Safe Speed Forums

Is there a defined "minimum distance" between two active speed measurement locations?

Scenario: Off duty night-porter/checkout-girl/bank-manager/policewoman/accountant is late for a personal appointment (e.g. school play) and travels safely and attentively at approx.37mph along a dual carriageway on the way to the school for 1500yards. The road used to carry a 40mph limit, but was recently reduced to 30mph (council decision).

How many speeding offences have been commited?
- One (for full 1500yards)
- Two (one for first 750yards, one for second 750yards)
- Fifteen (one for each 100yards travelled)
?

[this post has also been raised on
http://www.police-recruitment.com/one2/ ... hp?t=11496
but thought that this forum could also provide some useful input ]

I can think of several locations where there are two Gatsos in the same direction within half a mile of each other.

I vaguely remember a case where someone who had been caught by two cameras on the same road on the same occasion managed to get the courts to regard them as a single offence - somewhere in the Bristol area, I think.

_________________
"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

At the weekend i drove along A47 dual carrigeway into Peterborough. Around the "Thomas Cook Roundabout" there were 4 or 5 cameras in EACH direction within in a distance of only a few miles - as you drive along there are several in view at once. All were covered over with "Not In Use" bags ( the suspicious part of me thinks they probably had a hole for the lens to poke through ), and some still had signs of work being done.

a few years ago some kid got caught on two cameras very close together when he was speeding on his GPz 500...... his solicitor was trying to get them treated as one offence (as if he had been picked up by a patrol car he would only have been done once for the offence)

Thanks for the replies, but still no "legal" definition.

The way I see things, the speeding-punishments-via-speed-cameras system is grossly unfair, irrespective of the safety aspects.

This is because it is the only offence where you can be penalised multiple times without being notified "between offences".

Compare this to, say, driving a car with illegally tinted windows for 2 weeks before being stopped by the police and "booked". If the police also had evidence that you had been spotted driving the vehicle illegally 17 times on CCTV (or somesuch), you would not be punished 17 times.

If you are caught speeding by a speed camera on Monday, by what mystical intervention do TPTB think that you are going to "not speed" on Tuesday, Wednesday and all successive days until you are notified about your original speeding offence?

Or is it just a cynical game where TPTB "know" that most people will speed anyway when it is safe to do so and they don't think that they will be caught?

According to the guidlines you cannot be convicted of two offences in the same camera zone, regardless of the number of speed limit changes or the number of cameras.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

There is a difference. With the tinted windows, the tint is in place continuously for the two weeks, and so it can be argued that one, continuous infringement has occurred. OTOH, you will almost certainly stop more than once between Monday morning and Wednesday evening. So, the speeding incidents will be separated by periods of lawfulness, and so cannot be considered one, continuous offence.

That said, I heard rumours of a biker travelling a road near me. He had three points before his trip and then fell foul of two Gatso's and one talivan in about a mile and a half. The problem was that the first was in a 40 zone, the second in a 50 zone, and the third at NSL - so three separate offences. Allegedly, he lost his license. However, I'm only going on rumour, and this may be an urban legend.

_________________
Will

Understand your point, but I still maintain that speeding is treated differently.

Playing devil's advocate granted, but let's assume that Mr.Tinted-Glass was a very indecisive chap, and swapped the glass from legal to illegal and back several times, each iteration faithfully recorded on police CCTV.
I contend that when apprehended he would only be booked for ONE offence.