Safe Speed Forums

I'm sure this will strike a chord with many of us:

http://www.wintonsworld.com/news/opinio ... meset.html

Stop Speed Camera Injustice in 2005
Add Context, End Points For Minor Transgressions
Memo to Tories – Offer Amnesty For Unjust Points, Win Election
Why Can’t Our Yobbos Do Something Useful – Necklace A Camera

“for a speeding offence to attract points, it would need to be egregious and witnessed by a policeman”

Speed cameras produce arbitrary and counterproductive results, and criminalise careful motorists who can't believe they are running foul of the law.

Two of my friends, both slow and careful drivers, have twice been “caught” by speed cameras. This is because the cameras are often placed where logic doesn't insist that drivers slow down, where there is absolutely no safety danger. And the penalties - points on licenses - are over the top and often bear no relationship to the seriousness of the "offence".

Here is a chance for the Tories to do something that could win them the next general election – offer to shakeup the speed camera system, introduce technology that works, and offer an amnesty to those who have been unfairly awarded points on their licenses.

No Points Without Context
It is a monstrous injustice that motorists who break the speed limit by a relatively small amount and who pose no safety threat should be penalized with points on their licenses. A simple fine would be sufficient. Doing 35 mph in a 30 mph area shouldn’t lead to a penalty worth 25 per cent of your driving license. I think neo-Labour only introduced this because of some chippy, class war-related thinking, that the poor would suffer more from a £60 fine than the middle classes, so points on licenses would share out the misery in a fair way. That’s garbage. Given that a large chunk of the underclass don’t even have licenses or insurance at all, this only makes the point more strongly that police presence to enforce road-safety law is chronically weak.

I believe that if motorists are to be penalised with points on their licenses, there must be an added element of aggravated context - the driving speed should not only be clearly over the limit - say over 40 mph in a 30 mph area – over 55 in a 40, over 90 on the motorway (although the latter shouldn’t be a problem with deserted conditions at night or when traffic is light during the day) - but the driving offence must put other motorists or pedestrians in harm’s way because of the degree of irresponsibility or carelessness involved. In other words - for an offence to attract points, it would need to be egregious and witnessed by a policeman.

To make the policy truly eye-catching (to coin a phrase) the Tories should offer voters an amnesty on all points accumulated on licenses for offenses which were not shown to be irresponsible and dangerous. Anyone doing under 40 in a 30, under 55 in a 40, or under 90 on motorways would be eligible for the amnesty, unless their driving posed a threat to their fellow citizens.

Offer Technology Which Truly Saves Lives
To fight off the inevitable challenge by neo-Labour liars that Tories don't care about road safety, they should suggest a scheme which would not only be effective, it wouldn't hit the innocent and would be acceptable to all.

The Tories should introduce technology which firstly flashes unlawful speeds to the driver. If the driver fails to respond, traffic lights would automatically halt the traffic. (Obviously this wouldn't work on motorways, but there is really no problem on motorways).

This technology is already in use in Spain. It works beautifully. It slows traffic and doesn't make drivers feel angry and persecuted. True, it won't halt the irresponsible yobbo, but they are not deterred now as they drive around in their unlicensed, uninsured cars.

Fire Brunstrom
And here is final suggestion for a new Tory government. Fire North Wales Chief Constable Richard Brunstrom, an anti-motorist fool who brings the law into disrepute. I heard this demented imbecile say on BBC Radio 4 that people who drove over 30 mph were criminals because they were breaking the law. This jerk is saying that every single person who ever drove a car is a criminal, the equivalent of a burglar, because everyone driving has broken the limit. But it’s not driving at 31 mph that is the problem, it is the degree of danger to others generated by the action. For most recipients of speed camera fines, there is no such dangerous element.

If the police ever start arresting everyone who breaks the 30 mph limit, that would certainly signal the start of the revolution. This is a nonsensical statement which should force Brunstrom out. It clearly shows though that speeding isn’t a simple case of breaking an arbitrary limit.

Counterproductive for Safety
The offense demands CONTEXT. Driving at 40 mph on an urban dual carriageway which has been designated with a 30 mph limit by some dimwit council Guardian reading sandelista isn’t a criminal offense. Driving carelessly at 25 mph past a school when the children are pouring through the gates might well be.

The speed camera controversy has happened because government has tried to automate the process of law for the motorist and it just hasn’t worked. It is counterproductive for safety as drivers constantly look at their speedometers when they should be concentrating on the road ahead.

Where Is The Anger?
I think this also points to an unfortunate fact about the British nation. Too often we allow governments to impose unfair, unjust rules, which any group of self-respecting democrats ought to rail against. A self-confident, freedom loving nation would never have allowed arbitrary cameras to be used in the first place. Politicians should have thought that they would never get away with this. The response from the public would be too strong. Sadly, that isn’t the case.

In a country which was populated by independent minded citizens, there surely would be no ugly yellow speed cameras still standing. Most of these despicable machines, with their 1984 Thought Police overtones, should be lying in ruins by the roadside.

The newspapers are full of stories about British yobbos doing unspeakable things in town centres after drowning themselves in booze. Why can’t they use their violent tendencies in a more constructive way?

Hey yobbos, do something useful; necklace a speed camera today!

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Hear hear!

Along with a selection of other sensible motoring policies (more road construction, 80mph limit on motorways, removing the Dartford Toll etc.) this should be a vote-winner

I don't think it'd be as successful as you think. So many people have been brainwashed into thinking that Speed Kills now that it would simply put them off voting for that party.

Following this article posted by PeterE, I've had some very friendly contact with Neil Winston. There are a few things we're going to be working on together I think. Thanks Peter!

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Although the amnesty thing sounds like a vote winner I personally cannot see it coming about. It would be a mammoth task to sift through all of the convictions and remove points, particularly if the circumstances have to be considered in each case to determine whether the points should stay on or not.
Perhaps if a driver got to 12 points and was facing a ban, then the offer could be to revisit the previous convictions with a view to striking one (or more off) - i.e. we give that driver the benefit of the doubt without having to trawl through thousands and thousands of them.