<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Speeders insurance rises</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.motordefenceteam.co.uk/blog/2010/01/speeders-insurance-rises/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.motordefenceteam.co.uk/blog/2010/01/speeders-insurance-rises/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2012 08:32:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken Lines</title>
		<link>http://www.motordefenceteam.co.uk/blog/2010/01/speeders-insurance-rises/comment-page-1/#comment-469</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken Lines</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Apr 2010 17:07:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.motordefenceteam.co.uk/blog/?p=465#comment-469</guid>
		<description>In the majority of cases so called &#039;speeders&#039; are guilty of nothing more or less than exceeding a purely arbitrarily set speed limit.  The majority of the limits bear no relationship to any risk or danger.  I fail to see how any &#039;conviction&#039; for speeding, on its own, can justify an increase in insurance premium.  Many years ago, when I first started to ride bikes, there was no national limit.  We bought our bikes, we modified them and tuned them and three figure speeds were common, I was once waved past by a police driver who, himself, was already travelling at 100mph.  Then the law changed and the 70mph limit appeared applicable even on motorways which had been designed for sustained 120mph cruising.  Overnight speeds of well into three figures, which the day before were normal, frequently achieved and LEGAL suddenly became &#039;reckless&#039;, &#039;dangerous&#039; &#039;suicidal&#039; etc.  No one will ever convince me that the introduction of the current artificially low, arbitrarily decided NSL is anything other than just another devious way of raising money for an overstretched government.

Ken.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the majority of cases so called &#8216;speeders&#8217; are guilty of nothing more or less than exceeding a purely arbitrarily set speed limit.  The majority of the limits bear no relationship to any risk or danger.  I fail to see how any &#8216;conviction&#8217; for speeding, on its own, can justify an increase in insurance premium.  Many years ago, when I first started to ride bikes, there was no national limit.  We bought our bikes, we modified them and tuned them and three figure speeds were common, I was once waved past by a police driver who, himself, was already travelling at 100mph.  Then the law changed and the 70mph limit appeared applicable even on motorways which had been designed for sustained 120mph cruising.  Overnight speeds of well into three figures, which the day before were normal, frequently achieved and LEGAL suddenly became &#8216;reckless&#8217;, &#8216;dangerous&#8217; &#8216;suicidal&#8217; etc.  No one will ever convince me that the introduction of the current artificially low, arbitrarily decided NSL is anything other than just another devious way of raising money for an overstretched government.</p>
<p>Ken.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

