at the risk of going off topic a little...

just a question:::

should I be tempted to drive during my ban what is the likelyhood of being caught?

Do the Police and border points have direct computer access to a 'ban list'?

...all theoretical I assure you...

I personally wouldn't risk it - the police have a habit of doing random stops to check license, registration, abgas etc. I must have been stopped six or seven times this way in the last three or four years.

It's been ages since I was stopped but there was one weird period when I got pulled three times in about four weeks. All in Canton Argau. Seems like the police have a training college there and they like to get their trainees out to practice traffic checks.


I don't know what the penalty for driving without license is but I would hazard a guess that it's pretty severe and almost certainly a criminal offence.


Gav

My suggestion is don't. You might have luck, but you only need some other idiot to bring you unstuck, eg. A random check or an accident that might not even be your fault. Think worst case scenario.

Having said that, I know of people that have been caught only after 20 years. That is because they drove always a nice car, seatbelt on, stopped at every red light and drove at the speed limit.

Assume police here have access to all your information.

the Fuzz had a funky system in the Pigmobile which printed off the whole summary of my offence. No reliance on corroboration and regular speedos







Although I could not see what kind of shreddies they were wearing

I would like to add to my own thread to state that the temporary cameras in roadworks must have *something* to capture plates from bikes.

As I recently received yet another donut tax demand .... ironically timed 57 minutes after my missus went through the same temporary camera at 1kph faster than me

LOL....

Umm, I might encounter the wrath of the Forum here, but I don't see any point bitchin' over speeding fines.

I recognise speed alone doesn't kill - it's dangerous driving that's the problem. However, I've attended the scene of too many fatal RTAs to find the principle of 'Speed Limits' an issue worth discussing.

Limits are there for a reason. Reaction times of those around you also have to be considered.

Over-zealous policing has its inherent dangers and frustrations but you're not going to beat The System on this matter.

There's nothing - absolutely nothing - more 'sobering' than causing a fatal accident.

Don't want to rain on the parade

Hi Uncle Max,

I don't disagree with you that speed is a contributing factor in accidents. I think we all have a couple of objections though:

* Continually getting fined for 1 Km/h over the limit in a 50 zone is doing nothing for road safety.

* Cameras are not placed in areas which are unsafe, they are placed to maximise revenue. There are many places where the 50 limit is too slow, and it is perfectly safe to travel at 60. If the intent really was to slow drivers in an accident zone the camera would be obvious, with signs before it and not hidden.

* Speed is not the only cause of accidents - lack of seatbelts and alcohol are major factors. These factors are hardly addressed in Switzerland at all.

It seems they simply take the easy route with the cameras and make a lot of money with it. If road saftey really was a priority they would put a lot more effort into education (which is pretty much non-existant) and to target ALL aspects of road safety.

So in short, I don't disagree with your sentiments, but I don't entirely agree with them either.

(A smug bicycle rider replies...) I find the attitude of immunity concerning drink-driving here appalling, but I don't think this thread is about improving education: it appears mainly to be bitchin' about speeding fines.

Which is dumb. D-U-M-B. Drive under the limit - not 1 or 2 kph over - and you won't get fined. That's it!

(Putting on Flame retardent helmet... )

Troll alert.....

I don't think any of us race around trying to dodge the cameras. I for one don't try to drive over the limit, but sometimes it is possible that you get caught 1 or 2kph over the limit and I don't think this does anything except to make the state richer.

I think it would be far safer to keep one's eyes on the road instead of constantly glued to the speedo. I find 50 as the general limit inside an entire town a bit low. Every street is not the same. Some should be less than 50, some more. I support LIMITED use of 30 zones, but not the widespread use that seems to be happening in my area. In one common route I have to drive I have to drive for 10 minutes down a long straight road. The entire road is a 30 zone!

Don't get me wrong, I consider myself a safe driver and don't generally intentionally break the speed limits. I just think that the use of speed cameras here is excessive and has little effect on safety. In some places in Zurich there are 3 in a row! Yes of course it is dumb to speed, but when the tolerance is so low, people get caught. We are only human after all.

The only way to be really safe is pretend that the speed limit is 40 - and I'm not going to do that...

I have to agree with Mark here. Every speeding fine I have had has been for 1-2 km over the limit. I don't habitually speed, especially in towns, and all this does is piss me off that the tolerance is so low. I also beleive that the camera's are placed to make money rather than improve road saftey, there are a couple of accident black spots near where I live but not a camera in sight but on a long straight road with good visability cameras in abundance.

As for driving under the limit, that's just an invite for people to tailgate to try and make you go faster. Hardly a safer option!

speed does NOT kill. Innappropriate speed kills.

So do, for example, SMART cars who change lane without looking.

The complaints are actually about positioning of cameras in order simply to raise money for the donut fund. If speed was a real, real danger then surely they'd introduce a points system and take away licences after so many "contributions"?

PS: I don't speed in 50s at all. I think of the kittens.

The only time I really speed is on the highway. 150kph on a clear motorway with no other traffic is hardly doing anyone harm now is it? Or, for example, when I cross at Basel from Germany having done 250kph down that stretch - do I become suddenly more dangerous in Cloud Cuckoo Land?

Good points Lob. Unfortunately I had a mouthful of coffee when I got to the kittens part

sorry, I'll email you a new keyboard

Sorry, gotta weigh in on this one.

As someone who spent more than 10 years working in the area of road safety/enforcement, IMHO Switzerland has its road safety education and enforcement strategy completely wrong.

Problem #1. Drink Driving here is still way too socially acceptable, and enforcement is minimal. Random breath testing should be higher profile and intelligence driven.

Problem #2. Occupant restraints and helmets. Helmets are not so bad (except bicycles), but in low-speed areas seatbelt compliance is appalling. Even at 30km/h chances of serious injury or death in a collision are high when not buckled in. Again, enforcement is minimal.

Problem #3. Speed enforcement appears, if not is, geared to revenue. Static cameras, high traffic volume, and a speed limit set way below the 85% percentile (usual method of determining a speed limit). Kanton Zürich have mastered this practice.

Speeding over the limit is not dangerous, speeding for the conditions is. ie in some conditions the signposted speed is too fast. And I always have to laugh when the media used to report serious accidents and state that "speed was a factor". Sure it was. If all vehicles were stationary nothing would have happened.

I am more worried about the driver with his/her eyes glued to the speedometer than the one scanning whats in front of him/her.

Oh, and I only brake for humans...

ah yes, Litespeed, you touch on the Human Missile Mini-Mes that we often see stood between two loving parents in the car?

That's true love, preparing your loved child for a potential trip through your windshield!

Indeed. I would challenge any parent to let their child play a starring role in a Myth Busters experiment .

As far as helmets go, I have trashed two bicycles helmets since being here, the worst being when a crank arm snapped on my roadie whilst out of the saddle. If I didn't have a helmet then I think I would have had serious head injuries.

Glad to see I'm not the only one who has noted the high number of unrestrained children in cars. I think I've seen more better restrained dogs than children here....

Another interesting point - it's only in the last couple of years that it became law that child restraints must be fitted. Previously if you didn't have a suitable solution, like no child restraint (seatbelts not suitable for small kids) then you could legally let them run around in the back. The law has changed now, but as you've seen there isn't much in the way of education or enforcement being done.

I followed a Mercedes yesterday with dog perched perfectly in the position usually reserved for the child

i know a few people who have 'Gaydar' ..... does that count?