Safe Speed Forums

http://www.chorley-guardian.co.uk/chorl ... 5608472.jp



The car should have been visible .. or patrolling und using due professional judgement. This was a quiet bank holiday,. We know. We have pals who work there





I hope this person ist as noble when copped for pavement cycing . running a red light or pedalling too fast in Bournemouth or in Richmond Park




Either not speeding anyway as most do in this area per obervation as they all know it a scam zone

Or worse scenario .

They then accelerated away hereafter .. . so plod achieved what exactly then By the way .. pogo list this on database as hot spot.. Locals .. er know. Fools.


Better to follow und judge properly then.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

If they are stopped at the time they are found to be over I have no problem with this. Provided they also look for other contraventions and stop as well.

However I am fairly certain this will be just a speed check and nothing else. Also there will probably be no officer discression (sp?) as to the method of punishment.

Why is it sneaky? I's the speed limit concealed?

Police guidance says wear Hi-Viz clothing, why? The reason is for their protection, it is not primarily to give the motorist a sporting chance to slow down and is not required for that purpose.

Police guidance also says that 'covert' enforcement can be carried out, not that this is covert of course. Covert means you wouldn't see the officer or the enforcement equipment.

Good practice says that the best deterrent effect of speed enforcement activity is for a mix of covert and overt enforcement, so there you go Police guidance is use covert and overt. Why then do the news media and interest groups choose to selectively quote police guidance?

http://editorial.jpress.co.uk/web/Uploa ... %20004.jpg



It appears to me that this officer is clearly visible, is safe and poses no threat to road safety.

Unless the speed limit is deliberately concealed to the motorist in this location; you would have to cover up all of the lamp-posts, to do that, then the claim that it is sneaky is rubbish.

Let's stop media and intrest groups making selective quotations of police guidance, guidance they don't fully understand or have fully read, it has gone on too long.

That would only work if certain members of the "speed kills" lobby, didn't quote RIDICULOUS stats that they can't and won't back up!

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

I think the point here is the objective of this enforcement. Is the object to slow down motorists as the area is a very hazardous one and it is believed that slowing down traffic would make things safer?

If so, then making the enforcement as visible as possible would result in this being achieved. If it really is dangerous then hiding will not reduce the danger as nobody will slow down.

Of course, the Bank Holiday was the 31st of the month. Nothing to do with monthly figures, I suppose?

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

Well the tactic has reslted in massive publicity and now the locals are well aware that there may be some form of speed enforcement on that road. Most right-minded people will now be well aware of teh possibility of coming to the notice of the police if they don't observe the maximum speed in that area.
Enforcement can be done in a visible, partly visible and covert way, the mixture is best. It wouls appear in the circumstances that this was the best choice in this situation.
There is a possibility of the police enforcing at any location and in any form of visibility they so choose, if that belief is widely held then the deterrent effect is the widest possible. Tell people where, when and how visible enforcement is and they will do what is being enforced in those places elsewhere. Starangely enough it also leads to people thinking they can break the law and not be prosecuted for doing so if some guidance isn't being followed. So wheres the good in that?

We pass one in Manchester. He was parked up visibly ,. He had his truc on a tripod .. He was holding his .. not steadying on anything . thus prone to hand shake error.

Und the car was in foliage. By the way ,,. that road run from 40 mph to 30 mph to 40 mph again if I am recalling correctly last time I drive it. ( think I used on a visit to Southport when I came off M61 just before kittens were born... 6 month ago now.. I cannot believe how time fly here. )

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

I think the accusations of being sneaky are misplaced - and are largely as a result of the Lancs Camera Partnerships behaviours.

This illustrates the damage that the partnerships are doing to police/public relationship, and the manner in which the media portray incidents simply to sell their product, and give the advertisers exposure.

However, the public often rely on that same media to expose the behaviours of authorities who abuse their positions, so it's an uneasy relationship the public have!

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

Just a few words on this subject. It was the head of roads policing at the time that drew up the "ACPO code of Conduct for the operation of speed detection equipment" and runs to 104 pages in total. It is very informative with many answers to questions raised by the motorist. However. It is not worth the paper its written on. There is also the DfT information on this subject. Again a waste of taxpayers money. They are classified as "guide lines" and quoted as such,but, whats the point of guidelines if they are not used. They have speed limits which are a guide line, one can travel below them so why should!nt they work to those in the handbook on speed detection. Another point in question is that in the ACPO guide lines it states that mobile cameras "should not be used in automatic mode" but I will bet anyone that they are never off that mode. Cameras are in effect to support an officer in his claim that one was speeding but how can an officer claim to know when every vehicle is speeding when he operates the camera?. The motorist is far to easy a target for revenue generation by the minions who operate the system for Government and keeps those who would otherwise be unemployed off the unemployment figures.OLLIE

I have just been in conflict with the Lancashire Police (Scamera idiots) who issued me with a NIP as they had my previous vehicle (sold previously 18 months) on a camera breaking a speed limit. I had to provide them with the name of the driver although I had informed the DVLA of the disposal at the time. I informed them that I had P/X the vehicle with a dealer and fired some bullets into them and the C/Constable and made an official complaint as to how they had approached the matter. They phoned me and tried to make me see their point of view but had no success. After another letter I received another call from them and they said they could!nt trace who had spoken to me previously, (doggy now as I thought all phone calls were recorded? Did I trust them!!!) Anyway. In the end they sent me a letter together with an application to contact the IPCC with my complaint. Very good of them, except that they knew that there was a 28 cut off for such complaints and that had by now passed so it was recorded as a command and control complaint. After all this I had a letter of apology, but now, they quoted my present vehicle registration as the vehicle involved with the speeding offence. All this complaint was delt with by civvies who seemed to be on another planet and they have been the worst force that I have ever had dealings with, a right load of idiots. Sorry for you lot in Lancashire.