Safe Speed Forums

I thought I had seen that too, but I'm buggered if I can remember where ...

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

Declaring that Councils see cameras as revenue raisers is exactly the same as suggesting the police get to keep revenue. There is no difference - neither have any incentive to place cameras. Swindon get Treasury money whether they place cameras or not - just like all other areas.

Just back up youtr claim please - you are so sure, that it cannot be that difficult and does not have to include identification of the driver. Do it to shut me up and reduce me into making a grovelling apology. That alone must be worth it.

Enforcement / courses start at 35mph - this is a statement of fact.

As for the point about the Conservatives doing away with SCPs. When they come to power they will sit down with road safety experts and listen to the evidence and then change their tune. Anyone who believes the Conservatives will ditch cameras or listen to the views of this site is deluded.

I think enough has been said now.


My response to that: "Just back up youtr claim please - you are so sure, that it cannot be that difficult"

A real policeman, those who can consider "aggravating circumstances", will rightly tell you they are fully entitled to initiate proceedings below the 10%+2. Even Greenshed (a staunch dissenter) has confirmed this.

I have already done enough. I have shown that people have done so (by their admission, I guess all those people who said they were must be wrong too) and that there's no reason for it not to be so ("absolute offence").
Conversely you haven't shown how action below 10%+2 thresholds cannot be, or how my rebuttle was wrong. Simply saying something is fact doesn't make it so.
Furthermore, you cannot show these 'numerous posts' to support your so-called 'illusion'

I think the reader has enough to conclude what is really going on here: "false information (lying) " ... "deliberately distorts the truth" ... "spread mistruths and lies" indeed!


No matter. If true, then regardless of whether or not they actually do it, this pledge alone shows something critical:

Ditching speed cameras is a vote winner!

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

I think you do .. Greenshed /Red Kite.. Milesismpson.. Puff the Magic Mushroom ,.,, und not Good Driver Sam.

Your posts do not tally with a "retired headmaster" .. especially your ones regarding deliberately creating a hazard...in a village.


Plus the unsolicited attack on IG




It goes to the Treasury. The SAC fees are made payable to the County Council und still are as we happen to know of one more invitee at 36 mph in a Lancs 30 mph. They cut off as we have said these days at 38 mph ... 49 mph (40).. 60 mph(50) 71 mph (60) ,, und 81 mph (70) as far as we establish .. but have been known to invited at just 10%+2 if they have not got the bums on the seats

BACK in 2003 though.. they WERE inviting to SAC at 33 mph und 34 mph. It was the fuss und protests made which led to redress of that particular SAC. Other areas only offer to a 35 mph cut off und there are reports of 34 mph invites still.

Fees are still paid to the council who are ultimately in charge und use ADIs und not police to do these courses. If the person refuse the course or misbehaves in class - then the file go back to Police und then to CPS etc.




You do not know that for certain. There are reports in the paper und there are some who have been done for exceeding a mandatory 20 mph via SPECS in London ,, which got squashed as one pof these was set in the preceding 30 mph zone .

Blackpool Gazette und other Lancashire local press ..plus one punter done at 44 mph in 40 mph zone in Cumbria (just 10% ) have all featured in past press articles... with a copy of the NIP produced as evidence in these stories. You can find these in the archives of those newspapers by the way





You came on to this site advocating illegal activities of deliberately dangerous parking in your "village" you mean.

Plus an unsolicited attack on my cousin. who suggested legitimate und legal und practical ways to resolve the problem in your "village" - bearing in mind that he has not seen your village nor audited it for himself .. so suggest the normal "tried und tested und true working method"



Police do not offer SAC/ By the way I know of one "retired cop" on PH, In one thread concerning an ANPR gaffe on M6 in which a family with small kids were forced to walk up a dangerous slip road in appalling weather .. he speculated that "the chap had no VED as well as no insurance" (Car was insured.. insurers failed to update the database.. It also had VED und insurers paid up more compo to settle over hurt feelings/incovenience/danger etc per the MEN press last January.) This same "retired police officer" then posted up a whiney thread on PH bemoaning the fact that his VED had fallen on his windscreen und he got a parking ticket over "failing to display this und failing to display parking pass" ., und claimed he could challenge this. Oddly he got alll huffy when we pointed out that he did not have a leg to stand on on that one.




SACS are the domain of SCP only. They all have different rules und not all offer SAC anyway.. Most cut off at 35 mph only. Any trig speed up to 35 mph und only if pinged by a camera or SCP mobile camera. Lancs are a bit different in that they offer to 10% + 5 cut off across the range. The courses vary. The prices vary... from £60 to £110 in the case of the Lancs/Staffs which are of a whole day's duration und include practical driving in addition to COAST based theory. Some only offer a half day which ist "hazard perception" based... und thus a "sop" to the punter .. und these are normal cut off at 35 mph.


