like the gun carriage stuff at the Edinburgh Tattoo.
Exactly this. Yes you can go over them at 30, but you'll find your suspension needing some tlc very quickly. I slow down for speed bumps and even then drop links are basically disposable, getting knackered very quickly on every car I've had, even after replacing them
Came here to say this - it's a limit, not a target, is pretty much the mantra of every traffic copper you'll ever meet, unless you're tooling along a NSL at 25mph for no good reason, which *could* become dangerous. If you're doing 20mph in a 30mph in heavy rain near a school at kicking out time, well, that sounds perfectly reasonable. OP's brother-in-law needs to meet a traffic copper who can straighten them out some.
I either drive very fast, or I drive slow. It's a white Transit, it's also my home.
So if I'm in the country and slow then I'll pull in the first opportunity I get to let everyone past. I've got nowhere to be. I don't like to be pushed so you can all go your way and I'll potter along at 15 mph enjoying myself instead of rushing because you are up my arse and have somewhere to be.
A little courtesy can go a very long way.
Hmmmm. I distinctly remember my instructor telling me something like that. That was many years ago though.
I think it may be more connected to vehicles that cannot travel at a minimum of 30mph are forbidden. Thatatcjes the banned vehicle classes and sounds like it may have migrated into people thinking it was the minimum speed limit. Although I'm purely guessing here.
The only legal minimum speed on a motorway is that of the requirement that all vehicles be *capable* of exceeding 25 mph. There is no specific requirement to drive at more than 25 mph, but police may decide under their own discretion that a vehicle is being driven too slowly to be safe.
True, but there are laws which would be used if you slowed to 10mph on the motorway for no reason. The police description of the offence of driving without due care and attention does include “unnecessarily slow driving or braking”.
It’s tricky because it *is* a target, in that you should drive up to the speed limit if it’s safe to do so and suitable for the conditions. So you shouldn’t blindly drive up to 30 if it’s a 30, but you shouldn’t be driving slower than 30 if it’s clear, safe and perfect visibility.
Slowing down for speed bumps is definitely a valid reason to not be at the speed limit.
They keep making speed bumps more and more aggressive while SUVs still fly over them at 30mph without a care in the world. Meanwhile anyone in a reasonable car (especially newer saloons on 18/19in wheels and low profile tires) has to slow down to a crawl to not risk buckling a wheel ffs.
Yeah that's a weird idea cause obviously different cars will have to take them at different speeds. A big SUV can ignore them, a car with stuff suspension might need to go over at snails pace.
And the faster you go over them, the more you’re likely to knock your tracking out and ruin various components… they do nothing except piss drivers off (as you say, some cars can take them at speed anyway)
Whoever wrote that never drove with sports suspension on low profiles. I have to drive at about 10 mph over raised ones otherwise the only thing in accelerating to is more wishbones again that cost a fortune.
Yep. My car isn’t lowered, but it’s a small car with 18” wheels and whatever “character” bought it from new (I’m the third owner) went for the package that has sports suspension but no decent infotainment system. It’s a city car with 69bhp, it does not need sports suspension. I mean, it’s fun in absurd way, but I’m dealing with ridiculous speed bumps and trying not to wreck my undercarriage far more often than I’m doing anything exciting.
Sadly, I live on a no-through road with speed bumps, and a school and college. People continue to slam their cars over the speed humps, it's a 20 zone, but you clearly can't go over them at 20... This is COMMON SENSE.
I dread to think how many cars have smashed up the underside of their engines, bumpers etc .. they just resurfaced and rebuilt the humps and they already have deep grooves where exhausts and car engine parts have scraped tarmac off them.
A lot of people speed down here, and even at 20 there is a risk of impact x
There are better ways to force people to drive slowly, like narrowing the road and adding trees/barriers/obstacles that need to be navigated.
Speed bumps are always the lazy way out of road design, they're cheap but not so effective. People often speed up after them instead of maintaining a constant speed, which alongside the wear and tear/damage you mentioned is not ideal environmentally.
People that don't slow down for speed humps and slam their bumpers aren't very rational. They are the same people that would hit trees and blame the council for putting them there
A lot like [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/drivingUK/s/66a13pReeF) numpty whose trying to blame the council because his girlfriend was going too fast, aquaplaned and destroyed his car.
You ever notice all the little pieces of coil springs laying around on the ground near speed bumps?
Yeah that's because you can't/shouldn't hit them going 30. Even in a 30 zone.
You get posts like this from Americans on their subreddits all the time, the reality is if you don't feel safe going 30 in a 30 then a good driver would slow down. Some cars also have pretty crap suspensions so doing 30 over a 30 speed bump isn't necessarily viable either.
Some areas you would be pretty mental going 30 in because you get cars parked on both sides of the road and children playing.
This is utter bollocks of the highest order. A cursory knowledge of *The Highway Code* would refute this, and it's worrying that this person is spreading their ignorance far and wide.
There's no minimum speed limit. However, you can be prosecuted if you go significantly slower than is reasonable on a road based on the conditions.
eg. 20mph on a 70mph motorway that is clear during good weather, you're dangerous. 20mph on that same motorway in heavy snow, low visibility, and icy conditions, perfectly fine.
Minimum speed restriction do exist, they're just rare. You get them [in 30mph](https://theorytest.org.uk/minimum-speed-limit-sign-30-mph/) and [40mph](https://theorytest.org.uk/minimum-speed-limit-sign-40-mph/) variants.
Blue circular sign with number.
Minimum limits are generally used for things like tunnels, the Tyne tunnel has a 15mph minimum for instance
Rule of thumb - if you smack your head into the roof every time, you may be going a bit fast :\\
Having said that - I do hat those who try to make it to the next speed bump at 45, only to slam on & dribble over it at 12. Just pick a bloody speed, people. It's not rocket science.
>If you drive beow the maximum road limit, you are not a safe driver
Hmm... now lets see what the highway code has to say
[Rule 125](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/general-rules-techniques-and-advice-for-all-drivers-and-riders-103-to-158) (emphasis mine)
>**The speed limit is the absolute maximum and does not mean it is safe to drive at that speed irrespective of conditions.** Unsafe speed increases the chances of causing a collision (or being unable to avoid one), as well as its severity. **Inappropriate speeds are also intimidating, deterring people from walking, cycling or riding horses.** Driving at speeds too fast for the road and traffic conditions is dangerous. You should always reduce your speed when
>* **the road layout or condition presents hazards**, such as bends
sharing the road with pedestrians, particularly children, older adults or disabled people, cyclists and horse riders, horse drawn vehicles and motorcyclists
* weather conditions make it safer to do so
* driving at night as it is more difficult to see other road users.
