Legality of slip road speed traps

[Chim]

Phatboy317 said:

Yes, they seem to go to any lengths, including forcing potential conflicts with oncoming traffic.
On the plus side, any head-on collisions which ensue will be within the speed limit

\ From my experience the traps I have came across are, in general, normally located in a safe to deploy area, my main complaint with traps in general is that they are set up on roads that have limits that do not appear to match the taos conditions. There seem to have been a big push in recent years to reduce limits on roads and bypasses to unnaturally low limits, 50 in former 70 dual carriageways is a common one. These then are the points that the camera vans set up home as its easy money.

A prime example of this is the below, the area of the A71 between the 2 roundabouts was reduced to a 50 zone a few years back, all feeder roads are 70. Guess where a speed van is almost permanently camped out.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.5970449,-4.50463...

Going off topic though, as this is about the safety aspect of the deployment and not about speed traps and there worth.

[Chim]

Wow, this has moved on. I also seem to have been quoted a lot, which is nice, I think

Van, can I bring you back to my particular case, do you think its safe or unsafe in respect to the duty being carried out.

With regards to the argument surrounding the use of hand held speed cameras, there does appear to be a lot of ill-informed fairy tales out there with the officer having to outwit the vehicle being one of them, another is around calibration which is also a bit of an old wives tale.

The below link clears most of this up, if you skip to section 7 though it is very clear on the use of cameras within a vehicle.

http://www.acpo.police.uk/documents/uniformed/2011...

[Chim]

vonhosen said:

Your particular case (if you mean the slip road on the A road) it would depend on lots of factors, where exactly on the slip road, time of day, weather, how busy with traffic etc etc. All can affect the level of risk (or not) & subsequently the acceptability in the circumstances.

It would be the same for Highways Agency being stopped in a lane in order to cut grass to the side of the slip road for instance. The full circumstances would determine whether it presented an unacceptable level of risk or not.

Your butt must be getting blooming sore on that fence by now

On the highway agency, they come along with a truck that has 30ft tall flashing arrow stuck to its butt. Just in case you somehow manage to miss this though they have installed big huge train bumpers that look strong enough to spring you back to where you started your journey should you actually hit them.

Failing the availability of this behemoth though they will put out 40 miles of cones prior to the 100 yard stretch that they are actually working on.

[Chim]

vonhosen said:

But the point is there is no one answer (that you appear to want) because these things, just like whether a speed is dangerous, depends on all the relevant circumstances.
Where a statutory offence exists such as you stopping on the motorway or exceeding the speed limit, the circumstances don't matter.
That's the whole point of the legislation the way it's written, removing the assessment.

We will need to agree to differ on this one, in fact your remarks surrounding the workers on the grass verge tend to back up my assertion of risk. The council have assessed the risk to workers and traffic and in ALL cases they will post signage well in advance and go as far as to cone of the entire lane of the slip if the workers are on the verge.

[Chim]

vonhosen said:

Chim said:

vonhosen said:

But the point is there is no one answer (that you appear to want) because these things, just like whether a speed is dangerous, depends on all the relevant circumstances.
Where a statutory offence exists such as you stopping on the motorway or exceeding the speed limit, the circumstances don't matter.
That's the whole point of the legislation the way it's written, removing the assessment.

We will need to agree to differ on this one, in fact your remarks surrounding the workers on the grass verge tend to back up my assertion of risk. The council have assessed the risk to workers and in ALL cases they will post signage well in advance and go as far as to cone of the entire lane of the slip if the workers are on the verge.

As would the Police if they were working outside & in the presence of more than one vehicle on the slip.

Exactly, that applies to stationery vehicles as well though. Occupant of broken down cars on slip roads and hard shoulders are told to leave the vehicle and position themselves behind the barriers or off to the grass verging due to the inherent dangers involved of a collision, yet here we have officers parked in the same fashion to carry out a duty that could be, and this is an important bit, carried out from a a far safer location without impeding that duty in any way.