I think you will find that we know a lot more because we sit on FOI on these things


By the way Greenshed does not know IG's name. The great geared up one has more than one Christian name und he und we use the one which ist used familiarly across the family as we like to call him a "right Charlie" at times The late paulie Smith had all his details when he joined in this chat room. IG has never disclosed his surname to this person.

No one knows who Greenshed ist as he has not disclosed his own identity.. but we can guess from past fora. as the posting style ist the same. .. as are the ad homimen und the vulgar abuse..The management know as they have the IP address .. so as the late Hilda Baker would say.. "we knows you know."! und he ist a big girly's blouse too (with red kites on it ..

_________________
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!

Swindon has only got rid of fixed cameras It will still operate speed vans It would be naive to think Swindon will welcome the stupid who think they can hoon it up there

Of course they get Treasury cash .. but they are investing in vans and other courses - including SAC and Green Cross liaison in schools etc.. plus road information/driver information packs such as the leaflets samandben mentions in a different thread... (I note Greenshed is rather quiet on that one.. but then he cannot offer any real advice or informed pointers towards acclaimed good practice .. I make references to ToadCraft/Highway Code and various other courses on advanced driving to back up my posts... Just to say it's not must my opnion and many of these courses are run and organised by retired RPU and even RPU trainers.

But as Wildy says .. if you are offered a SAC - then you pay your money initially to the council (usually the admin body processing fees for these courses ) and not the Treasury via magistrates/SCP offices - whichever system in place. If you are given a fine or fixed penalty then this is endorsable on your driving licence. . By paying the organisers of the course .. as in the council part of the SCP - directly - this keeps the offence in the civil domain/education.


The excess cash over expenditure and sundry overheads paid on these would be probably be sent to Treasury and recycled back to provide and pay for the admin and wages to ADI employed/improve and provide better road safety measures which can include re-enginnering/cycle lanes etc. . Those offered the course do not pay to the same establishment as the FPN as the whole point is that the driver does not receive a penalty but a training programme to help improved standards. As such it comes under "education"

All those offered a SAC (and this includes DIS as offered by police themselves) remain on a database for three years. Any further offences would be liable to FPN or Summons if deemed warranted (case to answer)





As Wildy has said.. of those areas offering a course . some will cut off at 35 mph (which is not quite the same thing as "start at 35 mph" as you may not be offered the course a 36 mph )


Others offer across the whole range at relatively fair cut offs.


We use the guidelines as base but individual officers have the right and common sense to use their own intelligence. If we have stopped someone at the speed limit for something .. then the offence we would be pulling for would NOT be speeding but some other offence.. which could be ANPR flag..noted defect on the vehicle.. seat belt offence.. evidence of general incomptence/poor observation etc.





The Tories intorduced the speed cam in the 90s. New Labour created the SCPs New brooms will always look at existing policies and introduce their own version.


Personally I think the best place to start would be to standardise the SAC and the criteria for invites across the UK as this would make things fairer overall in current climate. If we get to a stage whereby part of a car package would include a "get to know your new baby car" session .. all the toys as some do not understand the safety features they boughtas standard or even " extras" properly - and do not use them properly or even a compulsory refresher on the HighwayCode/hazard awareness - which can be tested on line quite painlessly given advances in internet technology - then this could be a vote winner ,, with a more realistic selling point to voters. (Yep.. they will moan about "fees" but who said driving costs nowt? This could be administered each time you renew the photo licence and included within this fee.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

Steve - So you can provide no evidence that SAC are offered below 35mph. No surprise there then, because they are not.

Wildcat - you write: "BACK in 2003 though.. they WERE inviting to SAC at 33 mph und 34 mph. It was the fuss und protests made which led to redress of that particular SAC. Other areas only offer to a 35 mph cut off und there are reports of 34 mph invites still."

Rumour and mis-information, this was never the case.

I would respectfully add that I give up the will to live when I read your posts.

In Gear - You have convinced me that you may well be a police officer despite my previous doubts. Speeding is indeed an absolute offence as Steve states. But in practice no one has EVER been issued a tickets or invited to a SAC at any speed below 35mph. Partnerships do vary with their cut-off points for SAC - but they are not offered as anything but an alternative to a FPN which are in turn never offered lower that 35mph. You know the reasons - limitation of equipment, discrepancies between equipment and speedometers, certainty of conviction in court.

I don't care how much Steve etc bash the police, councils, partnerships or Gov. - as long as they get their facts right. In not doing so they bring a campaign they claim to support into disrepute.

What did you do, telephone them and ask if they had an officer named "In Gear"?

Has anyone ever heard of GreenShed?

At least I have attracted the ire of the ex-manager of the CSCP, so I must be doing something right!

