Safe Speed Forums

It can't believe you didn't see this coming.....
Are those who already do check properly with 100% compliance also in some part responsible for the extra KSIs? (don't give us BS about statistical behaviour, let's consider that ideal driver, afterall we have people who claim they never exceed a speed limit).

This is your problem, you have mixed an unsafe behaviour with an unsafe one, then call both of them bad; see below.


There it is! Everyone doesn't "fling" open their car door, only some do. Again you mix the safe with the dangerous: those who open carefully with those who "fling", then call them all bad.

You need to answer the following two questions (which I've already asked) to understand this:

Are commuters on motorways really no different from joyriders in residential areas? Should these two really be grouped together?

If A is a subset of Y and B is a subset of Y, and B results with Z, does A necessarily result with Z?


Circular argument. You've completely missed what I said (and my question to you) about arousal in my prior post. You can't continue with this sub-thread without addressing it; do you want to answer that question?

I also can't help but noticed you changed 'exceed the speed limit' with 'faster'; your fundamental issue isn't with the limit, but the absolute speed.
Do drivers suddenly become more dangerous if they maintain the same speed, but one which just became illegal because the speed limit was dropped, say a motorway limit from 70 to 60 (all else equal) ?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Hmmm, no comments or observations on my brief conversation with the course tutor then? I would have thought he weak ( IMO) answers to my questions would have brought some responses if only to agree with him. Oh well.

_________________
Flash.
(Everybody is entitled to my opinion)

I got distracted, but I'll bite.

Speculating: perhaps they want to offer SACs to only a select few. Only a 'few' to keep their activities below the radar, just enough to keep them in business, but not enough to draw attention to themselves and the surrounding debate. The 'selected' few are likely to be those least likely to push the issue (or be supportive of their efforts) who didn't realise they weren't 'driving by numbers', instead of those who consider the risks and drive to the conditions.

Given my experience with those associated with the SCPS, I think they're doing what they can to prevent the common person from realising what is really going on within the 'speed kills' debate, especially their fraudulent claims regarding the effectiveness of their efforts.

Flash, have you read this (RTTM) page?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Thanks Steve re the RTTM page. Interesting article and ads weight to the argument as to why we really have speed/safety cameras on many of our roads. Thanks for alerting me to it.

_________________
Flash.
(Everybody is entitled to my opinion)

1. Right .. first of all.. I recall chunky chops making a big thing of linking to the Durham site .. where .. lo and behold .. it confirms exactly what IG said about their SAC offer being in the domain of their van team but that their patrolling RPU cannot offer this. Only the ones operating the van "doo dahs" as he rather "affectionately" calls them

2. Lancs Guardian or Telegraph .. I forget which.. managed to elicit this reply once over the daft cut off for Lancs





This was printed in one of these local papers back in the summer of 2003. I recall the moment well as it was during that hot summer that year and for us .. it was that EUREKA! moment when we finally realised the stupidity of cameras. Before that point - we really had not fully realised the sheer corruptness of a policy more minded to make money than save lives. That's when we started asking more questions. Ironically 3 colleagues were pinged at 34 mph and 35 mph and invited to the course. From asking questions of those known to have attended at the time (and obtained the mark sheet as posted up a few times in the past) - we then established and acknowledged that the course as offered was actually beneficial in terms of overall contact - but was being seriously undermined by the crass stupidity of the SCP morons.

As a result of umpteen letters from selves and the good folk of Lancs as a whole - SCP did extend the cut off to 10%+4 across the speed limit range to 70 mph .. sending a warning letter only at 10%+2 and offering the course to the 10% up to +5. Occasionally we find they offer the course to those at the lower margin if they are not placing enough bums on seats though .. per a couple of recent cases we've heard of.

3. Weepy .. the door opener may be done for careless driving if his door opening cause a fairly nasty injury which need hospital. He would certainly be chased by the ambulance chasers via his insurers.

BUT.. per John Franklin - I am advised to ride a car door width.. und be on the COAST type look out when passing any parked cars .. I call it being responsible for my own safety when riding. In my may - I consider it courteous common sense und duty of care to others to look around properly when getting out of my car.