[Chim]

vonhosen said:

tapereel said:

From my experience of stopping in a police car on a slip road to a dual-carrageway or motorway, a traffic officer won't do it if there is a danger to him or the public. Perhaps there are traffic officers that disragard the risk; I am yet to meet one.

They'll do a dynamic risk assessment with regard to the full circumstances.

Now you are hitting on an area that I am familiar with. If they are carrying out a risk assessment the first question is as below

Can this activity be undertaken easily without the need for Risk. Answer, yes it can.

[Chim]

vonhosen said:

Chim said:

vonhosen said:

tapereel said:

From my experience of stopping in a police car on a slip road to a dual-carrageway or motorway, a traffic officer won't do it if there is a danger to him or the public. Perhaps there are traffic officers that disragard the risk; I am yet to meet one.

They'll do a dynamic risk assessment with regard to the full circumstances.

Now you are hitting on an area that I am familiar with. If they are carrying out a risk assessment the first question is as below

Can this activity be undertaken easily without the need for Risk. Answer, yes it can.

But does that impact adversely on their ability to then catch up with the perpetrator in a timely manner?
It may still be the best local option if it can be done acceptably safely.

Your clutching at straws now

Safety over technical infringement. There is only one answer to this.

[Chim]

vonhosen said:

Chim said:

vonhosen said:

Chim said:

vonhosen said:

tapereel said:

From my experience of stopping in a police car on a slip road to a dual-carrageway or motorway, a traffic officer won't do it if there is a danger to him or the public. Perhaps there are traffic officers that disragard the risk; I am yet to meet one.

They'll do a dynamic risk assessment with regard to the full circumstances.

Now you are hitting on an area that I am familiar with. If they are carrying out a risk assessment the first question is as below

Can this activity be undertaken easily without the need for Risk. Answer, yes it can.

But does that impact adversely on their ability to then catch up with the perpetrator in a timely manner?
It may still be the best local option if it can be done acceptably safely.

Your clutching at straws now

Safety over technical infringement. There is only one answer to this.

Acceptable safety over potentially unacceptable safety (again you are assuming it's always about prosecuting minor speed transgressions when you see them).

But parking on slips has already been deemed as totally unacceptable, as has excessive speeding I will grant you, when you have a choice though and this choice in only hindered by a slight reduction in pursuit time there can only be one answer, the safest alternative here is to take the slight hit on pursuit time

[Chim]

vonhosen said:

Chim said:

But parking on slips has already been deemed as totally unacceptable, as has excessive speeding I will grant you, when you have a choice though and this choice in only hindered by a slight reduction in pursuit time there can only be one answer, the safest alternative here is to take the slight hit on pursuit time

Parking on slips roads has not been deemed to be totally unacceptable (i.e. in all circumstances). It depends on the circumstances.

There be them straws again, it has been accepted to be totally unacceptable. If you go back to your blanket exemption for officers it does not state anywhere in this that its acceptable for the police to park on a slip, its a cover all, this cover all is caveatted by Risk assessment of the dangers and I have already shown here that the risk assessment can not be justified for this manoeuvre/duty

[Chim]

Mk3Spitfire said:

Chim said:

it has been accepted to be totally unacceptable.

Accepted by whom? (Genuine question)

Motorway regs, although not sure on bypasses but I would imagine the same applies.

[Chim]

vonhosen said:

Chim said:

vonhosen said:

Chim said:

But parking on slips has already been deemed as totally unacceptable, as has excessive speeding I will grant you, when you have a choice though and this choice in only hindered by a slight reduction in pursuit time there can only be one answer, the safest alternative here is to take the slight hit on pursuit time

Parking on slips roads has not been deemed to be totally unacceptable (i.e. in all circumstances). It depends on the circumstances.