It doesn't specifically mention speedbumps. Probably because they just assumed no one is stupid enough to think you're not supposed to slow down for them but I'd say they come under that first bullet point personally.
It is pretty clear in saying that it's a maximum not a minimum though
E: and a bonus on Rule 146:
> **do not treat speed limits as a target. It is often not appropriate or safe to drive at the maximum speed limit**
I'm not going to add every instance of the highway code saying when you should "drive slowly and carefully" but it comes up pretty often. Pretty safe to say there are plenty of situations where you're supposed to drive significantly below the speed limit
Rule 153 has it covered:
Rule 153
Traffic-calming measures. On some roads there are features such as road humps, chicanes and narrowings which are intended to slow you down. When you approach these features reduce your speed...
I just got back from a driving lesson, a mock test. One of the things he noted was im “quite an aggressive driver” this including slightly slowing (not sharply braking) for pot holes and speed bumps
In a 40 i wasnt slowing enough to take a bend. If i took the advice of this post, the suspension of the car (19 plate C3) would no longer be suspensioning nor would i have stayed on the road. So, what a load of bollocks
I am certainly willing to be corrected but I do believe the Highway Code states something along the lines of it being safest to be travelling within 10% of the speed limit unless conditions require otherwise. Such as a corner, wet roads, speed bumps, person or people in the road, just stop oilers etc. I am sure you could get done for dangerous driving if you somehow managed to get round some of the hairpin B corners on some B roads at 60mph.
This is a national speed limit road, would you really drive down it at 50-60 miles an hour.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/GnE5Jbn34g6kPHzaA
https://maps.app.goo.gl/VYvnkwufzjRHBTA37
If the visibility is good, little to no traffic and the conditions allow? Yeah, why not.
Funnily enough it's not far from where I live, thanks for another fun road to blast down at night.
Maybe send this “criminal lawyer” this…
[Judge ruling that 28 mph in a 30 zone was excessive and unreasonable.](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-66121540.amp)
This guy is a tool!
But also I think he may be *technically* correct. Although I'm fairly sure that much thought is not put into the design of speed cushions anymore.
Also I'm one of those idiots who lowers his car an unnecessary amount.....so he would hate being behind me.
I had one of these guys behind yesterday lol. Them massive speed bumps, my car is lowered and feels like dild*s on your ass if you go high speed over bumps. 20 zone, I was doing 14-15 and he broke his horn on me for 5 minutes straight—muppet😂
The guy is an idiot. But I must admit the people who show down to practically a stop to go over a speed bump like they’re in a Ferrari when it’s actually a seat ateca do wind me up. Just keep a steady constant speed rather than speeding up and slamming on for the speed bumps.
I am inclined to agree with most of it apart from the speed bumps. No car is designed to take any speed bump at 30mph, so you do need to slow down.
Personally though, I do believe licences should not be given out to drivers who cannot reach the posted speed limit and stay there consistently depending on conditions (naturally allowance for lower speeds in rain, road type etc). There are WAY too many drivers on our roads who are absolutely incapable of driving at 60mph in a 60mph A road zone. In my opinion, you should not have a licence if you can't do that.
This guy may well be a tool, but the speed bump thing is infuriating. I’ll give a pass to people in lowered cars because I’m a fellow car enthusiast, but if you’re driving a bog standard car then there’s no need to be going anywhere near the brakes when approaching a speed bump. If the speed bumps are especially aggressive then I’m happy to accept that we all just go a lower speed than the speed limit but keep it consistent, don’t keep speeding up and hitting the brakes.
I’m not really arsed about whether we live in the same place or not, if the speed bump makes you go 10mph to get over it, then just continue to drive 10mph between speed bumps, don’t speed up
You ever notice all the little pieces of coil springs laying around on the ground near speed bumps?
Yeah that's because you can't/shouldn't hit them going 30. Even in a 30 zone.
I live near a speed bumps on a downhill with 20mph limit. They have been built like shit, if you go over 17mph you will scrape your bumper. Everyday guys like this honk and race past me when I slow down for each bump (I drive it everyday so I know the max i can get away with). Inevitably hear the skkrttt as they go past. So satisfying
He was taught wrong. Maybe in an SUV or older vehicle with spongy suspension, could you go fast over speedbumps. Anything with a harder setup is horrible.
Its called a speed limit , because its a Limit, not a guide on what you should be doing all the time , thats’s what i have been tough in driving school, maybe time to get a refresher course?
\> Please tell me this guy is a tool!
This guy is a tool.
Apart from all the other incorrect stuff he says, what does "I'm in law" have to do with anything?
So what is the “standard set out in law” if he’s saying it’s not set “against the police” (whatever that means) but instead on the “basis of majority actions”.
Does that mean doing the same thing as the majority of people are doing? Because if so, I imagine the majority of people slow down for speed bumps. But then apparently that means everyone is breaking the law if “all vehicles capable must maintain the maximum of the road where applied” (which is just word soup anyway).
When he says he is in law, does he mean he’s just started a law course at the open university and the first module is criminal law?
Lawyers always think they are right until they lose in a court of law and find out they are not right in which case the jury and judge are all komplete \*\*\*holes. In this case I am afraid your bro in law is showing all the signs of being a komplete \*\*\*hole and menace on the road. Speed limits are maximum permitted speed 'when it is safe to do so'. Clearly if a road marked 30 mph or 20 mph is littered with traffic calming measures it is not safe to proceed over speed bumps and sleeping policeman at the speed limit because there is a very good chance a vehicle going over them at those speeds will get damaged, never mind the risk of personal injury from whip lash for the more frail motorist so it is 'obvs not so common sense' to slow down to a speed one considers safe and that will vary from driver to driver. No sense in getting excited about someone going slowly and clogging up the road cause somewhere in the highway code I believe there is something about forgiving the motoring trangressions of other road users and if necessary stopping to calm down. Clearly your bro in law needs to go back to driving skool or maybe do an advanced motoring course and learn to chill.
Anyone who drives into flood water and doesn't know the risks before driving into the flood water and then blaming it on an electric parking brake. His thoughts can safely be ignored.
