Safe Speed Forums

Those of us who are opposed to current speed camera policy often say we
would like to see the number of cameras greatly reduced (if not entirely
eliminated) and a substantial increase in the number of trained traffic
police officers on the roads.

But how would those officers actually go about their business? Would we
expect them only to apprehend offenders by pursuit (which can often be
dangerous), or would it be acceptable, in a situation where police forces
could not benefit from fine revenue, for an officer to pull over selected
drivers who had been caught by an unmarked camera or observation post
further up the road?

Are red light cameras OK (assuming a reasonable margin of tolerance) or
should those be done away with too?

We should also bear in mind that, before speed cameras, the actions of
traffic police were often regarded as arbitrary and unreasonable,
particularly by people driving performance cars or coming from ethnic
minorities.

But if there is effectively no enforcement, then we will end up with a
situation where people basically do what they like and believe they will get
away with it, but the law comes down on them like a ton of bricks if they
cause a serious or fatal accident - which is what tends to apply in urban
areas even now. Sensible, targeted enforcement could nip such tendencies in the bud.

In my view one of the best deterrents against dangerous behaviour on the
roads is knowing someone who has been convicted for an offence or even
spoken to by the police.

Any thoughts - not so much about penalties or fines vs training, but how
officers would actually "get to" offenders?

Regards,

Peter

_________________
"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

I think we're learning very fast now about what actually makes road safety work - I know I am and I know some important folk are listening. I hope this new knowledge will spill directly into a post camera road safety strategy.

I'm very confident indeed that our road safety systems are actually based on our road safety culture, and I'm hoping and expecting that "culture feeding" will be the key road safety strategy of the future.

As far as traffic police are concerned, I hope they will receive clear instructions to identify and deal with dangerous, careless, irresponsible and anti-social behaviours. If their instructions are based on feeding the culture, I don't think we will have to worry too much about officious or aggressive behaviour, and targets would be completely out of the question.

I think the majority of traffic police ten years ago were excellent. I know there were bully boys too, but I believe that the bully boys were (and will be) stongly in the minority. It's unfortunate that an experience with a bully boy is highly memorable and may overshadow 10 experiences with decent and caring officers.

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

There's an awful lot of anecdotal evidence about people from ethnic minorities, people driving "flash" cars and motorcyclists being unreasonably targeted and harassed.

Strong safeguards would be needed if this were not to become a problem in the future.

Regards,

Peter

_________________
"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

Excellent 10 years ago? Listen, mate, we are still excellent now!

Yes - "Bully Boys" thankfully are in minority. We are trying to recruit the right calibre. You always remember bullies though. Even from schooldays - probably because bad experiences do stick!

As you know - some forces have reduced trafpol numbers - maybe as they rely on the speed cameras and the Partnerships more and more. We will have to train more BiBs to bring numbers back to pre-scamera levels.

We were always given specific and clear instructions as type of driver to apprehend: obviously dangerous ones, defective cars. etc. We have never been in business of persecuting people.

How we "get offenders?" Same way as we got 'em before the speed camera And Peter - we did not benefit from fines then - nor should we now. Safety should not be about generating money by issuing fines willy nilly. I would hope to make fullest use of Smiley Sids, and retain some scameras - but only deploy them in really dangerous areas. Any fine revenue for motoring offences should be invested into the full spectre of road safety measures anyway.

You know us of old - surely? Hours I have spent lurking in a side road -then putting the fear of God into someone when I got 'em! Did not always give them a speeding ticket - even then. It really depended on the type of offence they committed - and yes - it was subjectively based upon my judgement, my experience and my training. (But we are still the best trained in the world )

We still do this kind of work - in Durham! (Co Durham may only have one fixed camera - but the lads are out and about in force with radar traps in the vulnerable areas)

Happy Days

Oh! for their return! Soon - please

Oh and yes - I did pull up Mad Mogs once - before he married into the family And between me and rest of the internet - I 'fess up - I just wanted a look at the car he was driving at the time - His Triumph Stag!