There be them straws again, it has been accepted to be totally unacceptable. If you go back to your blanket exemption for officers it does not state anywhere in this that its acceptable for the police to park on a slip, its a cover all, this cover all is caveatted by Risk assessment of the dangers and I have already shown here that the risk assessment can not be justified for this manoeuvre/duty

You are mistakenly conflating you not being allowed to do something with it automatically being unsafe whatever the circumstances.

You doing 71 in a 70 is illegal, but that doesn't mean it's unacceptably safe when you do.
You stopping on the hard shoulder to phone home & tell your family you'll be late for dinner is illegal, it doesn't mean it's unacceptably safe when you do.

The full circumstances determine with something is acceptably safe, not it being outlawed for those without exemptions.

At the end of the day laws are mainly around common sense, if there where no laws in place I, as thinking person and of average intelligence, can work out that stopping on a slip road for any reason other than having broken down is a really stupid thing to do, I do not need motorway regs or a risk assessment to tell me this. All the risk assessments, conditions, circumstances etc do not change this, the only one that would change it would be if the slip road was not actually in use. The road is filled with idiots and the unobservant, I have also previously posted a perfectly viable and common scenario where it could easily result in an accident for even careful drivers.The officers in the car have precisely zero control over their situation

Back to the risk, is does not equate in any way imaginable.

[Chim]

Mk3Spitfire said:

Chim said:

Motorway regs, although not sure on bypasses but I would imagine the same applies.

Could you post a link to this literature?

If you read back to earlier posts, around page three I think, the regs are already quoted. Need to skip over the silly stuff prior to getting into the grown up discussion that is taking place and being enjoyed at the moment though

[Chim]

vonhosen said:

Chim said:

Mk3Spitfire said:

Chim said:

it has been accepted to be totally unacceptable.

Accepted by whom? (Genuine question)

Motorway regs, although not sure on bypasses but I would imagine the same applies.

Motorway regs do not apply to the slip road you provided a link to & something being outlawed for the populace does not mean it can't be done with an acceptable degree of safety.
Motorway regs apply to all motorways, there are no such regs for all A grade roads.

Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 1st March 19:43

There is though a big"no stopping at any time sign" prior to entry on to the slip.

[Chim]

vonhosen said:

Chim said:

vonhosen said:

Chim said:

vonhosen said:

Chim said:

But parking on slips has already been deemed as totally unacceptable, as has excessive speeding I will grant you, when you have a choice though and this choice in only hindered by a slight reduction in pursuit time there can only be one answer, the safest alternative here is to take the slight hit on pursuit time

Parking on slips roads has not been deemed to be totally unacceptable (i.e. in all circumstances). It depends on the circumstances.

There be them straws again, it has been accepted to be totally unacceptable. If you go back to your blanket exemption for officers it does not state anywhere in this that its acceptable for the police to park on a slip, its a cover all, this cover all is caveatted by Risk assessment of the dangers and I have already shown here that the risk assessment can not be justified for this manoeuvre/duty

You are mistakenly conflating you not being allowed to do something with it automatically being unsafe whatever the circumstances.

You doing 71 in a 70 is illegal, but that doesn't mean it's unacceptably safe when you do.
You stopping on the hard shoulder to phone home & tell your family you'll be late for dinner is illegal, it doesn't mean it's unacceptably safe when you do.

The full circumstances determine with something is acceptably safe, not it being outlawed for those without exemptions.

At the end of the day laws are mainly around common sense, if there where no laws in place I, as thinking person and of average intelligence, can work out that stopping on a slip road for any reason other than having broken down is a really stupid thing to do, I do not need motorway regs or a risk assessment to tell me this. All the risk assessments, conditions, circumstances etc do not change this, the only one that would change it would be if the slip road was not actually in use. The road is filled with idiots and the unobservant, I have also previously posted a perfectly viable and common scenario where it could easily result in an accident for even careful drivers.The officers in the car have precisely zero control over their situation

Back to the risk, is does not equate in any way imaginable.