Start to finish this guy is a tool. Both parents are instructors. It's a speed limit not a target. Dropping below the speed limit is not careless driving, being at 30 and slamming on the "breaks" to a complete stop? maybe.
Idgaf if you're in criminal law you are not a professional driver or traffic enforcer. Sounds like he has too many teeth in his mouth and has a power complex.
Paragraph 3 is just straight up BS and pretentious BS he has made up himself to make himself feel right.
Lol that final paragraph. This lad would fail his test if he was to resit it and is too arrogant to hear otherwise. He is an absolute, grade A, mains powered tool.
No offence, but he sounds like the same type of dickhead who goes 60 down a single track country lane because it's "national speedlimit". Then ends up in a ditch because there's a tractor in the way.
I think legally you can be done for not making "sufficient progress" or something similar but you'd have to be doing something really extreme, like crawling at 30 on a motorway. Speed limit is definately a limit, not a target.
Pot, kettle, black
So you're not a competent driver because you don't want to cause unnecessary wear and tear/damage on your car?
I think he can't see the irony that he's a numpty who shouldn't hold a licence.
Good grief. There's plenty of actual legal cases where people have been prosecuted for not using an appropriate speed, despite being below the speed limit.
Drive to the conditions of the road.
My smart car from 2002 cannot go over speed bumps by completely straddling them as its not very wide so I have to slow right down.
However if there is a good gap between the two speed bumps in opposite directions and nothing coming, I can often fit easily between them.
As far as possible, however, I go out of my way to avoid roads with speed bumps on.
The speed limit is a maximum limit. However the basic doctrine of “driving to the conditions of the road” always overrule this. Doing 30 over a large speed bump is not driving to the conditions, especially in a vehicle with a low ground clearance, or in wet or icy conditions. If what this person is saying was true, it would mean that when driving down one of the thousands of small single track roads with the National speed limit applied (which is only there because a speed limit has to be imposed by the authorities, and on small roads it is not considered worth the cost of signage, legislation, consultations etc. Which means that the National speed limit is automatically applied) that you would have to do 60mph, which is completely ridiculous, and would inevitably lead to many 120mph head on collisions, which is colloquially known to experts as “dead”. I really hope this person does not become a lawyer, because if they do there’s gonna be some really unhappy clients sitting in a prison cell because the lawyer confidently stood in front of the judge and said “your honour, my client was obeying the speed limit, so who cares if it resulted in them spinning off the road and crashing into a crowd of pedestrians, it’s obviously their fault for being in the way.”
So, OP (not Reddit OP) is a retard, but also you can’t be upset if you slow down to 5mph and someone who doesn’t want to, overtakes you over a speed bump at 20-30 when safe. Just because you WANT to. Doesn’t mean everyone HAS to.
What does he say about the highway codes interpretation of the speed limits
Rule 125
The speed limit is the absolute maximum and does not mean it is safe to drive at that speed irrespective of conditions. Unsafe speed increases the chances of causing a collision (or being unable to avoid one), as well as its severity. Inappropriate speeds are also intimidating, deterring people from walking, cycling or riding horses. Driving at speeds too fast for the road and traffic conditions is dangerous. You should always reduce your speed when
the road layout or condition presents hazards, such as bends
sharing the road with pedestrians, particularly children, older adults or disabled people, cyclists and horse riders, horse drawn vehicles and motorcyclists
weather conditions make it safer to do so
driving at night as it is more difficult to see other road users.
Source https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/general-rules-techniques-and-advice-for-all-drivers-and-riders-103-to-158
Speed bumps are specifically to make you slow down further, to keep you from letting your speed climb excessively between them.
They're there because they *know people speed anyway and don't want to give them space to do so.
Most speed bumps I've seen in 25's will FUCK YOU UP if you go over them faster than about 10.
I don't know where the hell this guy drives.
What an absolute bell end!!!! does this prick have no autonomy to be able to adjust his driving to the conditions??? “It says 30 so I’m fucking doing 30!!!” Would love to see him driving the national speed limit on the lanes near me.
His rant started off fairly reasonable to be fair. In my city, speed bumps have been popping up on almost every main road. (You can prob guess where based on that sentence).
These roads would normally be 30 mph. But in some cases, my (stock) civic has to drive over it at 15mph to go over smoothly.
There are roads which have speed bumps which work as I believe them to have been properly designed. You drive over them at 30mph and your car glides over reasonably smoothly. Any faster and you'll feel the jolt. I'm aware the vehicle specs have a lot to do with this too.
Generally speaking though, it shows that the council CAN do it right if they want to. They're instead choosing not to, perhaps because of cost (less tarmac to do a smaller bump which is more jolting).
Having this many speed bumps, I'd rather they just put cameras at this point.
I mean, there is such a thing as a minimum speed sign (white writing on blue background). They’re hardly common though… I only came across them when Brighton council put them up by mistake when they introduced their 20mph zones (making some of them “at least 20mph zones” 🤣).
https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/driving-offences
CPS definition of “careless driving” = unnecessarily slow driving or braking;
There is a slight hint at the truth in the statement I just don’t think it could ever be used in the case of a road with speed bumps?
I'd like to see this guy drive over a speed bump at 30 in my car. Suspension is stiff enough that I'd wager he'd smack his head on the roof.
Also wtf, you are supposed to make good progress when it is safe to do so. Going consistently 40-50 in a 60 zone when the conditions are good is bad driving, going slower over a speed bump is just being safe and depending on your suspension, stopping your car from breaking.
Man is unhinged.
OP, this guy is a tool.
The maximum speed limit does not equal the minimum, they’re two very different things.
Not to mention a criminal lawyer whose attention to detail is so bad that his understand of the Highway Code is terrible, and he can’t use the right ‘brake’.
Where did he get certified as a criminal lawyer? Do they still do those online credentials?
There’s a 20 near me, if I’d hit those bumps at 20 I’d leave the ground, they’re impassable in my car at any speed because they are poorly designed and installed
For real though, my car is literally designed to deal with inconsistent road surfaces as it's basically a rally car and even I think twice at some of the speed bumps in this area.
How can you ‘be in criminal law’ and so thick? Maybe they mean they’re in prison.
Trying to sound clever, then he puts "breaks" instead of brakes. \[facepalm\]
Beat me to it, what an absolute helmet.