I think I answer Flash und others in one post here for a change..

_________________
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 am sorry but I think you couldnt be more wrong!

1. speed awareness courses are issued to drivers who were driving at safe speeds and do not need the education
2. drivers who have no idea of safe speeds are excluded from speed awareness couses
3 Drivers who actually have accidents are not generally educated to prevent accidents

If this was about road safety, every driver who has an accident would have to take a course.
If this was about safety, The higher the offence the more training/education the driver would need.
That training should include trauma first aid course as the high risk offender is the most likly person to be the first at the scene of a accident.

credit in the courts for the speed awareness course should be 3 points per course (maybe suspended points) If a driver has a serious road accident and takes the first aid course and the collision awareness course they could mitigate 6 points against an accident that may have given them a 6-12 points.

What I see in courts is a joke

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

I have to say I completely agree with the above. The instructors on my course kept referring to "appropriate speed" They never defined this only in the context of slower than the set limit as in fog, ice and other weather conditions. On the road I live the speed limit is 30MPH, there are speed bumps and kiddies as young as 3 and 4 on bikes, there is a sharp 90 degree bend you cant see around with trees either side of the road to obscure your view. To do 30MPH on this road is complete madness yet it is legal. IMO 20MPH is the maximum, I travel on it at around 15mph as I consider it an "appropriate speed" We all know roads where 30MPH is a ridiculously low speed limit.

The town where my mum lives has a main road leaving/coming into it. Going out of town and into the country and approx 200yards out there is a 30mph sign, 200 yards further on into the country there is yet another 30MPH sign then a national speed limit sign. That's 3 speed limit signs in 400yards 2x30mph 1x national speed limit sing.

I am going to take a picture of this madness for signs and speed limits and post them somewhere (am I able to on here using say photobucket?) Sorry gone a bit off topic there ( that's you guys fault, you started it ) I believe the course instructor I engaged (at least for a short time) in conversation was a little embarrassed by my questions and fumbled with his poor answers. I even think he had some sympathy with what I was saying and asking. Eevn though they stated they do not reports back anything that's said by those attending a SAC I didn't want to push my luck.

_________________
Flash.
(Everybody is entitled to my opinion)

Another thing that niggles me is that going on a course should only negate points for totting up perposes. The points should still be awarded and should count for insurance.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

This site is starting to amaze me for the amount of false information posted by people who really believe they are right but continally pass off ill informed myth as fact.

Speed Awareness Courses kick in at EXACTLY the same point as fixed penalty tickets - at 10% + 2mph over the posted speed limit (35mph, 46mph, 57mph, etc). Anyone who claims to have been offered a course or a fixed penalty at 31, 32, 33 or 34mph is a liar and I challenge anyone on this site to produce an official invite stating as such.

The above, is, of course is something In Gear should know as a "police officer".

Johnnytheboy, you write: “SACs are usually offered at speeds that wouldn't normally have got you done in the first place. It's all about the money...”

No they are not - EVER! Where do you get your information from? Speed Awareness Courses are an alternative to a fixed penalty. All drivers invited to attend a SAC have the choice of a ticket or the course. Get your facts right.

Dcbwhaley writes: “I think that offering SACs to people who are a few miles over the limit is a tacit admition that they were not causing harm and don't deserve a punishment”

They are not offered in this way – so there is no such admission.

But then this is the site whose leader recently told Sky News that the police get to keep speeding fine revenue. More mis-information – either Claire is deliberately giving out false information (lying) or she is ignorant of the facts in respect of FPs. Which is it Claire?

Steve Callahan stop pretending here. We can see straight through you now.


NOT all areas offer SAC. Check out all SCP sites. We have. We have FOI. WQe have not published all of these. But then ..some things are open only to members und some things are discussed very privately off line via "privates"
Some stuff even in personal contact. .. but you are not privy to this

Most who offer SAC cut of at 35 mph./


Lancs/Staffs work together. They used to cut off at 35 mph Now they do not. They listened to the concerns raised. I am fair enough to acknowledge such. We all are.