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

As Wildy says .. I have more than one .. umm Christian name., Like yourself .. my guvs may refer to the first of these names (I have three .. as family tradition. I am known to pals as Charlie or Charles., Greenshed does not know my surname. I think it perhaps as well as he would seem to be rather malicious by character - but I base this on posts as read to date. The real human being may not be as silly..

I identified myslef to the late Paul Smith on the day I registered. I owed this to him and he even accepted we may nt agree on this and that at times.. but we never ever fell out and I owe his grieving Claire that same respect. She loves Paul as I love my Alice . and how Vrenchen and Ted describe their marriage as in "truly madly deeply in love and respect of each other"


I confess to finding Greenshed as an enigma as I have not posted anything supporting any dodgy practice. I am more than delighted that most on here have accepted the COAST message as mature/professional and caring drivers. Given SAC/DIS use this same model to assess.. I think I am expanding and furthering their message



I think I would have been disciplined long since if I were encouraging illegality out there .

I have warned folk that this area is just as tough on miscreants on the roads as colleagues. I would not want folk to get the wrong impression of this area just because we do not have forests of fixed Gatsos I have never said we posecute speeding at low speeds. but that ]we may prosecute substandard driving at any damned speed. we use guidelines as rule of thumb ,., but allow our RPU to use the common snesne professionalism we drim into them during training all the same. If Greenshed Callaghan has a probem with this.. then it's his problem.,

As far as Co Durham is concerned ... we have a firm policy which delivers and portects out public on all counts. I do mot want to come across as complacent as we do have KSI here.. and we seek to reduce . We do record less carnage than average but are not complacent and know we still have to improve as best we can.

I do not see our policy as "in competition for brwony accoldades" We do what we can and hope we have made that difference.. without causing untoward anger from our public. Indeed we have their support.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

Or,

In letting others spread misinformation which they claim to be fact (but have never shown to be evident in any way, even when the reverse has been demonstrated), they are being allowed to bring the campaign they oppose into disrepute.


This is going nowhere fast. I'm not going to allow this to continue for much longer.

Still nothing to back up your false claim then Steve?

Don't worry - I'm sure another Safespeeder will come to your rescue and produce a FPN for 31, 32, 33 or 34mph or an invite to attend a Speed Awareness Course due to an offence at 31, 32, 33 or 34mph. After which I will have to make a grovelling apology to you. Right?

At least we now agree that fine revenue does not go to the Council or the Police. And that Councils get money (a grant)from the Treasury whether they place cameras or not, therefore giving them no incentive to place cameras rather than other road safety measures?

Still absolutely nothing to back up your claims that my claims are false?
Still absolutely nothing to back up your own claim of impossibility for action below 10%+2?
Still absolutely nothing to show that the statements I gave (more than what you've done) in the links are wrong?

Are you going to call Greenshed a liar too?
"In practice the lowest I have seen is by a Police Officer at 33 mph in a 30 mph speed limit..."

Wildy, is there any chance of your 3 colleagues that were pinged giving a copy of the FPN they already returned?


Councils will eventually see a portion of that revenue (not directly of course); no fines will eventually mean somewhat smaller funding from a somewhat smaller 'pot' (they will get funding either way of course).

Regardless, that doesn't validate your earlier absurd claim of:
"Declaring that Councils see cameras as revenue raisers is exactly the same as suggesting the police get to keep revenue. There is no difference -"

Nor does it validate your other claim of:
"[Claire said] the police get to keep speeding fine revenue"

Nor does any of this validate your other claim of:
"I originally referred to the police as numberous posts throughout this site appear under the illusion that police place cameras to raise money for themselves."

All considered, you don't seem have the demeanour or the intellectual wit one would expect from a 'retired headmaster'.

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

I would have hoped that a retired headmaster would have know that salting a tarmac road wouldn't have caused it to break up, in my day headmasters were intelligent people.

_________________
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.

Graball, to be fair, in some schools they WERE known as arrogant bullies! You must have been lucky.

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

I love IG's somewhat "Freudian slip" of Toadcraft since on social get-together on Saturday when we headed southwards to meet the guys on return from a trip und a social get-together with family und pals in the big'burb .. we watched a DVD chez Julia which showed Toad of Toadhole getting done for speeding (The in-laws have kids about to learn how to drive .. so we had a fun compilation of the "what's absolutely about this"

Anyway .. back to the thread. Steve .. I will phone up colleagues. I thought I had copy of one of these NIPS photocopied on file here,.. but I think I've gone und archived all this up und placed in a box right at the back of the cellar. I will phone up to see if I can get hold of another. These guys were the ones who gave us the first mark sheet from their SAC und actually said it was a good course with COAST etc .. but the concerns were raised over the number there who all said 34 - 35 mph pings. I recalll asking them about the types they met on these courses. They said that the youngest on their respective SACS were aged 27 years - just one or two in the two sessions per day .

