I was threatened with arrest for warning of a speed camera .

I was threatened with arrest for warning of a speed camera .

Author
Discussion

wizzbilly

955 posts

192 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
Good work OP i salute you .

Dirty pigs should treat members of the public right that simple they tar everyone with same brush and then wonder why others have a pop at them .

they tried doing it outside my house sneaky sods hiding in a side street with camra over wall so i parked my van there so couldnt get anyone should of seen how many police cars arived in the area in such short period of times ,

funny enough lived at current adress 12years and never seen a accident yet but they only place them where accidents happen utter garbage . 2 streets away there is a school and is offten a accident on that stretch of road never seen a camra in 12yrs kind of proves a point

More bent coppers than legal and think that radio gives them power .

I admit i couldnt do there job as have to deal with some right drug addicts drunks etc but we all no motorists are easy targets , wont go chasing a drug addict will they as aint got money to pay fines .

POLICE ARE HERE TO SERVE THE PUBLIC BUT ARE ONLY INTRESTED IN MEETING TARGETS

get burguled tonight car stolen etc you get crime number and a plod will come see you a week later

Do i flash other road users DAM STRAIGHT I DO and if could be botherd would stand outside with a big board with slow down only worried about safty and advising others it would be more appropriate to trake car of there speed just like these smily flashy faces and speed boards etc

Think best one was when i see a load of youths throwing bricks at the camra van if i ever bump into them i must remember to buy them a drink .

streaky

19,311 posts

248 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
floydbax said:
s51, Police Act 1964 - Assaulting or Obstructing a Constable in the Execution of His Duty, namely: acting as a Revenue Agent for HMG.

Streaky

This is a typical example of bending a law for a purpose it was not intended for!
Perhaps you shouldn't have removed the smiley.

Streaky
-
Unintentional, I was just emphasising yr point.
You'll find that using the "Quote" or "Quote all" links to be efficacious, and it will make those of your posts that contain quoted posts much easier for everyone to read.

Streaky

0a

23,879 posts

193 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
I'd ignore it and keep doing as you did.

Derek Smith

45,514 posts

247 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
Just to clarify: spedding convictions are not a police target.

Now that that is clarified and will never, ever be repeated on PH threads again, Let's look at this incident.

You will remember that that drivers who flashed their headlamps at approaching drivers were not prosecuted for obstruction of police. The offence is quite technical and there is Home Office guidance to the police and, I believe, the CPS as to when it should be prosecuted. The drivers were prosectured for misuse of headlamps. One wonders how many lorry drivers are prosecuted for this. Oh, no I don't.

As for indicating to other drivers to slow, case law suggests:

If you only signal to those who are, in your opinion, exceeding the speed limit then it is an offence of obstruction. Whether this comes within the guidelines is another matter.

If you signal to every car to slow then this is not obstruction.

It is possible that the police had set up a special operation with regards drivers flashing their headlamps after seeing the speed trap. There is this 'flavour of the month' enthusiasm and as some other forces have decided to have a go.

There is a defence - technically not a defence as no offence would have been committed - that the driver was flashing the other driver in order to warn the other driver of the vehicle's presence on the road as the driver felt the other car was wandering towards the centre line.


R0G

4,984 posts

154 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
jjr1 said:
I was just doing my duty of using arm signals to slow a few drivers down, who I thought were going too fast and it was coincidentally, just around the corner from a speed camera van.

Next thing I know a group of three of our finest pull up in an unmarked car and tell me that I am facing a possible arrest. Ten minutes later and a few questions and they let me off with a warning.

Yeah, I know 'it was a cool story bro' but I thought I best warn others, they take great offence to having their revenues reduced, even for just a few minutes.
You were lucky just to get a warning because you could have been convicted of obstruction of a police officer and that is a criminal record on your file for life

Your personal views are your own business - if you want to change the laws then there are legal ways to do that

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3330852/...
A DRIVER who flashed his headlights at oncoming motorists to warn them of a police speed trap has been left with a 440 bill for obstructing police.