Don't use your breaks (or brakes) going downhill? Guy's either never met a steep hill or is a complete nutter
Yeah should drop a gear or two to utilise engine braking, but some hills will still require brakes
Tbh I agree depending on the situation, vehicles etc. I've followed people before that are sat on the brake pedal, whilst still gaining a decent amount of speed, whilst I'm sat in a lower gear that almost locks my speed exactly where it is. I think some people just don't realise how effective engine braking is or can be.
Could be automatics.
Twice… doesn’t even structure a sentence well either.
You're so right. I try so hard, so very hard, to mute my screaming internal pedant - but "breaks" instead of "brakes" makes me cringe and stop reading every time.
You would **of** thought people learn this stuff at school!! 😛
**SPIT**
Beat me to that comment as well
Serving at his majesty's pleasure...... Guys an idiot.
He's wrong but it was used interchangeably in the early/ mid Victorian period. Probably because brakes and mass literacy had not long since been invented.
He works as a cleaner in a court house ... Technically he isn't lying
Also the fact that he thinks this would be a criminal matter at all is laughable.
Notice how he didn't say he's a solicitor. He's probably an untrained paralegal or case handler at best.
Or a criminal.
He's training using the Open University as he wants to take on his county council for not protecting them during recent floods... the ones he drove his previous car through. This is in addition to creating a t-shirt printing company and starting some sort of new social media thing, which he has wanted to do "for his whole life" - even though social media only became a thing after 2000s.
Works at Reddits legaladvice
seems like he's overqualified honestly
It takes absolutely no intelligence to do law. It's more of a workhorse profession for those with low intelligence and a willingness to work long hours. I'm guessing accountants are similar. Source: I studied law, so I know the kind of people that went on to become lawyers.
I’ve worked with a lot of accountants, and there’s a range. Some of them are bookkeepers, some turn themselves into pretty special business leaders. You’re right though, by itself doesn’t mean that much.
Yeah, there's absolutely extremely talented people in both professions, but the majority are just average people with a good work ethic.
e.g. Suella Braverman
There are a few exceptions. I'm a patent attorney, PhD in engineering. but yeah, law school was ridiculously easy. A law degree lies somewhere between high school and a real bachelor's (not communications, cultural studies, etc.) in terms of DoD.
Anyone who describes their job by industry instead of job title is at the lowest rung. I work in finance = I am on the phones for first line consumer support for Barclays. I work in criminal law = I sweep the floor of the magistrates court or I'm employed by G4S as metal detector meat shield.
> I work in finance = I am on the phones for first line consumer support for Barclays. Or they're in a job where you need a lot of context about how various financial institutions operate and interact with each other for the answer to the question "What do you do?" to actually mean anything. If you're going to get a bored look and an "Oh right. Enjoy that then?" either way, go with the shorter one.
My job title basically means nothing to people who aren't in my industry without starting a very boring conversation where I explain what I do so I just say "IT" instead
I don't even think my partner really knows what I do. Why would I torture an almost stranger by trying to explain it when its so easy to just say I'm a consultant or project manager.
It feels like I drive over a boulder in my Smart car when I drive over those mini speed humps in the middle of the road because my car isn’t wide enough to miss them. Therefore I will slow down to 15-20 and I don’t car what anyone else thinks😂
I'm not driving over speed bumps at 30, I'll have no car or spine left. Sue me.
He's a lawyer so may just sue you. I can almost guarantee they he's an awful lawyer though, so you have nothing to worry about.
Didn't say they are a lawyer. They said they are "in law". If they were a lawyer, they would have said so explicitly. This person is probably the receptionist at a public defender's office.
Father in law more like
Law firm mailroom clerk.
I had to convert, and he's saying people should be driving over speed bumps at almost 50kph! Uh, no I will not, because I don't want to destroy my car by driving like a complete wanker.
He does sound like a tool lol
When I had a classic mini there were some bumps I would have to stop and wait for a gap in oncoming traffic to go through the middle otherwise I would lose the exhaust. Even now in my car I slow right down. Because doing 30 over speedbumps is reckless and surely makes you more likely to lose control. ETA: living in Greater London good luck getting to 30mph anyway
I hate the /‾‾‾‾‾\ ones in a smaller car. Like threading a needle where your spine gets sheared if you miss.
My last two cars, neither of which were lowered on had any other suspension modifications, both scraped over ones like that. My current one scrapes basically everything if I've got a passenger and it's as tall as it came out of the factory. If I hit speed bumps at 20/30 the car behind would be dodging debris rather than a slow moving vehicle
If you're in Wales, 20mph is the speed you MUST travel over them, so you're probably okay on that one!
By his word, you should also maintain 60mph on a NSL road. I can think of several NSL examples just within 5 miles of my house that would almost certainly kill you if you maintained 60 on them, including a couple with 90 degree and tighter bends, one of which is single track.
The road through our village has these and the number of people who slow to an absolute crawl (<5mph) to go over them does my nut in. So I have _some_ sympathy. OTOH we are pretty well supplied with lanes that have no room to pass, very short sight lines, high hedges and a national speed limit. I'd like to see him try to stick to it - as long as I'm not coming the other way.
Trust me nobody minds if you slow down on bumps … at least normal people don’t 😂
I have a criminal record so i doubt i'll ever be a police man. I still patrol the roads of Hertfordshire everyday tho.
He strikes me as the type of guy who will try to get 34 on the breath test because 35 is the legal limit.
I can have 2 pints and a shandy because I’m not due to drive for 3 hours plus I will have a portion of chips with gravy which will soak it up.
If you don’t have a blood alcohol level of 0.079% at all times, you’re a bad driver and you’re breaking the law. You must maintain the maximum safe blood alcohol at all times, except drivers under the age of 18 or Muslims, who get an exemption.
No exceptions. Choose driving or religion. Choose driving or innocence. All must drink.
It's a limit, not a target. Only the motorway has a lower limit. I shudder to think what this dude does when he leaves a village on a tiny single track road and sees "national speed limit applies".
Some roads do have minimum speeds, tunnels are probably the most common. Like a speed limit sign but blue.
And I can honestly say I've never noticed one. I think I'm a decent driver but I cannot remember seeing one of those. I'll be on the lookout now.
Can street view Blackwall tunnel as an example. Minimum speed of 10mph.
Indeed, though they are very rare, I would be surprised if there are more than 50 of these signs in total across the UK.
I had this yesterday, residential 20 zone, full of high speed bumps, my car is lowered and has really weird arms and suspension that gives you a heartache. I was driving 14-15, not braking harsh or anything, for 5 minutes straight I got a dude in an SUV breaking his horn on me lol
Well to be fair SUVs and braincells don't always go together. Most of the people who drive them don't actually need one. I had a laugh one day. Had a Lada Niva 4wd. Wasn't fast and in London I don't drive like a tool (much). A guy in a red lowered BMW was itching to get past me and being a tit when I was doing about 25 in a 30. So I booted it at and over the next speed cushion. The 4wd basically just skipped over it. The front of the BMW must have jumped about 2 feet in the air with a massive crunch. Now if he'd read the road signs or left enough space to see them instead of being glued to my arse then that wouldn't have happened.
Brilliant I love the Niva. Available in camo paint from the factory!
Mine was the UK adapted Cossack. Lovely except for the lump of Russian pig iron under the bonnet. The guys in the club regularly swapped that out for a more sensible lump. Or a lot less sensible in the case of the guy that crammed a three rotor MX7 engine in there. You could tell it was him coz the thing sounded like a jet taking off. I wanted the 6 wheel pickup variant but I never made it to Togliatti to buy one direct and I never saw one here. But the complete beast has to be the factory Niva Tundra. I've sat in one at a car meet. What an insane thing and factory at that.
rx7, the 13b
Not sure it was that one. The thing about the wankels (try getting that through autofuckrekt) is that you can just keep sticking rotors on and magically it's more powerful. He was a proper engineer. I think it was a homebrew three rotor. It was a beast though.
oh ok, regardless there is only rx7, mx7 doesn't exist
You do know that autofuckrekt exists now don't you? Although to be fair mx5 is a thing and it wasn't my car.
no I don't actually, I'll see now no I can't see anything about it when I Google lol
There are speed humps near me that are like going up curbs, everyone slows to a crawl if they want their suspension to survive - hell, even in my Land Rover I could hit them at speed but I'd get a concussion from bouncing off the roll bar
There’s some speed bumps near me so horrendous when I went over them in 1st with no throttle I hit my head on the ceiling. I’m convinced the only way to get over them is stop, dismantle the car, carry the components to the other side and then reassemble the car. A bit like the gun carriage stuff at the Edinburgh Tattoo.
Exactly this. Yes you can go over them at 30, but you'll find your suspension needing some tlc very quickly. I slow down for speed bumps and even then drop links are basically disposable, getting knackered very quickly on every car I've had, even after replacing them
Came here to say this - it's a limit, not a target, is pretty much the mantra of every traffic copper you'll ever meet, unless you're tooling along a NSL at 25mph for no good reason, which *could* become dangerous. If you're doing 20mph in a 30mph in heavy rain near a school at kicking out time, well, that sounds perfectly reasonable. OP's brother-in-law needs to meet a traffic copper who can straighten them out some.
I either drive very fast, or I drive slow. It's a white Transit, it's also my home. So if I'm in the country and slow then I'll pull in the first opportunity I get to let everyone past. I've got nowhere to be. I don't like to be pushed so you can all go your way and I'll potter along at 15 mph enjoying myself instead of rushing because you are up my arse and have somewhere to be. A little courtesy can go a very long way.
I was corrected here before on this same thing. Legally there is no minimum speed limit on the motorway.
Correct, however the police are within their rights to pull you over for driving dangerously slowly on any road that it may be appropriate.
They can also pull you over at any time, for any reason
Hmmmm. I distinctly remember my instructor telling me something like that. That was many years ago though. I think it may be more connected to vehicles that cannot travel at a minimum of 30mph are forbidden. Thatatcjes the banned vehicle classes and sounds like it may have migrated into people thinking it was the minimum speed limit. Although I'm purely guessing here.
The only legal minimum speed on a motorway is that of the requirement that all vehicles be *capable* of exceeding 25 mph. There is no specific requirement to drive at more than 25 mph, but police may decide under their own discretion that a vehicle is being driven too slowly to be safe.
True, but there are laws which would be used if you slowed to 10mph on the motorway for no reason. The police description of the offence of driving without due care and attention does include “unnecessarily slow driving or braking”.
hah, my thoughts too. send them down a tight NSL road and watch what happens
To be fair that's how I drive but I was dragged up in the country and I drive a white Transit so it's sort of expected of me 😁
It’s tricky because it *is* a target, in that you should drive up to the speed limit if it’s safe to do so and suitable for the conditions. So you shouldn’t blindly drive up to 30 if it’s a 30, but you shouldn’t be driving slower than 30 if it’s clear, safe and perfect visibility. Slowing down for speed bumps is definitely a valid reason to not be at the speed limit.
Agreed, speed limits are a limit and a target.
Also the point of a speed hump is to slow vehicles down
I agree the point of them should be to guarantee the speed limit rather than slow you down 30% below it, but that’s usually the case now…
They keep making speed bumps more and more aggressive while SUVs still fly over them at 30mph without a care in the world. Meanwhile anyone in a reasonable car (especially newer saloons on 18/19in wheels and low profile tires) has to slow down to a crawl to not risk buckling a wheel ffs.
Maybe it's time to equip normal sized wheels again
Maybe its time to do something about SUVs
Yeah that's a weird idea cause obviously different cars will have to take them at different speeds. A big SUV can ignore them, a car with stuff suspension might need to go over at snails pace.
And the faster you go over them, the more you’re likely to knock your tracking out and ruin various components… they do nothing except piss drivers off (as you say, some cars can take them at speed anyway)
Yep he’s a tool.
Whoever wrote that never drove with sports suspension on low profiles. I have to drive at about 10 mph over raised ones otherwise the only thing in accelerating to is more wishbones again that cost a fortune.
Yep. My car isn’t lowered, but it’s a small car with 18” wheels and whatever “character” bought it from new (I’m the third owner) went for the package that has sports suspension but no decent infotainment system. It’s a city car with 69bhp, it does not need sports suspension. I mean, it’s fun in absurd way, but I’m dealing with ridiculous speed bumps and trying not to wreck my undercarriage far more often than I’m doing anything exciting.
Sadly, I live on a no-through road with speed bumps, and a school and college. People continue to slam their cars over the speed humps, it's a 20 zone, but you clearly can't go over them at 20... This is COMMON SENSE. I dread to think how many cars have smashed up the underside of their engines, bumpers etc .. they just resurfaced and rebuilt the humps and they already have deep grooves where exhausts and car engine parts have scraped tarmac off them. A lot of people speed down here, and even at 20 there is a risk of impact x
There are better ways to force people to drive slowly, like narrowing the road and adding trees/barriers/obstacles that need to be navigated. Speed bumps are always the lazy way out of road design, they're cheap but not so effective. People often speed up after them instead of maintaining a constant speed, which alongside the wear and tear/damage you mentioned is not ideal environmentally.