FOR information .. they reported that there were TWO courses daily: One starting at 9 am und starting the lunch at 11.30 am und the drive then start at 12.30 pm for 2.5 hours. The second session start at 11.30 am... with lunch at 12.30 pm.. und then theory for further 1.5 hours before the two hour driving session.

They said that most of these were 40-65 year old women .. about 60% . Most males were already of retirement age. They reported that in the ice breaking session - they were asked to introduce themselves und say what speed they were "pinged at" ... These three were very surprised that all present reported 34 mph und 35 mph with one stating she had be "got by the chap inthe Hertz van at Wrea Green" ... (the one which had featured in the dailies one month earlier .. parked on a bend .. und one person thought it was abandoned.. stopped und found the cam op hiding under a blnaket in the back! (Oct 2003 Express archives Sam .. I am the person most teachers actually HATED as I have the long und photographic memory und usually use ot to smart-ass und sass! )

A quick gander through LEP etc archives would elicit similar stories such as the one who drove up the Blackpool prom at 34-35 mph und was pinged by four cams und offered the course - as they felt unfair to ban on one journey like that when he appealed via ABD to get one life saver which mean he had 9 points for the three years to declare. I personally thought he should have hit the magistrates as thaat should have been tested for "one journey at steady speed= one offence" - but his solicitor advised differently per his account to the LEP at the time




.

_________________
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!

My cousin Jess ist a headteacher. She ist based in Merseyside. She says you have to be prepared to "roll with the senses of humour" as heavy handedness does not always provide the best discipline. It ist "give und take" as in any successful relationship.


I have sisters-in-law who all teach too. They all say the same thing .. that you have to be fast to react with the right "laconic wit which also know where to draw the discipline line which none cross" . In a way it ist like we deal with our own fruits of our marriage. Nice kids but you have to "lean on them at times to rein 'em und steer back to leveller headed course" if you know what I mean?

But perhaps GDS ist not the head of a comp .. nor a Physics teacher. I think perhaps he was the head of the "infants division" which still has demanding responsibility for Nursery to Infants aged 4-ish to 6/7 year all the same. It require different skillls und management style perhaps to that of the large comp full of stroppy hormonally charged teens although anyone who has had kids will know there ist little difference between the terrible twos und the terrible teens But it may account for his lack of knowledge in some areas of science

The ice get into wear/tear of surface. It freeze. It break the tarmac. When it thaws .. wither naturally or via grit .. the damage done become more apparent


I think he find me "torture to read" because I out -sass him

_________________
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!

Who is going to have to do the substatiation here?

Suffolk have never issued a SAC at 34mph.

Your source is an unsubstatiated forum post. Mine is Suffolk.

That's the problem with Internet fora, full of BS sources and made up "facts" that are simply not factual at all.

Perhaps the contributor slipped with his keyboard and moved down the number pad from "7" to "4"? It's quite easy to do.

I strongly suspect people who say they been offered a SAC for 34 didn't really want to admit their true speed for fear of loss of support or sympathy.

How would you know that? Are you telling us you are actually in a position to review all cases (even ones unfought) from Suffolk? If you can show this, should you have a 'speed camera' avatar?


How remarkably selective of you greenshed...
viewtopic.php?p=209476#p209476

So did these others all tell BS too?
What about the article in the respectable online newspaper further down the list of hits? Shall we dismiss that one too?

So what about this (again):

That's the problem with people with versted interests invading Internet fora, full of contradictory BS and wild claims which have already proven to be utterly misleading ( RTTM et al)

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

SAC in the National Scheme is given between 10% +2 and 10% +6; banter and newspaper reports are not authoritive and should be treated as dubious as that is what they would seem to be. I could canvas all county systems but I don't think it necessary as they will simply follow the example you gave from Suffolk that shows the original source was inaccurate.
I have given an example of a police officer issuing a FPN at 33 in a 30, the Speed Enforcement Policy clearly states this can be done if the manner of driving suggests it is appropriate, that is the case in my example.
RTTM has been addressed and benefits are shown from the use of enforcement whereas your claim here is there is none. The fatality gap is naive fantasy.

Are you any sort of higher authority when it comes to speed enforcement, or should the reader treat you as dubious?


Take note GDS, unless you think Greenshed to be dubious?


No - it has been proven, but not addressed!
We still have PR staff claim effectiveness of cameras without accounting for this effect (or long-term trends):
"74% reduction in collisions at speed camera sites resulting in death or serious injury" [surreycc.gov.uk, 2009]; that doesn't sound to me like it has been addressed.

"RTTM] et al" 'Bias on selection' hasn't been addressed at all has it:
A is claimed to result with Y
B also results with Y
Therefore Y cannot necessarily have been caused by A
...so do you understand this or not? Unless you want to argue that Y must have been caused by A only?

I couldn't help but notice how you ducked out of that thread for whole week after me asking you that, then returned never to acknowledge it.

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