Edited by R0G on Saturday 6th October 08:16

TheBear

1,940 posts

245 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
Well done OP. Hopefully anyone who was unlicensed/ uninsured/ disqualified had enough warning to turn off/turn around and get away. Phew it could,be been close!

petrolsniffer

2,461 posts

173 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
Well done op smile If I see a van they always get some nice hand signals from me also make sure I warn others too as people have saved me from a fine or two from doing the same.

Pontoneer

3,643 posts

185 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
TheBear said:
Well done OP. Hopefully anyone who was unlicensed/ uninsured/ disqualified had enough warning to turn off/turn around and get away. Phew it could,be been close!
While I can have some sympathy for someone who inadvertently goes over the limit by a small margin ( done it myself in the past ) , I am afraid that those who speed well in excess of the limits know they are doing it and the risks they are taking ; these people , along with unlicenced and uninsured drivers , all of whom know they are breaking the law and still choose to do it , deserve all they get .

I don't go around warning people of speed checks .

yellowjack

17,065 posts

165 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
TheBear said:
Well done OP. Hopefully anyone who was unlicensed/ uninsured/ disqualified had enough warning to turn off/turn around and get away. Phew it could,be been close!
THIS^^^

I am a fully insured driver, with a taxed and MOT'd car. I have been caught by a fixed Gatso once, at the Swansea end of the M4 where the speed limit inexplicably reduces to 50mph. SP50, as I recall. A fair cop, I was doing 70 in a 50 zone, BUT there was no danger, as it was early hours of the morning, well lit, good visibility and no roadworks. £60 and 3 points, and I felt hard-done-by.

Second time I was caught was by one of Hampshire's mobile vans on the A32 through Droxford. 30mph limit, and I was clocked at 34mph. This time I was offered a speed awareness course, the cost of which went straight from my pocket into the pockets of the 'I'm a former Police driving instructor' chap (?jobs for the boys?), and the roly poly social worker type lady who together ran the course.

Now, I know the script, "built up area/speed kills/20's plenty/think of the kiddies", BUT, the van was more than half way through the village, and I was about car 4 in a 'loose convoy' of about 8 cars, and I reckon there's a good chance ALL OF US were caught and fined. IF the SCP was genuinely about SAFETY, surely the place to set up the van is WELL BEFORE the speeding driver has posed a threat to the safety of persons in the village. No, what they did was to allow the offence of 'excess speed' to be committed, then collect the fines.

The problem with this 'record the offence/punish through the post' attitude is that it won't catch the uninsured habitual moron in the unroadworthy, unregistered stbox, as he's got no chance of ever seeing the NIP, leave alone responding to it. So I, and others like me, who, yes, were breaking the law, but were not THAT far outside the prescribed limit, are punished, whilst the truly dangerous morons get away scot free.

Far better, in my opinion, than fixed or mobile cameras that simply record offences, would be an increase in Road Traffic Policing. At least then a living breathing person with the ability to exercise discretion, would be able to examine the offence within it's context, and if there were more officers out and about, we might see overall driving standards improve, as the habitual morons would have to be 'on their toes' all the time, rather than the current system, where they simply learn where the speed traps are, and amend their behaviour on approach, or simply use other routes.

For the record, I will not EVER warn another motorist of the location of a camera. This is principally because I am sick to death of being tailgated/flashed at by following drivers simply for adhering to the speed limit. If you want to get by, overtake, FFS, or if you haven't got the stones, drop back. Trying to intimidate me just will not work, and I WILL become 'Mr Ten to Two, push pull' for as long as you keep up your nonsense. I'm just as likely to be puzzled by a seemingly inappropriate low speed limit as you are. But it's the limit, and because I have a clean license, and no Radar Detector/Satnav to tell me where the cameras are, I'm going to continue to drive like there's a camera around every corner. BECAUSE I CAN. If you are in so much of a hurry that your judgement is clouded, then maybe you should just get up earlier, because then you would be in front of me. wink

BigBob

1,471 posts

224 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
TheBear said:
Well done OP. Hopefully anyone who was unlicensed/ uninsured/ disqualified had enough warning to turn off/turn around and get away. Phew it could,be been close!
......... and how does a SpeedSafety Camera detect these unlicensed/ uninsured/ disqualified drivers if they aren't exceeding the speed limit. wink


BB

TheBear

1,940 posts

245 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
BigBob said:
......... and how does a SpeedSafety Camera detect these unlicensed/ uninsured/ disqualified drivers if they aren't exceeding the speed limit. wink


BB
With an unmarked vehicle containing 3 officers and ANPR...

yajeed

4,888 posts

253 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
Out of interest, does anyone know the offical reason for painting speed cameras bright yellow?