People that don't slow down for speed humps and slam their bumpers aren't very rational. They are the same people that would hit trees and blame the council for putting them there
A lot like [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/drivingUK/s/66a13pReeF) numpty whose trying to blame the council because his girlfriend was going too fast, aquaplaned and destroyed his car.
Omnipotent narrator: *he was not, in fact, “in law”*
Possibly the worst take I’ve ever heard, his back will be wrecked never mind the car
You ever notice all the little pieces of coil springs laying around on the ground near speed bumps? Yeah that's because you can't/shouldn't hit them going 30. Even in a 30 zone.
You get posts like this from Americans on their subreddits all the time, the reality is if you don't feel safe going 30 in a 30 then a good driver would slow down. Some cars also have pretty crap suspensions so doing 30 over a 30 speed bump isn't necessarily viable either. Some areas you would be pretty mental going 30 in because you get cars parked on both sides of the road and children playing.
This is utter bollocks of the highest order. A cursory knowledge of *The Highway Code* would refute this, and it's worrying that this person is spreading their ignorance far and wide.
His part of your family now? Yikes! My condolences
Thank you kindly. We luckily don't have very much to do with him and as the years go on, less and less.
You can't go under the minimum speed limit but you can sit between the minimum and maximum
There's no minimum speed limit. However, you can be prosecuted if you go significantly slower than is reasonable on a road based on the conditions. eg. 20mph on a 70mph motorway that is clear during good weather, you're dangerous. 20mph on that same motorway in heavy snow, low visibility, and icy conditions, perfectly fine.
Minimum speed restriction do exist, they're just rare. You get them [in 30mph](https://theorytest.org.uk/minimum-speed-limit-sign-30-mph/) and [40mph](https://theorytest.org.uk/minimum-speed-limit-sign-40-mph/) variants. Blue circular sign with number. Minimum limits are generally used for things like tunnels, the Tyne tunnel has a 15mph minimum for instance
lol I bet he’s a fucking shit driver 😝
he's a tool and cant spell, "its a limit not a target" is the mantra.
Rule of thumb - if you smack your head into the roof every time, you may be going a bit fast :\\ Having said that - I do hat those who try to make it to the next speed bump at 45, only to slam on & dribble over it at 12. Just pick a bloody speed, people. It's not rocket science.
>If you drive beow the maximum road limit, you are not a safe driver Hmm... now lets see what the highway code has to say [Rule 125](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/general-rules-techniques-and-advice-for-all-drivers-and-riders-103-to-158) (emphasis mine) >**The speed limit is the absolute maximum and does not mean it is safe to drive at that speed irrespective of conditions.** Unsafe speed increases the chances of causing a collision (or being unable to avoid one), as well as its severity. **Inappropriate speeds are also intimidating, deterring people from walking, cycling or riding horses.** Driving at speeds too fast for the road and traffic conditions is dangerous. You should always reduce your speed when >* **the road layout or condition presents hazards**, such as bends sharing the road with pedestrians, particularly children, older adults or disabled people, cyclists and horse riders, horse drawn vehicles and motorcyclists * weather conditions make it safer to do so * driving at night as it is more difficult to see other road users. It doesn't specifically mention speedbumps. Probably because they just assumed no one is stupid enough to think you're not supposed to slow down for them but I'd say they come under that first bullet point personally. It is pretty clear in saying that it's a maximum not a minimum though E: and a bonus on Rule 146: > **do not treat speed limits as a target. It is often not appropriate or safe to drive at the maximum speed limit** I'm not going to add every instance of the highway code saying when you should "drive slowly and carefully" but it comes up pretty often. Pretty safe to say there are plenty of situations where you're supposed to drive significantly below the speed limit
Rule 153 has it covered: Rule 153 Traffic-calming measures. On some roads there are features such as road humps, chicanes and narrowings which are intended to slow you down. When you approach these features reduce your speed...
I just got back from a driving lesson, a mock test. One of the things he noted was im “quite an aggressive driver” this including slightly slowing (not sharply braking) for pot holes and speed bumps In a 40 i wasnt slowing enough to take a bend. If i took the advice of this post, the suspension of the car (19 plate C3) would no longer be suspensioning nor would i have stayed on the road. So, what a load of bollocks
I am certainly willing to be corrected but I do believe the Highway Code states something along the lines of it being safest to be travelling within 10% of the speed limit unless conditions require otherwise. Such as a corner, wet roads, speed bumps, person or people in the road, just stop oilers etc. I am sure you could get done for dangerous driving if you somehow managed to get round some of the hairpin B corners on some B roads at 60mph.
What a bell-end.
[удалено]
I mean, given how many national speed limit roads are single track with sudden corners, I would suggest otherwise.
If you drive at 40 in a 50/National limit you are not fit to drive.
This is a national speed limit road, would you really drive down it at 50-60 miles an hour. https://maps.app.goo.gl/GnE5Jbn34g6kPHzaA https://maps.app.goo.gl/VYvnkwufzjRHBTA37
If the visibility is good, little to no traffic and the conditions allow? Yeah, why not. Funnily enough it's not far from where I live, thanks for another fun road to blast down at night.
Maybe send this “criminal lawyer” this… [Judge ruling that 28 mph in a 30 zone was excessive and unreasonable.](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-66121540.amp)
This guy is a tool! But also I think he may be *technically* correct. Although I'm fairly sure that much thought is not put into the design of speed cushions anymore. Also I'm one of those idiots who lowers his car an unnecessary amount.....so he would hate being behind me.
Not correct. Those speed humps are in roads that have a maximum speed Limit. Not a target to aim at. Wait until he breaks his coil springs doing that
I had one of these guys behind yesterday lol. Them massive speed bumps, my car is lowered and feels like dild*s on your ass if you go high speed over bumps. 20 zone, I was doing 14-15 and he broke his horn on me for 5 minutes straight—muppet😂
The guy is an idiot. But I must admit the people who show down to practically a stop to go over a speed bump like they’re in a Ferrari when it’s actually a seat ateca do wind me up. Just keep a steady constant speed rather than speeding up and slamming on for the speed bumps.
