RE: Canada Scraps Cameras
Thursday 5th July 2001
Canada Scraps Cameras
Common sense prevails in North America
Discussion
Speed cameras like all other forms of law enforcement have got their place and use. However, they should not be overdone or it can loose its effectiveness. No one likes getting 'done' whether it is a speeding ticket, or a ticket for no seatbelt or whatever. But there again no one likes to see a friend or relative get killed or injured as a result of an RTA. Road safety in the U.K. is reasonably good, but as with everything there is room for improvement, and that is what the government appear to be trying to do. They do this by looking at amongst other thing statistics, and one of the statistics is the increase in the number of injury RTA's. But why is this happening, surely cars are safer?. Well maybe they are but a great number of the public in this country are becoming dishonest, and making fraudulent claims for injuries they have not got, as a result of being in an RTA. Consequently they have caused an increase in the number of recorded RTA's. (it also takes money out of the health service). How many of you know of a friend etc who has put in such a claim?.
Certainly in my job it is reaching daft proportions, in nearly every minor RTA I attend some joker is sat there holding there neck trying to make out they have whiplash. Perhaps I should stop giving out producers and hand out oscars, some of the performances certainly warrant them.
To sum up, enforcement is needed, but it should be justifyable and selective based on evidence of problems within that area, in respect of automatic detection devices. Day to day enforcement by individual officers on patrol, is I feel pitched just about right. With very few exceptions most of my colleagues do a fair and reasonable job with speed/traffic enforcement. Other than that I feel that people who make bent claims for injuries they have not got are causing the honest motorist more problems than you think (ie not just higher insurance).
Edited by john robson on Thursday 5th July 11:09
No Manek Mr Robson does not make the laws, however as a Member of the Police Service He and his Colleagues are tasked wih their enforcement, a job within which they have some discretion. Like any profession there are many fair, reasonable members of the police who excercise this discretion with the care and attention it deserves, however the Motorist is an easy catch, the majority of motoring offences are absolute crimes and they contribute to the crime figures as well as to the balance sheet. He can only expect to come under fire on a board such as this.
I have a healthy understanding of the law and have been surrounded by lawyers all my life (there are 9 in my family!!)Like wise I have never fundamentally had anything other than respect for the Police Service even getting lamped by a policeman at a demonstration which I was observing did not shake that.
In recent years, however this has changed, and this is due in no minor part to the handling of the issues of motoring offences. Police authority has always been bolstered by being essentially on the side of right. On this issue they police zealously and are backed up only by evidence that is at best shaky. I have little faith in the Service as a result, if their heads can be turned(and this is deliberately inflamatory) by the offer of money, both by meeting targets and by retaining revenues, I see little reason why their integrity should be any different in other areas.
I should also point out that I say all this from the point of view of somebody who has been the victim of a serious traffic accident. Speed causes accidents when the speeding vehicle is under the control of a driver not well enough trained to handle the situation, speed alone does not kill, ignorance does, and the actions of the Police service on this issue can only be desciribed as ignorant, with cameras and fluorescent vehicles a distraction from the serious business of driving a car on the public road.
John,
I think your comment about "human" enforcement is very important here. People can at least have a discussion with a police officer about what they did wrong and there is an element of discretion in the process.
Cameras are just grey, wallet invading thugs standing by the side of the road.
It's interesting to hear your comments about the number of "injuries" in RTAs. I hadn't really considered that connection with the proliferation of speed cameras before and I have to say I find it rather disappointing. But then I guess it would be too time consuming (and useful !!) to actually do the proper research into RTAs and find out how many people are genuinely being injured.
Out of curiosity, is it an offence to spray paint on the road, provided it doesn't obscure any existing road markings ?? I just wondered what the reaction might be if people went out and sprayed big patches of paint on the road, coincidentally in close proximity to speed cameras......
DANS,
that is by far the most intelligent sumnation toward this governments behavior I have yet seen,I admit that I gave JR the benefit of doubt considering his position in the scheme of things but now I think his defence of the proliferation of cameras with absolutely no interest in anything
other than cash generation is beginning to sound lame.
nmilton,
grey wallet invading thugs... I like that, how about getting some bumper stickers made up
Edited by apache on Thursday 5th July 12:34
In regard to all the whip lash claims..
I realise that this is by far the biggest reason for all the insurance claims, and everyone knows about it aswell. Hence every jo blogs and his 'mate' are staging tiny shunts to get a nice big wedge of cash from the insurance company for their stiff neck.
I don't know much about insurance companies, but do you think its possible that insurance companies could start stating that you are full covered for third-party claims for medical/car EXCEPT the whiplash injuries? or am I just being igornant.
Edited by bosshog on Friday 6th July 09:27
False medical claims are a problem as are uninsured drivers, however the real problem is the car repair companies. I don't know how many of you have tried to book a car in for body work when the job is not an insurance one, but from my experience it usually produces a string of plumber like tooth sucking and alot of do you really think "it's worth it" or "Sorry we're snowed under just now". Go in with a cheque for the lot from mr N Union and they have no problem claiming they'll have you on the road by monday, at a cost. My mate got driven into by a lady who wanted a long insurance wrangle over fault, he could not be bothered and offered her a cheque there and then as all the damage ammounted to a 10 inch scratch on the drivers door less than 5mm deep.
The car went to the bodyshop and the repairers proceeded to replace the door, strip to bear metal the whole drivers side and respray total cost 1500 quid. This was a franchised dealer and the car was an 8 year old micra surely worth les than 1500 anyway.
Until some control is taken over the practices within the motor trade there will continue to be huge insurance bills and little relief for those of us paying through the nose.
Edited by dans on Friday 6th July 11:48
>>With very few exceptions most of my colleagues do a fair and reasonable job with speed/traffic enforcement. <<
Officers can (and do, and should) apply discretion. Dumb grey boxes cannot, and this is why I object so strongly. The policy of cameras on the few "overtaking straights" on country A roads is a real pain, as the safest overtaking manueover is to get past FAST and get back on your own side of the road. What happens when the poloce see a Gatso photo of such a manouever?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff