Safe Speed Forums

What Is excactly meant by the trained eye? A Police officer can say he saw you jump a red light from 500 yards away & That a driver was well over the Speed limit, without any proof. Have they got any Qualifications stating this? We can all tell if someones speeding etc

_________________
RoADA Member -GOLD 2008
If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there.

You think so? Go stand by the side of a road, any road (though only if it's legal for you to be standing there!), and try judging the speed of vehicles. To make it more challenging, try standing in a position where you can see a speed camera which you know to be active, and see how many of the vehicles you think are speeding then go on to trip the camera... It's easy enough to tell if someone is speeding when you're driving in your own vehicle and can compare your speed with others, it's a lot harder when you're stationary with no means of measurement other than the Mk1 Eyeball.

If it was so easy for the average person to determine speed by eyeballing, we wouldn't have as many reports of NIMBY residents demanding speed cameras because of all the speeding motorists using their road as a racetrack... unless it really is easy to judge, and they're just lying through their teeth about a non-existent speeding problem to try and get a camera anyway

errr no?
without conclusive proof this would just be a difference of opinion.
i got a talking to for going 'too fast' round a bend having encountered a 'police slow' sign half way round.
i resisted the temptation to argue (heaven forbid suggest it the audi on its side may have been going a bit too quick ) but i'm not sure they could have taken it any further, short of inconveniencing me with a documents & vehicle check.

but chapter and verse from someone in the know would be good.

Well done ed m, you obviously know that the first test all police officers run, is the attitude test.

_________________
'Detritus, get yer stoney arse over ere'

Ah , but lets not forget the unquestional calibrated eye of the residents who say that cars are speeding in their street, and get a speeding blitz when one of their young kids ( about 3) walks out in front of a car doing about 15mph when playing unsupervised in the street.
The drivers get harassed, the mother gets -what - nothing - you cant get points on a parents licence-especially if you're a single parent on benefits

It may be a coincidence, but I'm just watching the BBC news story about the Conservatives plan to 'order' useless parents to spend more time with their anti-social offspring in an attempt to improve their behaviour. What happens if they don't is anyones guess.

ASBO Tax

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Which you and I will pay I suppose?

I think in the case of some parents the less time spent with the children the children the better....

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Yes - gents - i was actually talking about the boneheads (typically) who live on council estates ( typically) and can't be bothered to suspervise their young kids. Read a piece about it not so long ago - called "play streets", where the local council ( usually full of nambie pambie idiots) decides that so & so street will become a "play street". We as motorists still pay our road tax to "maintain " this sort of street , but (and this is big but) we can't actualy drive down this street( unless we live in it). This road is given over to kids - You can drive to your house if you live in the street, and park in it if you live in it. Just don't expect the police/council to come runing when you constantly have to clean all your windows before moving it or your wing mirrors keep getting knocked off by a ball( or you find kids of 3-4 walking over your car).
Then when you drive down it at about 15 mph- you find some 2-3 year old jumps out from behind a parked car , hits you in the middle of your car and then --- mother rushes out " Speeding /reckless motorist" .
Who let the infant out to play in first place -

Think i'm joking - try it for yourself

The street where I live is an unofficial "play street", although I have yet to encounter any of the scenarios you list above.

Granted it's a cul-de-sac so the only people driving here are the residents & their visitors, but the kids certainly don't behave in the manner you suggest above.

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?

1. Measure the distance between 2 points. In a built up are say 2 lamp-posts.
2. Work out the m/s equivalent to the speed limit.
3. Divide the the m/s into the distance between points to get the time to traverse that distance at the speed limit.
4. Observe vehicles passing point 1. Start to count.
5. Did vehicle pass point 2 in a time less than the figure calculated at 3.
6. There you have it - A trained eye!

Now why didn't you all think of that?

4 - count - ???? how ancient ,and i thought that camera pratnership wallies were scientific and accurate, like the 81 mph bus.
Sorry - was thinking of the "economy" version of village vigilantes ,armed with tape measures, calculators and heard chanting,"one second,twwo seconds"
With a new symbol

Come on, Keep up!
All you are after is finding out if the vehicle is over or under the speed limit. It takes just a few seconds. If you are not confident with counting use a watch, with a second hand, that's the one that you can see moving without having to stare at it for a long time, if you really want to mark it up with a pen or something if you are cofused with numbers.

I do agree with the 250 mph Allegro though. That wasn't really acceptable practice for a science that is so very basic.

That's the point I'm trying to get over. I just can't understand how you find it so difficult. Perhaps it's because I am remarkably clever and work with more remarkably clever people.

Folks, this arrogant vitriol has been posted from an IP address associated with Steve Callaghan, manager of the Cumbria S camera partnership.

Steve, you appear to have turned into a really obnoxious petty hitler. Carry on like this and you will be banned from these forums. I expect far higher standards of behaviour from public servants.

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

Ah yes, that's how you've managed to reduce the number of road deaths in Cumbria.

Oh, hang on a second, you haven't

_________________
"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

And in the case of CSCP talivan operators...

1. Measure the distance between 2 points [using the range-finding function of the same laser gun that is later used to corroborate the speed reading]

Thus both the primary AND corroboratory evidence are now absolutely dependent upon the accuracy of a tool that is only supposed to be used for obtaining secondary corroboratory evidence.

In truth, the "opinion" that is used as the primary evidence is reduced to being a manual approximation of the integration element of the laser gun. In other words it's effectively the same piece of evidence as the corroboration, but with several extra levels of inaccuracy built in!

This is the way the "remarkably clever" people do it!

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

Maybe because we're thinking about the sort of scenario mentioned at the start of the thread, where you don't have the luxury of being able to prepare your hunting ground, and instead are having to simply judge whether someone is above or below the limit based on an instantaneous observation.

So, without any pre-prepared distance markers or crib sheets for time/speed conversions, could YOU accurately determine whether someone was above or below the limit on any given stretch of road? Not quite as easy as you make it out to be, is it... oh, and let's not forget that someone's licence and finances are depending on you being correct in your estimation - the pressure is mounting, are they or aren't they speeding? Are you SURE? Would you be able to stand in a court of law and be entirely comfortable in stating under oath that in your considered opinion the driver was breaking the law, knowing what the consequences might be for that driver?


Sure, it's easy if you can rig the process in your favour, but you can't always have things your own way, can you. Now howsabout you stop trying to score cheap points by insulting people and start taking a proper part in the discussion by giving reasoned, thought-out responses which actually sound as if they're coming straight from your heart and mind as opposed to a random page in the Bumper Book of Politically Correct Scameraship PR Responses




Whereas this forum is merely populated by a number of individuals who've proven themselves academically (engineers, scientists, medics...) to be "clever", plus a whole bunch of other people who may or may not have any top-notch academic qualifications to call their own but who have probably learned as much through living in the real world and have just as much right to consider themselves as "clever" as any of us with letters before/after our names. Oh yes, and I'd never believe anyone who boasts about how clever they think they are - in my experience the truly gifted amongst us are the ones who either don't realise it, or prefer not to make a big fuss about it.

Or in your case, letters

So intelligent, in fact, that you just can't see the wood for trees.
Try looking a bit outside of your blinkered viewpoint for a change.

Cheers
Peter