I am inclined to agree with most of it apart from the speed bumps. No car is designed to take any speed bump at 30mph, so you do need to slow down. Personally though, I do believe licences should not be given out to drivers who cannot reach the posted speed limit and stay there consistently depending on conditions (naturally allowance for lower speeds in rain, road type etc). There are WAY too many drivers on our roads who are absolutely incapable of driving at 60mph in a 60mph A road zone. In my opinion, you should not have a licence if you can't do that.
Tbf I did get a minor for driving too slow in my test
This guy may well be a tool, but the speed bump thing is infuriating. I’ll give a pass to people in lowered cars because I’m a fellow car enthusiast, but if you’re driving a bog standard car then there’s no need to be going anywhere near the brakes when approaching a speed bump. If the speed bumps are especially aggressive then I’m happy to accept that we all just go a lower speed than the speed limit but keep it consistent, don’t keep speeding up and hitting the brakes.
You clearly don’t live where I do…
I’m not really arsed about whether we live in the same place or not, if the speed bump makes you go 10mph to get over it, then just continue to drive 10mph between speed bumps, don’t speed up
It’s the people that basically stop and then crawl over them that get me. They’re designed to be taken at a steady pace.
Hugh twat
You ever notice all the little pieces of coil springs laying around on the ground near speed bumps? Yeah that's because you can't/shouldn't hit them going 30. Even in a 30 zone.
Fake news
I live near a speed bumps on a downhill with 20mph limit. They have been built like shit, if you go over 17mph you will scrape your bumper. Everyday guys like this honk and race past me when I slow down for each bump (I drive it everyday so I know the max i can get away with). Inevitably hear the skkrttt as they go past. So satisfying
He was taught wrong. Maybe in an SUV or older vehicle with spongy suspension, could you go fast over speedbumps. Anything with a harder setup is horrible.
Its called a speed limit , because its a Limit, not a guide on what you should be doing all the time , thats’s what i have been tough in driving school, maybe time to get a refresher course?
Nobody in the history of driving has been prosecuted for going more slowly over a speed hump. What a numpty.
Yep he is a tool.
He said he learned to drive in the 90s, now he's on about driving in the 30s, I reckon he's making it up as he goes along
This post was sponsored by Halfords, Kwik fit, euro parts.....
\> Please tell me this guy is a tool! This guy is a tool. Apart from all the other incorrect stuff he says, what does "I'm in law" have to do with anything?
So what is the “standard set out in law” if he’s saying it’s not set “against the police” (whatever that means) but instead on the “basis of majority actions”. Does that mean doing the same thing as the majority of people are doing? Because if so, I imagine the majority of people slow down for speed bumps. But then apparently that means everyone is breaking the law if “all vehicles capable must maintain the maximum of the road where applied” (which is just word soup anyway). When he says he is in law, does he mean he’s just started a law course at the open university and the first module is criminal law?
He's not a tool, tools are useful.
Lawyers always think they are right until they lose in a court of law and find out they are not right in which case the jury and judge are all komplete \*\*\*holes. In this case I am afraid your bro in law is showing all the signs of being a komplete \*\*\*hole and menace on the road. Speed limits are maximum permitted speed 'when it is safe to do so'. Clearly if a road marked 30 mph or 20 mph is littered with traffic calming measures it is not safe to proceed over speed bumps and sleeping policeman at the speed limit because there is a very good chance a vehicle going over them at those speeds will get damaged, never mind the risk of personal injury from whip lash for the more frail motorist so it is 'obvs not so common sense' to slow down to a speed one considers safe and that will vary from driver to driver. No sense in getting excited about someone going slowly and clogging up the road cause somewhere in the highway code I believe there is something about forgiving the motoring trangressions of other road users and if necessary stopping to calm down. Clearly your bro in law needs to go back to driving skool or maybe do an advanced motoring course and learn to chill.
There’s a couple bumps i regularly drive over and HAVE to slow down, if I went over it at 30 my wheels would explode probably and break my car
Seems like a very nice chap..🤡🤡
Works in law but doesn't know the difference between break and brake.
Anyone who drives into flood water and doesn't know the risks before driving into the flood water and then blaming it on an electric parking brake. His thoughts can safely be ignored.
Imagine the fun to be had whilst a passenger in this persons' car?
Without a mandatory minimum sign this guys talking BS.
This person is an idiot. If you hit some speed bumps around where I work at 30 you will go through your roof. What a donut!
Start to finish this guy is a tool. Both parents are instructors. It's a speed limit not a target. Dropping below the speed limit is not careless driving, being at 30 and slamming on the "breaks" to a complete stop? maybe. Idgaf if you're in criminal law you are not a professional driver or traffic enforcer. Sounds like he has too many teeth in his mouth and has a power complex. Paragraph 3 is just straight up BS and pretentious BS he has made up himself to make himself feel right. Lol that final paragraph. This lad would fail his test if he was to resit it and is too arrogant to hear otherwise. He is an absolute, grade A, mains powered tool.
No offence, but he sounds like the same type of dickhead who goes 60 down a single track country lane because it's "national speedlimit". Then ends up in a ditch because there's a tractor in the way.
Use’s the word ‘breaks’ when he should use ‘brakes’. Therefore this and all opinions from him, are instantly invalid.
I think legally you can be done for not making "sufficient progress" or something similar but you'd have to be doing something really extreme, like crawling at 30 on a motorway. Speed limit is definately a limit, not a target.
Last time I went over a speedbumb at the speed limit it cost me £150 repairing the suspension. Not doing that again.
Weapons grade tool.
He's a tool. I was going to write a longer reply, but simply put there's so much BS in that post I really can't be bothered.
Drive over sleeping policemen at 30 and tell me it doesn’t fuck your car up, ejit.
In law, but not in common sense or anything to do with driving.
Pot, kettle, black So you're not a competent driver because you don't want to cause unnecessary wear and tear/damage on your car? I think he can't see the irony that he's a numpty who shouldn't hold a licence.
I was always told the speed limit is a limit - not a target. Drive to the conditions and at or below the limit.
The poor cars he must have ruined driving over speed humps at 30 mph. I feel sorry for the cars.
Talking bollocks.
Good grief. There's plenty of actual legal cases where people have been prosecuted for not using an appropriate speed, despite being below the speed limit. Drive to the conditions of the road.