Laws are legislated because a sufficient number of us have not shown common sense in our judgement in relation to the activity, hence the need to legislate. That's not to say that some couldn't have adequately judged it, just that a sufficient number to cause the legislators concern have.

Of course they have some control over the level of risk by looking at all the circumstances & making a choice with due regard to all of them.
That's using judgement.

That though is my point, they are making a judgment based on risk, the fact that they have no control over the actions of the great unwashed in terms of how they approach and use the slip means that the risk is always there, it does not go away regardless of conditions, it may lessen due to a clear and bright day, it is still there though. I then go back to the point you raised, risk assessment, when you apply the first question in the risk assessment this particular duty fails it.

[Chim]

vonhosen said:

Chim said:

vonhosen said:

Chim said:

Mk3Spitfire said:

Chim said:

it has been accepted to be totally unacceptable.

Accepted by whom? (Genuine question)

Motorway regs, although not sure on bypasses but I would imagine the same applies.

Motorway regs do not apply to the slip road you provided a link to & something being outlawed for the populace does not mean it can't be done with an acceptable degree of safety.
Motorway regs apply to all motorways, there are no such regs for all A grade roads.

There is though a big"no stopping at any time sign" prior to entry on to the slip.

There's no such sign on motorways because of the regs. You entering the motorway means all manner of rules come into play.
The point remains that there are no such regs on all A grade roads. You need signage in order to enforce each.

I give you the signage on the slip in question, you can also note that its not exactly a clear sight slip road when entering

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.607068,-4.64735,...

[Chim]

Mk3Spitfire said:

Chim said:

If you read back to earlier posts, around page three I think, the regs are already quoted. Need to skip over the silly stuff prior to getting into the grown up discussion that is taking place and being enjoyed at the moment though

Ta. The reams of multi quotes was a bit much to take in. What are ACPO's feelings on the subject?

Not much to say on it that I can find other than the following

Slip roads form part of the motorway and all motorway regulations still apply.

[Chim]

Cliftonite said:

Chim said:

I give you the signage on the slip in question, you can also note that its not exactly a clear sight slip road when entering

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.607068,-4.64735,...

So the implication is that the police are stupid enough to park a car just around a bend on a Clearway?

Thats exactly where they where, its also quite a common spot for them.

Anyway, we seem to have come to an impasse, personally, I think I have won the debate Would imagine though that others disagree, not looking at you at all here Van,

Have enjoyed it though, after the initial nonsense, and have learned some stuff as well so all good. Thanks to Van and others for contributing and will bow out and leave to others to perhaps carry it on.

Edited by Chim on Sunday 1st March 20:51

[Chim]

The Mad Monk said:

Chim said:

Thats exactly where they where, its also quite a common spot for them.

Edited by Chim on Sunday 1st March 20:51

How do you know?

In your first post you told that it was your daughter, not you, who allegedly saw the police vehicle.

No, go back and read properly, I said my daughter came in raving about it and it got me thinking, as I have said MULTIPLE times this is common practice here in Scotland and this is one the spots that they are often at.

[Chim]

FlyingFin said:

You obviously cannot read sufficiently well to understand what was being said, I clearly said:

"whilst awaiting for the local authority to arrive. This would have been deemed to be a danger to the public, hence the need to park the vehicle if a fend off type position protecting the public from such danger."


AND


"but the spillage was still awaiting action from the local authority."


But that would be difficult to understand wouldn't it...


My examples were feasible suggestions as to why the car could have been there. Examples which had not been considered or discussed.


Since you were obviously there as you have know there was no subsidence and no local authority workers on scene or on their way, what did really happen? What was the make and model of the police vehicle? How many people in it? How many people were inconvenienced by the positioning of the police vehicle?

You don't know the answers to the questions? Why is that then??


You are obviously only out for an argument.


Go take a look in a mirror, you might find someone who will listen to you there.

Do you practice being an obnoxious condescending tt at the mirror in the morning or does it just come naturally to you.