Surely if it's to encourage people to slow down in that area (and therefore prevent them from being caught for speeding), then whoever painted them should be in for a visit from the BIB too?

thinfourth2

32,414 posts

203 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
This would be the undermanned and over stretched police i keep reading about



streaky

19,311 posts

248 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
yajeed said:
Out of interest, does anyone know the offical reason for painting speed cameras bright yellow?
It is only advisory. Yellow scameras used to indicate that the scamera pratnerst operated the hypothecation scheme.

Streaky

anonymous-user

53 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
People are being deliberately obtuse. You all know the logic. It's that the person will re-offend and still present the same risk whereas otherwise they would have entered into a system where their their behaviour would be challenged and they wouldn't re-offend. You can be as irrational and emotive as you want about it, but you run the risk with the police 'having a word' if you do what you did in those circumstances.

Saying that, I'm yet to be convinced SCPs offer a tangible benefit to safety. An offence that occurs billions of times per year can't offer that much risk in the grand scheme of things. Speed and inappropriate speed for the circumstances are two different things. The latter kills the former doesn't.

jjr1 said:
whoami said:
jjr1 said:
woody155 said:
take no notice of their stupid warning u did the right thing
The warning was quite clear that they would arrest me. Even if it didn't proceed any further, a trip down to the station and a few hours of 'no comment', would even bore me.
And they wonder why public support is sometimes lacking?
A very astute point as the public do not differentiate between various positions within the force. If they see fit to issue threats of arrest for something that helps them, to inform members of the public of a safety hazard area, they can't complain when people stand and watch them trying to tackle the drunks on a Friday night.
Not that astute at all. At least not to the degree that you and most other people on here don't realise or acknowledge that you don't hold a monopoly on opinions. It's easy to surround yourself with like-minded people who all think the same and conclude everyone must think like you. A vast amount of people contact the police complaining of excessive speed. This is also reflected when people are surveyed around priorities etc. From my experience, for every person who doesn't like the police enforcing minor motoring, there is someone who supports it.






Clivey

5,108 posts

203 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
OP: I just hope you didn't apologise!

thumbup

andy_s

19,397 posts

258 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
yajeed said:
Out of interest, does anyone know the offical reason for painting speed cameras bright yellow?

Surely if it's to encourage people to slow down in that area (and therefore prevent them from being caught for speeding), then whoever painted them should be in for a visit from the BIB too?
They used to be hidden away or camouflaged, but then had to be painted in yellow and placed in a position where they could be clearly seen and roadsigns put up warning of their presence as it was decided they weren't there to 'trap' people but there as traffic calmers - hence their very presence made people slow down, thus achieving their aims.

I don't really see how an added warning that someone gives to oncoming traffic travelling at an indeterminant speed would make much more difference, therefore I see the whole 'obstruction' thing as a construct and a pitiful waste of time and resources, both the police. IP and the courts.

People and the organisations they run sometimes lose perspective, especially when they feel they may have been 'slighted' in some way, i.e. cheated out of a conviction or two by someone warning of a cameras presence. It's pretty pathetic really. Certainly not something I would have entertained as a police officer.

R0G

4,984 posts

154 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
Am I right in aying that many of the more modern cameras are ANPR ones so can check on tax insurance etc as well as speed?

covboy

2,573 posts

173 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
R0G said:
Am I right in aying that many of the more modern cameras are ANPR ones so can check on tax insurance etc as well as speed?
No

R0G

4,984 posts

154 months

Saturday 6th October 2012
quotequote all
covboy said:
R0G said:
Am I right in aying that many of the more modern cameras are ANPR ones so can check on tax insurance etc as well as speed?
No
I wonder why modern technology is not being used in the way I described?