Forgive me! Yes I still believe that the real trafpol are excellent. Still the best in the World.

I think we're going to have to do some work on the driving skills pool at the top instructor level which has been badly and willfully eroded over the last decade.

I've got a driver training conference in preparation for 28th April in Warwick. We're hoping to get some top ex Hendon instructors along and review that last 15 years changes. Serving traffic officers will be very welcome. I hope to get the paperwork ready for Monday.

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

So if you don't want to attract the attention of the traffic police, the Daewoo Lanos has to be the vehicle of choice

Regards,

Peter

_________________
"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

Yup Peter!

So true! Still true! Most of the people we stopped for this reason were "pleased" about it (oops!)

But a great way to get a good look a nice car!

Though we might pull Daewoos on grounds that they are a bit "iffy!"

By the way - we are running safety campaign on dodgy cars and their owners - checking tyres, and documents etc. See we are doing something other than persecute you all for speeding!

This has got me thinking - how does everyone feel about the use of radar/laser speed detection devices in a post-scamera era?

My own (and so far only) experience of being caught speeding was by being caught in exactly such a manner - speed recorded by radar, then pulled in further along the road.
This had an immediate effect on my driving, even on the journey home I was much more careful (this was about 10 years ago when I was younger and much less road-wise: I'd tend to drive from A-B as quickly as possible, without necessarily thinking about whether it was safe to do so.. ).
I also think that being "told off" by a policeman has a much more powerful effect than a NIP 2 weeks (or more) later (by which time the link between the offence and punishment is often not obvious, and quite often just causes resentment).

Therefore personally I'm not against the use of radar/laser speed detection devices, as long as they are used with safety in mind (i.e. only "vulnerable" areas as above, and only drivers causing a definite danger were stopped (not just those committing a technical offence)).
The advantages are that there would be no issue with driver identification, the driver would know exactly where the offence was committed (and it could be shown what the potential problems/dangers caused by his driving manner were).
However I also think that if there is simply a localised speed problem then flashing signs may be better (carrot), they can then be backed up by enforcement if ignored (stick).


Absolutely!


A side-effect of the return of human policing?

Last time I was lasered, it had the oposite effect, cause I was so angry at their excuse (some local show, so they expected plenty of traffic on the A1M past peterborough. About 1 car per mile at the time, and I was overtaking a slowish vehicle before the 4 lanes ran out).
Took advantage of the impending ban by completely ignoring the speed limits for the rest of the journey!

Sean

Which sounds completely like a "vulnerable" area (not!)

That's why I'd sugggest enforcement only in "vulnerable" areas where there is a definite (and quantifiable) danger, and then preferably only when flashing signs etc. have been installed and are being ignored.

If the government/police want to change the public feeling persecuted for technical offences they'll need to do something more than simply convert the existing sites to police-manned traps (IMHO).


Another positive experience..

So you did decide to join in the discussions here after all!
Oops! What have I done? Unleashed a potential "troll"

Hmm! So at last! Got it out of you and in public - too!

Was 21 years ago now folks! And just to wind him up even more - he is nearing his half century!

He was then - and he still is now!

Was doing 40mph in a 40mph zone when he came suddenly and from nowhere with all his lights flashing! (Was about 2am )

Actually thought I had missed a speed sign , then started wondering if a bulb had gone!

Got the sarcy "Is this your car, Sir" After 5 minutes it became obvious he was admiring the motor! Still got that car - a first edition Stag and an absolute classic! (Only fault with them - they tend to overheat a bit! - And they are temperamental in traffic jams! In fact, they are just like "wimmin" )

Was one heck of a shock when he turned up as guest at my wedding - though - and he is still eyeing up my wheels!

