Safe Speed Forums

Hi. I'm doing some research ref a scamera local to me. I'm aware of the requirement that the Guidance For New Sites states a minimum of 4 KSI within the previous 3 calendar years, but what pertains to current cameras? Does the 3-year snapshot 'roll' forwards as the camera is introduced? In other words, does a scamera site have to have to continue to comply with the guidelines once it is installed, or is it a done deed, once installed?

_________________
all spilling mistakes are alcohol induced

I don't think so. Here in Cumbria our local scamera partnership have had the same sites now for 3 years. This either means that they don't need to complywith a "rolling" requirement or I guess it could mean they're not working! The partnership strenuously maintains that KSI accidents HAVE reduced at the sites so, I agree with your logic. Under the guidelines (and they are only guidelines I believe!) they should no longer be sites!

Or it could be that the scamera is still maintaining the requisite number of KSI over the 'rolling' 3 -year timeline?

_________________
all spilling mistakes are alcohol induced

There are different requirements for both fixed and mobile sites. It is 4 KSI at fixed, but only 2 at mobile. This is why so many mobile sites are being introduced !!

_________________
Good manners maketh a good motorist

Having just read the new guidelines, the 'rules' are changed again. They've combined the PIC and KSI, and reduced the 85th % speed to ACPO guidelines or +5mph for non-built=up areas...

_________________
all spilling mistakes are alcohol induced

The sites are chosen because of a combination of PIC (personal injury Collisions) and KSI's. That means that if someone has had a collision which resulted in even a slight bruise or cut, if it was then reported to the police within 30 days it would count towards the siting of the camera. The baseline for selection is three years, but then a count of all PIC's over a five year perios is taken to make sure the cameras are going in the right places.

Fixed cameras have to have had 3 KSI's on the site per km in the 36 month baseline period; mobile cameras have to have had 1.

When the site does not meet the PIC requirements, or the requirements for visibility etc. the force can still operate it as an "exceptional site" for 15% of the total hours that a core site is in operation - Translation: Police can put cameras wherever they damn well please!

Police can also operate covert sites (meaning that the camera can be totally hidden from view) at their discretion, and the siting of these cameras does not necessarily need to be at places where injuries have occurred. They only need to be at sites where there have been a few too many reports (or complaints) of high speeds.

I once had to swerve into the middle of the road to avoid one police car because whilst he was hiding behind a wall recording my speed he'd left his car sticking out a foot or so into the narrow country lane we were in. So if anything had rounded the bend coming the other way I would have been lucky to miss it.

The "Rules" also say that non-compliance of the "Rules" does not mitigate or provide a defence against prosecution... so I ask you what is the point of having these rules? The only penalty that Forces endure for not following the rules is that their costs cannot be reclaimed if it can be shown that they didn't. Sounds more and more like the only reason they bother to put yellow stickers on the boxes these days is that they won't get paid if they don't! And they say it isn't about money? Don't make me laugh!

See: http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_rdsafety/documents/page/dft_rdsafety_611087.pdf for further details.

Happy reading!

I did not know a mobile site needed only 2KSI in the last 3 years, virtually any busy road with high traffic volumes would fit this criteria.

A really really really busy road with 2 KSI could actually be considered a safe road if you take into account the number of journeys travelled per year. Do SCPs take this into account?

Also what constitues an SI? A broken arm? Emotional disturbance? A police man's discretion? 4 road deaths is much more serious than 4 broken arms yet both would be reported as 4 KSI.. How misleading is that?!

The whole point of the SCPs is to ensure they get a camera on or near every lamp post. Its to get the money in reliably. WIth every motorist exceeding the speed limits daily, this gives a limitless supply of cash. Think of them as police enforcing Prohibition and you'll get the picture

_________________
Good manners maketh a good motorist

I normally think of myself as a good law abiding citizen I don’t speed in built up arias if any thing I go slower that the posted limit due to safety issues more often that I go over the limit on open roads with good conditions. But the more I read about these “rules” the more I am considering one of two options.


A move out of the country and watch from the sidelines as it destroys itself.

B turn into what I hate with a passion an uninsured driver in a cloned car driving like a tools safe in the knowledge there sod all chance of getting caught and even if I did who cares the fine will be cheaper than insurance tax and constant speeding tickets for do 25mhp in what used to be 40mhp limits.



Because of the person I am I will go with option A but just how many options B will theses “rules” spawn in the next few years.

Frankly I weep for the rule of Law as without the respect of the common man its nothing more that another mugger out for money.

I feel I should point out that none of the PIC/KSI required for camera placement need to be related to speeding – inappropriate or above the limit. Given this argument I would say the great majority of cameras are sited where they’ll accomplish nothing (except £or the obviou$).


I believe a camera can remain if there is a perception of a speeding problem – no accidents, no danger, just speeding.