Drivers and their problems

It does, doesn't it?

Were they aiming for a big flat open field, or did they misjudge how wide the road was?

Utter muppets

A bit harsh! How can drivers be expected to know that fog, sunshine, rain, dark etc. should modify their usual 'foot down and accelerate out of trouble' practice.

hawkinspeter wrote:

It's a veritable war on parkers, don't you know!

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/cameras-plan-catch-parents-parking-9764409

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/cameras-installed-outside-bristol-schools-9777626

Bristol city councillors voted unanimously in favour of the trial

David9694 wrote:

Joey Baptiste pleads guilty over Ferrari crash in Norwich

Baptiste, 41, from Catkin Close, Cringleford, had previously denied driving without due care and attention, claiming the car had suffered a "mechanical failure".

But he changed his plea to guilty yesterday, with his lawyer telling the court the Baptiste had "lost communication" with Mr Mendham (the vehicle's owner who let JB drive as he was "unwell") , so the vehicle could not be tested. She said that moments before the crash Baptiste had accidentally hit the accelerator when trying to break [sic].

She added that "witnesses think that he was speeding because the car has a loud engine," before her client whispered it was a "4.7 V8 litre engine".

Miss Buck said that Baptiste had received four points on his driving licence for an unrelated speeding incident which happened since the Ferrari crash. The magistrates in Yarmouth indicated they intended to issue him with at least another seven points for the Rose Lane smash.

Before they sentenced him, Miss Buck requested an "exceptional hardship application" be lodged, claiming that Baptiste required his full driving licence to do his job as a ground worker. She added that he has a son who lives in Fakenham and requires his driving licence to pick him up at the weekends.

As he left court after the hearing, Baptiste unleashed an expletive-filled tirade at our reporter, who asked if he wished to comment on the case.

Baptiste said he would throw him and his telephone into the nearby river if he took a photo of him. Court security guards came out of the building to soothe tempers and Baptiste was ushered back into the building by the guards and his solicitor.

https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/24831593.joey-baptiste-pleads-guilty-ferrar...

Sounds like a lovely bloke. I wonder why he didn't want his photo taken, when it was already published when he was found not guilty of sexual assault and GBH back in July (https://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/24474225.joey-baptiste-found-not-guilty-peterborough-crown-court/)

brooksby wrote:

It does, doesn't it?

Were they aiming for a big flat open field, or did they misjudge how wide the road was?

I think they were aiming to stay in the air a bit longer. A witness said that it "looked like it stalled and nose-dived into the main road".

Still, any landing that you can walk away from is a good landing.

hawkinspeter wrote:

David9694 wrote:

Joey Baptiste pleads guilty over Ferrari crash in Norwich

Baptiste, 41, from Catkin Close, Cringleford, had previously denied driving without due care and attention, claiming the car had suffered a "mechanical failure".

But he changed his plea to guilty yesterday, with his lawyer telling the court the Baptiste had "lost communication" with Mr Mendham (the vehicle's owner who let JB drive as he was "unwell") , so the vehicle could not be tested. She said that moments before the crash Baptiste had accidentally hit the accelerator when trying to break [sic].

She added that "witnesses think that he was speeding because the car has a loud engine," before her client whispered it was a "4.7 V8 litre engine".

Miss Buck said that Baptiste had received four points on his driving licence for an unrelated speeding incident which happened since the Ferrari crash. The magistrates in Yarmouth indicated they intended to issue him with at least another seven points for the Rose Lane smash.

Before they sentenced him, Miss Buck requested an "exceptional hardship application" be lodged, claiming that Baptiste required his full driving licence to do his job as a ground worker. She added that he has a son who lives in Fakenham and requires his driving licence to pick him up at the weekends.

As he left court after the hearing, Baptiste unleashed an expletive-filled tirade at our reporter, who asked if he wished to comment on the case.

Baptiste said he would throw him and his telephone into the nearby river if he took a photo of him. Court security guards came out of the building to soothe tempers and Baptiste was ushered back into the building by the guards and his solicitor.

https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/24831593.joey-baptiste-pleads-guilty-ferrar...

Sounds like a lovely bloke. I wonder why he didn't want his photo taken, when it was already published when he was found not guilty of sexual assault and GBH back in July (https://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/24474225.joey-baptiste-found-not-guilty-peterborough-crown-court/)

Lovely bloke indeed. He didn't have his photo taken when he was found guilty of coercively controlling his ex-girlfriend though. https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/20638501.man-guilty-causing-ex-severe...

hawkinspeter wrote:

(That pic looks like it's photoshopped)

Live-action Wacky Races?

Netley Abbey isn't really just around the corner from that Tesco.

David9694 wrote:

RAC head of policy Simon Williams …

Are you sure you didn't read this story on Newsthump?

So if I've got this right, it's OK to park a load of cars ...

Of course! Otherwise there would be no way at all for people to visit the coast- won't somebody think of the disabled and blind drivers?

You'd be boiling over with uncontrolled anger too if that was how someone summed your life up.

mdavidford wrote:

You'd be boiling over with uncontrolled anger too if that was how someone summed your life up.

Inaccurate count of ferrets? They were actually weasels?

Stoataly different...

ktache wrote:

Stoataly different...

That kind of mistake is weasely made

It mustelid to a lot of frustration though.

Hirsute wrote:

OK, now I'm really worried !!

"I’m a neuroscientist who taught rats to drive."

Get "rats for LTNs and modal filters" founded immediately or we're doomed!

David9694 wrote:

Cornwall planning: Desperate race against time to fight 'predatory' parking proposal at beach beauty spot

A planning inspector has overturned Cornwall Council's refusal of a hated car park plan and now angry residents need serious help

So if I've got this right, it's OK to park a load of cars ("The site falls within the Cornwall National Landscape, the Heritage Coast and part of the northern boundary of the car park is formed by the two Grade II listed lime kiln structures") erect a crappy home made sign, but not to have a camera on a pole because it "would represent alien and visually intrusive man-made features which would fail to conserve or enhance the landscape character and scenic beauty"?

Those who are against the parking equipment being installed are now in a fight against time to oppose the appeal approval in the High Court.

"Do we have any philanthropic friends who would like to leave a legacy of keeping this part of the world unspoilt, friendly and accessible to the community? We have identified a barrister but are unable to take things further without financial support."

https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/cornwall-planning-desper...

How about the landowner signs it over to the council and says, "There you go - you deal with it!"? I wonder how quickly the councils objections to a camera etc would evaporate?

"had mental health issues and a "deficiency in thinking skills"."
Perhaps best if he doesn't drive again.

chrisonabike wrote:

Hirsute wrote:

OK, now I'm really worried !!

"I’m a neuroscientist who taught rats to drive."

Get "rats for LTNs and modal filters" founded immediately or we're doomed!

Low Tabby Neighbourhoods?

Hirsute wrote:

"had mental health issues and a "deficiency in thinking skills"."
Perhaps best if he doesn't drive again.

"Shurely blatant discrimination", said his counsel, "and we all know that those branded 'normal' or mentally competent are very well represented amongst those convicted for these offenses..."

Personally I'm happy with being a lot more restrictive about those who get to drive - BUT without us providing alternatives to driving the charge of unfairness has to be addressed...