Posted By J Knight
Hi Folks,

A constant theme in the anti-camera litany is: 'we need more police patrols, that would really help road safety'. I have asked on this forum for any evidence that that is the case (evidence rather than opinion), and I repeat my request. However, how effective do we think the Police can be in enforcing limits when a significant number of them have apparently been caught speeding while on duty? And what do we think about the fact that prosecutions have been dropped as being 'against the public interest'? How does this help the credibility of the 'more patrols is what we need' argument?

You'll find the story I'm on about on the BBC web-site,

John

Posted By Aileen
Hi John

I do agree that it doesn't give out a good message if off-duty police caught speeding are either let off or get a lighter penalty than the rest of us.

However, I would urge anyone who thinks speed cameras are a bad thing to spend a few days with the ambulance service to see the effects of speeding (experience from my previous employment). True, not every speeding event ends in an accident but, a large proportion of speeding events that do end in an accident have a quite horrific outcome.

It's my personal opinion that, the lower the limit, the more carefully it should be adhered to (i.e. 20mph outside schools and in busy residential areas). I also believe that it's a nonsense that making sure you stick to the limit means you can't keep your eyes on the road - an argument that I hear regularly. A bit of discipline and practice is usually all that is required.

Getting back to the original point though, the police should absolutely be setting an example and, if they don't, they should be made an example of!

Aileen

Posted By Brigham
Lets be clear on this. I don't think many people are against speed cameras in higher risk areas e.g. accident blackspots. I would suggest the rebellion against speed cameras per se is the blatant miss/overuse of them around the country where the risk is no more than than normal. As a point of evidence, on the A1 from Newcastle to the Scottish Borders where a lot of the road is single track, I recall counting 3 cameras. From the Scottish Borders to Edinburgh which is mostly dual carriageway, I recall counting about 17. Whose trying to con who?

Posted By GT
J Knight / Crim,

I must admit to not being a total complier when it comes to driving within speed limits except in built up areas. There will be many separate discussion headings incorporated in this thread and they will no doubt be selected later.

I think Crim has hit on a great idea with the controlling nav equipment, if it has the effect of controlling his speed then it may work for all of us. I am thinking about asking Santa for one and my question to Crim is which one you have, that is tried and tested.

Merry xmas to all........... that's why Santa doesn't get caught!!

GT

Posted By J Knight
Funnily enough I don't think cameras should be used just in 'high risk' areas: there are no high-risk areas, only high risk drivers.

I like cameras, and can't agree that they are only a revenue raiser. They are a good idea which has been hamstrung by craven government ministers and a 'feral media' (to quote Mr Blair). They should never have been painted yellow.

To me, the nearest analogy is with safe systems of work and safety culture. If you were on a building site and noticed scaffolders following only the bits of the ACOP they liked or agreed with I think you'd be concerned. That's how I feel when I'm confronted by motorists who think they can a) drive as they like and b) how they like is by definition good driving. What on earth makes them think they're so great?

Sticking to speed limits (and other points in the Highway Code etc) is about discipline on the roads. The Police long ago lost control, and it now seems that loss of control extends even to their inability to control their own driving, let alone that of others.

Paint 'em grey and hide 'em,

John

Posted By Colin Reeves
One of the major problems is the "one size fits all".

Consider a country dual-carriageway, fairly straight. Should you drive at the same speed whether it be in the pouring rain on a winter's evening rush hour or if be 5 in the morning on a fine summer Sunday? First is clearly dangerous, but at 69 miles an hour legal. At 75 miles an hour illegal on the quiet Sunday morning. That is illogical.

That is why speed cameras are considered to be less useful that a police officer, who will use a risk assessment approach!

Speed limits are not a good way of enforcing road safety as they do not vary with the conditions.

There is a slogan often quoted "Speed kills". This is not correct, what kills is acceleration from speed to nowt!! A better slogan is "Inappropriate speed can kill"

Colin

Posted By J Knight
Hi Michelle,

With refrence to the Porsche, no of course it's not safe; but imagine if the cameras were grey and hidden? How long before your Mr Posche either got a ban or changed his self-centred attitude to driving?

Its not entirely about 'speed kills'; it is about 'driving as though you own the road kills'. Banning the selfish, the immoderate and the inconsiderate might be a good way forward for those of use who choose to drive as our licences allow, not as we think fit,

John

Posted By J Knight
BB, QED.

But would the Police do a better job? That's the question I asked at the top of the thread. I've been passed by a Police van while I have been doing 30 in Sheffield, so just how good would the Police be at enforcing speed, or just road discipline in future,

John

Posted By Robert K Lewis
Only problem with the police is that if it is a chief constable you will never catch them up - Was it 90 in a 40 limit for one chief constable recently - I did not realise how fast I was going was his excuse - I will watch my speed in future. This same chief constable had the temerity to lecture people on speeding and their criminal intententions.

Bob

Posted By garyh
What really disappoints me in this thread (in fact, it can be seen in many threads) is when people express their opinion as if it were a fact. I do not know what the data shows as regards "safety" cameras and road casualties. I certainly have an opinion, though.

So please, say something like "in my view" or "in my opinion". If you have "facts", give us the data, or where we can find it.

Posted By pluto
Oh, and by the way. I have never had any points on my license and have never had more than a bump in a parking lot.

Posted By Garry Homer
Speed cameras are fine. (pun not intended)

But, more Police on the roads would do it better.

The advantages of the Police patrols are they can sort out:

Drink drivers
Un-fit vehicles
Joy-riders
Gatso 'surfers'

Cameras can not do this.

The Police will also be in closer for all the other needs we have of them.

Best solution; cameras and Police patrols but no more 'rent a cops'.

Posted By BB
Crim,

Fair do's. Point well made. I have to admit to being a little outspoken on this as I am 'the worm that turned'.

My particular low point was in 1993, flat out in my company Rover 214, on the M2, doing 120mph (completely) flat out, drinking a can of cola, smoking a marlboro, whilst talking to a colleague via the car phone.

To make it (even) worse, my colleague was in Hong Kong and there was poor reception combined with a time delay, made using the hands-free impossible.

Getting older has certainly mellowed my behaviour! I cringe when I think about it.

Posted By Pete48
JK, you may want to do some research around the recent Operation Vortex run by Devon and Cornwall Police. They took to the road in unmarked cars with the specific aim of improving driving behaviour.. The one quote that stood out for me was "it was good for us too, driving an unmarked car gives a much better idea of the normal driving standards". 1000 drivers were prosecuted during the campaign, amongst other offences they found people not wearing seat belts, using hand-held mobiles and of course speeding. Some of that was probably about ignorance of the law and if that is all these operations do, then they do by definition improve road safety across the general spectrum of driving behaviour.
My opinion is that they achieve far more than that, how many drivers in Devon and Cornwall change their habits or were more alert following the publicity given to this campaign I wonder?
I am not a fan of speed cameras. They actually say that we do not want to consistently enforce the law anywhere else but here. At least that is the way that most drivers use them.
As to your question about whether policeman can still enforce when their own employees commit offences. It would be a sad day if policemen weren't human beings; I thought a human being making enforcement decisions was what the anti-camera campaigners wanted?

It is an interesting thing to watch how modern society dislikes being judged on many fronts, including simple compliance with the law. As safety bods we often bemoan the difficulty in getting people on board with H&S. It is for your own good we say, it is the law we say, it will save you money we say.
Funny how that doesn't seem to work so well when faced with a subject that "we" don't think is a valid control. Hmmmm.