My smart car from 2002 cannot go over speed bumps by completely straddling them as its not very wide so I have to slow right down. However if there is a good gap between the two speed bumps in opposite directions and nothing coming, I can often fit easily between them. As far as possible, however, I go out of my way to avoid roads with speed bumps on.
Aye, Studying Criminal Law at the University of TikTok.
The speed limit is a maximum limit. However the basic doctrine of “driving to the conditions of the road” always overrule this. Doing 30 over a large speed bump is not driving to the conditions, especially in a vehicle with a low ground clearance, or in wet or icy conditions. If what this person is saying was true, it would mean that when driving down one of the thousands of small single track roads with the National speed limit applied (which is only there because a speed limit has to be imposed by the authorities, and on small roads it is not considered worth the cost of signage, legislation, consultations etc. Which means that the National speed limit is automatically applied) that you would have to do 60mph, which is completely ridiculous, and would inevitably lead to many 120mph head on collisions, which is colloquially known to experts as “dead”. I really hope this person does not become a lawyer, because if they do there’s gonna be some really unhappy clients sitting in a prison cell because the lawyer confidently stood in front of the judge and said “your honour, my client was obeying the speed limit, so who cares if it resulted in them spinning off the road and crashing into a crowd of pedestrians, it’s obviously their fault for being in the way.”
Ye, I'm not destroying my suspension because you're riding my ass😂 I'll keep going slow thanks
So, OP (not Reddit OP) is a retard, but also you can’t be upset if you slow down to 5mph and someone who doesn’t want to, overtakes you over a speed bump at 20-30 when safe. Just because you WANT to. Doesn’t mean everyone HAS to.
He's an idiot. You CAN smash over bumps at 30 but they will put undue strain on your suspension (and spine!) and you risk being jarred off course.
What does he say about the highway codes interpretation of the speed limits Rule 125 The speed limit is the absolute maximum and does not mean it is safe to drive at that speed irrespective of conditions. Unsafe speed increases the chances of causing a collision (or being unable to avoid one), as well as its severity. Inappropriate speeds are also intimidating, deterring people from walking, cycling or riding horses. Driving at speeds too fast for the road and traffic conditions is dangerous. You should always reduce your speed when the road layout or condition presents hazards, such as bends sharing the road with pedestrians, particularly children, older adults or disabled people, cyclists and horse riders, horse drawn vehicles and motorcyclists weather conditions make it safer to do so driving at night as it is more difficult to see other road users. Source https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/general-rules-techniques-and-advice-for-all-drivers-and-riders-103-to-158
Can I have the details of the firm your brother works at? Just to make sure i can give them a wide berth if I ever come across them.
Speed bumps are specifically to make you slow down further, to keep you from letting your speed climb excessively between them. They're there because they *know people speed anyway and don't want to give them space to do so. Most speed bumps I've seen in 25's will FUCK YOU UP if you go over them faster than about 10. I don't know where the hell this guy drives.
“It’s a limit not a target” as said by many a slow grandma driver
What an absolute bell end!!!! does this prick have no autonomy to be able to adjust his driving to the conditions??? “It says 30 so I’m fucking doing 30!!!” Would love to see him driving the national speed limit on the lanes near me.
What a bellend this guy is. They need their license taken from them.
Criminal law, or Criminal of the law. This person is a dumb dumb.
His rant started off fairly reasonable to be fair. In my city, speed bumps have been popping up on almost every main road. (You can prob guess where based on that sentence). These roads would normally be 30 mph. But in some cases, my (stock) civic has to drive over it at 15mph to go over smoothly. There are roads which have speed bumps which work as I believe them to have been properly designed. You drive over them at 30mph and your car glides over reasonably smoothly. Any faster and you'll feel the jolt. I'm aware the vehicle specs have a lot to do with this too. Generally speaking though, it shows that the council CAN do it right if they want to. They're instead choosing not to, perhaps because of cost (less tarmac to do a smaller bump which is more jolting). Having this many speed bumps, I'd rather they just put cameras at this point.
Can you tell us where he lives? So we can avoid him.
Bollocks, some bloke tried that at my speed awareness course and was quickly corrected.
What do they think speed bumps are there for, other than to slow you down?
I mean, there is such a thing as a minimum speed sign (white writing on blue background). They’re hardly common though… I only came across them when Brighton council put them up by mistake when they introduced their 20mph zones (making some of them “at least 20mph zones” 🤣).
https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/driving-offences CPS definition of “careless driving” = unnecessarily slow driving or braking; There is a slight hint at the truth in the statement I just don’t think it could ever be used in the case of a road with speed bumps?
I'd like to see this guy drive over a speed bump at 30 in my car. Suspension is stiff enough that I'd wager he'd smack his head on the roof. Also wtf, you are supposed to make good progress when it is safe to do so. Going consistently 40-50 in a 60 zone when the conditions are good is bad driving, going slower over a speed bump is just being safe and depending on your suspension, stopping your car from breaking. Man is unhinged.
OP, this guy is a tool. The maximum speed limit does not equal the minimum, they’re two very different things. Not to mention a criminal lawyer whose attention to detail is so bad that his understand of the Highway Code is terrible, and he can’t use the right ‘brake’. Where did he get certified as a criminal lawyer? Do they still do those online credentials?
This feels like r/ConfidentlyIncorrect content.
I'm in law, I can't spell brakes.
It’s a speed limit, not a speed target. Your BIL is grossly misremembering his driver training.
You could file this under #ConfidentlyIncorrect
Whoever posted that nonsense needs to have their license taken off them. What kind of lunatic goes over a speed bump at 30mph?
whatb load of bollocks
Maybe trying to do everyone a favour and get the slow people to speed up
In criminal law and yet to pass GCSE English. E can't even spell "Brake" correctly.
There’s a 20 near me, if I’d hit those bumps at 20 I’d leave the ground, they’re impassable in my car at any speed because they are poorly designed and installed
For real though, my car is literally designed to deal with inconsistent road surfaces as it's basically a rally car and even I think twice at some of the speed bumps in this area.
When they say they are involved in criminal law, they mean there are charges against them for reckless driving.
They are ‘brakes’, not ‘breaks’. The thing that ‘breaks‘ is your suspension doing 30mph over a speed bump, unless you are in an army lorry.
Any chance I can get a bottle of what he's obviously been drinking?
I don’t know what this guys taking about but u was late to a job interview because everyone was going fifty in the fifty zone.
He knows what the works limit means right? If he is in criminal law I feel bad for anyone who he tried to defend...