Safe Speed Forums

This story is being replayed in Cumbria at present, following the collapse of an earlier trial.

My question is this, if failing to take action results in a prosecution for manslaughter and breaching health and safety laws, then allowing somebody guilty of speeding to pass a camera without detaining them, has certain parallels.
The Safety Camera Partnerships are always banging on about how dangerous speeding is, so if somebody passes a camera and is not stopped - and if they then have a fatal accident, then the partnerships are guilty by their own clear assertion that it is dangerous.

Any thoughts on this?

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

I've said this in not-so-many words for a long time.

If speeding is dangerous, then stop the driver. Sending a letter 14 days later demanding £60 does nothing to stop a dangerous act???

_________________

It seems VERY logical that if a monitored camera, ie. the operator makes decisions to 'zap' what he/she determines to be so called dangerous drivers as they are speeding. And yet, not a chirp from them for 99.9999% of these 'maniacs'. Sure, if they saw somebody REALLY driving dangerously - that actually triggered their PERSONAL sense of right & wrong and not just following a job mandate they might get on the radio/phone & call it in to great effect: The prevention of dangerous driving...not the free travel of millions of citizens.

I did a BikeSafe course recently run by two TrafPol in Cheshire. When asked about cameras they said :

"Cameras have a negligible impact on road safety. I've lost count of the number of times I've pulled someone up and explained to them in detail why they are getting a ticket, and they've shook my hand at the end and thanked me for the education. Cameras don't do that, you get a brown envelope through after 14 days and then you're annoyed, you're cursing us, and your riding will be worse because the natural reaction is to spend more time looking out for cameras so it doesn't happen again, and you've failed to notice the artic pulling out, or the kid on the bike coming out of the driveway"

I was a passenger yesterday, and we got pulled by a unmarked white volvo xc70 (I think it was). Driver got a bit of a lecture about his speed (80 in a 70) and x in a 50, and also not leaving enough space to the car in front. We were on our way again with a warning and a shake of the hand.

We then spent the next 10mins discussing the space issue and decided it was when cars were pulling into the gap in front of us (this all happened on a dual carriageway), that we were not dropping back enough.

Oh and this happened on the A55 in North Wales!!!

Ernest I agree completely with you, and it is one of the reasons why I am so anti camera, they knowingly allow (potentially) dangerous drivers to continue. I stopped at one site near Lincoln, the operator was a friendly chap who was explaining how the kit worked and noticed a car doing over 100mph and was bouncing from lane to lane, he picked up a ticket but at no point did I see or hear the operator call the police.

Likewise of the three sites I've complained about that have subsequently been shut down I pointed out that the siting was dangerous and now that I had informed them of this, were an accident to occour they would be criminally and civilly liable (Duty of care towards employees and those affected by your undertaking). They didn't like that but couldn't argue with it.

_________________
Gordon Brown saying I got the country into it's current economic mess so I'll get us out of it is the same as Bomber Harris nipping over to Dresden and offering to repair a few windows.

Chaos, panic and disorder - my work here is done.

http://www.wildcrafts.co.uk

The reason people are anti-speed camera is that they do catch more people than the police ever could, this is a non argument.
Of course police oficers dont likemodern tecnology doing "thier" job who does??
If the speed camera was not there would this hypothetical speeder who goes on to crash have been going slower???

non speeder and proud the point I was making was that if there were traffic police about as in the past this guy would have been stopped, now he has a ticket but on the day he he is clocked and the next 14 days he can still drive like a complete clown.

As for being anti speed camera, I got invloved after the dangerous siting of a camera van in Essex, the camera partnership came out with all sorts of bullshit, finally getting down to personal insults and then after failing with those decided to question my knowledge of safety, given my tag you can imagine what I do for a living. When I proved that my knowledge was greater than thiers, did they apologise? Did they ensure that they operated in a safe manner?

Did they hell !!

All they did was ignore me.

With regards that particular site, they put the public at a greater risk of accident than the 'speeding' driver they were there to catch.

And that is my professional as well as personal opinion.

_________________
Gordon Brown saying I got the country into it's current economic mess so I'll get us out of it is the same as Bomber Harris nipping over to Dresden and offering to repair a few windows.

Chaos, panic and disorder - my work here is done.

http://www.wildcrafts.co.uk

So, lets just completely ignore the fact that the drunk driver weaving all over the place at 29 in a 30 limit doesn't get snapped, yet the perfectly sober driver doing 36 gets 3 points and a fine for breaking the speed limit. I think you'll probably find the drunk driver is much more likely to cause an accident, whereas the car 'speeding' will probably not... (lets assume for the purposes of my example that there are no/few hazards on the road)

A camera can't spot that, but the police can, and so could a camera operator if he saw it... So can many other people... A traffic officer's job is vital... What about a car on cloned plates doing 50 past a school at 3pm... Even if a scam snaps them, they're still going to be driving by like a lunatic... A camera operator could call this through, and a traffic officer could go after them and pull them over/whatever they would need to do to stop them...

A camera has no was of looking at the circumstances... It sees speeding as speeding, and everyone else is safe by its terms.

_________________
Mike

I have suspended "non speeder and proud". It is a duplicate account from an already suspended account holder.

I thought I recognised the typing style!

A while back, we had a discussion as to whether a length of road with more than one camera counted as one offence, or a separate offence for every camera passed.
Quite clearly, breaking a law is not multiple offences sliced up by time - a burgalar gets done for breaking and entering, not entering and entering and entering each time he goes back in to bring out more swag, yet the SCP's would tell you it's multiple offences! Yeah, and multiple revenue too!
They cannot have it all ways, if they see an offence, fail to stop it, they are aiding and abbetting, and responsible for any consequences.

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!