Bad luck tsh. That sounds like the Welsh during the GB rally. Any old excuse to make some money

Cambs are bit draconian. Check out their web site - it is full of statistical garbage. Even "In Gear" was shocked at the extent of it. We have taken print - and can supply it! In case you have not seen WildCat's comment on PH, Sorter's rant on the "Duty" site, and mine somewhere on here - it claimed that 187 serious incidents had occurred on A14/A141 on week 15-22 March 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003. to justify the talivan acitivity.

Think we would have heard about such tragedy on one day on one road - don't you?

Course, the pratners will say it was typo or something

Beermat - agree with you - Smiley Sids - and enforcement only if those have been ignored - much more sensible

Post cameras, obviously we need some sort of controls on speed, since there are still plenty of people who regularly exceed a sensible safe speed much of the time. I suspect that most people wouldn't be too concrened how this is done, so long as the overall result is that the number of tickets issued returns to pre-camera rates.

Then you have a constant reminder that the numbers on sticks are probably about the right speed to be driving at, but so long as you're sensible and observant the chances of getting more than 3 points in 3-4 years are not enough to be a significant burden. Any more than this, and the 'risk' of a ticket starts to impact on driving style (I won't let anyone follow me on a motorway over 75 anymore!)

Sean

An interesting set of replies, but, fundamentally, is "trap & catch" acceptable?

A hidden van monitors the speeds and numberplates of passing vehicles.

400 yards up the road, a police officer pulls over selected offenders.

Obviously, as it demands personal attention, the number pulled over will be limited, so it will only be offenders over a high threshold (maybe 20% +4 mph or similar)

In my view, done properly, this would be a main tactic of the post-camera enhanced police presence environment.

This might be particularly prevalent in 30 or 40 mph villages on otherwise NSL primary roads.

Assuming all limits are set properly according to Roads 1/93 criteria, would that be acceptable?

Regards,

Peter

_________________
"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

I have now created a webpage on this important subject:

http://speedlimit.dreamwater.org/after.html

Any thoughts are welcome.

_________________
"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

That's why it's so important to tackle the 'speed kills' mindset at its root - just as they have tried to do with racism.
The police nowdays think twice before stopping someone from ethnic minorities for anything. OK, perhaps that's a bad example, and it could be argued that it's gone too far the other way, but the principle holds.
Before speed cameras, the police often used to stop people because 'it seemed like they were going a bit fast' - regardless of whether the speed was appropriate for conditions or not. Their only justification was the widespread belief that 'speed = danger'.
We really need to make 'speed-ism' as unacceptable as racism.

Regards
Peter

Many would say that kind of thing still goes on - although on the other hand there appears to be a marked lack of traffic enforcement activity in inner urban areas.


Which is why it is important that the police identify and concentrate on specific offences rather than simply pulling people over because they don't like the look of them.

As I said in the article, I have full confidence that experienced traffic officers such as our own Mr In Gear are capable of exercising discretion properly - but this certainly didn't happen much of the time in the past, and the 70s and 80s, while undoubtedly better than today, were no golden age of traffic policing.

_________________
"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

Personally i think prevention is better than cure and i belive if cameras are ever reconsidered (hardly unlikely with the money grabbing goverment) it should be replace with better training... although that should happen anyway!!!

I see too many people on the road now who just seem totally scared to be driving and only doing 20mph just in case they crash/speed... they don't seem to have confidence to pull out of junctions and especially around here where we've just had some new invention... that roundabout thing... people just have no idea how to use them... turning left, cross over to right hand lane.. cut across left lane, cut up car... why's that car sounding it's horn?

i mean we really need to up the standards on driving if any accidents are going to be reduced.

as for replacing them with trafpol, i've had bad experiances with trafpol when i was younger, they seemed to take a dislike to the fact i was driving a new car at such a young age... and the fact i had a licence when they thought i didn't (long story)

However since the advent of cameras in-car, i've not had one problem with them... well that's when i see any around here now, but i think it's harder for them to "discriminate" anyone for that reason and at least then it would cut down on those driving around with no licence/insurance (i know a couple of people who do it because they've either lost there licence, or afraid of it)