Oh .. we have the proof .. on the Lancs/Staffs own websites and PR to press in late 2004. I even have a confirmation from a Pc based in Lancs. He posts as Dibble to PH. I have his real ID .. by the way. I will not ever disclose to you though as you would try it on to make trouble for a hard working type like Dibble


We also have the proof of different cut offs. We have posted it in the past. Lancs own PR to local press.. Or perhaps Lancs und the local Lancs Press are liars according to you?

Steve callaghan .. stop the pretence. You fool no one person here and make yourslef look like a right k:censored:b .


Sorry for the language .. But I think plain speak matter here. GDS ist chunky ist Greenshed.

Ask why he need to ..


Answer? He has no argument of merit to offer.

BLUNT SPEAK here. By the way .. we also know yoou post as Red Kite. We have proof now.

_________________
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!

The threshold for prosecution is only a guideline, it is not a hard and fast rule.
A quick Google shows quite a few have been offered SACs below the 10%+2.

edited to add:

I've just had a look (1, 2) but I can't find a reference of your claim, "The councils see it as a revenue-making opportunity" yes, but nothing about the police keeping it.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

No it's not, not if you have to drive dangerously to attain 30mph.

It's not legal to drive a car dangerously, or with due care.

I repeat. It is legal to drive at 30mph on this road and you CAN NOT be prosecuted for doing so that is exceeding the speed limit. Of course I am aware of the offence of driving without due care and attention and dangerous driving but show me a road where the speed limit is 30mph and I would be prosecuted for doing that speed or be offered a SAC?

_________________
Flash.
(Everybody is entitled to my opinion)

It's not legal to travel at 30mph if you are doing so dangerously, regardless of the limit.

Ahh weepy . Liebchen .. und you know me by now as person who gives a very caring damn about others. But that ist the problem. . the nub ..

driving to the speed limit does not mean the person oberves or anticipates nor drives with due care

Kids killed in driveways. folk injured in car parks. folk injured by cyclists/ rolelr bladers. joggers. walkers who do not look where they are going?



But Lancs/Staffs offer across a range. Others offer a wide disparity ... sunstantiated by various claims including bizarre FPN of 120 in a 70 und 60 in a 30 bybibs on PH . which Greenshit accepts for some reason , but which police procedures/IPCC do not. Ummm .. one of the gang hit throttle. Not me . nor MM nor IG.. but the raw trained one who has to get experience) They got disciplined. But all the same .. boss noted

Wepy .. I see you concur .. but in different style to me

_________________
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!

its completely legal to do 30mph and not be prosecuted for it, it's not legal to drive without due car and attention. There is a difference you know. BTW most of this road is straight and although 30mph is the limit I drive much slower given parents who don't appear to understand the meaning of parenthood and safety for their children isn't paramount it seems. Nobody will or can be prosecuted for doing 30mph on this road and I doubt they would be prosecuted for doing so should they have an accident. If you can show me any instance where somebody was prosecuted for the offence of speeding while doing a speed consistent or within the given speed limit I apologise. Until then I suggest we drop this as its going nowhere and my point was that speed limits as in travelling at "an appropriate speed" are often not valid in many circumstances unless you want to disagree with that as well.

_________________
Flash.
(Everybody is entitled to my opinion)

For a relatively recently joined user, who claims to be merely a concerned member of the public, you spout a lot of stats about the mechanics of enforcement, and seem to follow Safespeed quite closely.

I put it to you that you are a safety camera partnership employee or even manager, AICMFP.

In dense fog where you can only see 10 foot in front of you?

So what? Less of the ad hominem please!

They are also a means for the Camera Partnerships to circumvent the rules which see fines going to the treasury without being filtered by the SCP expenses racket.

The actual cost of providing the course is supplemented by a cost for administering it which is retained instead of going to the treasury as a fine would do.

Some large companies provide speed awareness courses for their employees at a cost of between £45 and £60 per person depending on the numbers involved.

SCP generated courses cost between £65 and £110 depending on how much they think they can get away with before they get rumbled!

The reputable companies (in most cases) who run the courses are not responsible for the policy behind their provision... that is usually up to the SCPs in the various council areas who are in receipt of the Government's road safety grants.

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