Watch out for Tractors

[HantsRat]

A marked police car will only slow people down when they see it or due to being flashed approaching it. Speed enforcement from an unmarked vehicle will catch more people but once word gets around such as this article, it will slow more drivers down as they never know if there will be a police camera or not. I can guarantee bikers have slowed right down along this route since they know police target speeders in unmarked vehicles.

Overall aim - More people slow down in the long run and not just when the see a police car or get flashed.

Edited by HantsRat on Wednesday 30th September 12:23

[V8 Fettler]

Policemen hiding in tractors to catch motorists?! Is this some sort of bizarre Terry Gilliam cartoon sketch?

[Hackney]

HantsRat said:

A marked police car will only slow people down when they see it or due to being flashed approaching it. Speed enforcement from an unmarked vehicle will catch more people but once word gets around such as this article, it will slow more drivers down as they never know if there will be a police camera or not. I can guarantee bikers have slowed right down along this route since they know police target speeders in unmarked vehicles.

Overall aim - More people slow down in the long run and not just when the see a police car or get flashed.

Edited by HantsRat on Wednesday 30th September 12:23

Discuss with reference to visible, static cameras (GATSO etc) as well as the vast number of additional offences that a marked police car can detect and prevent.

[anonymous-user]

BullyB said:

If it had anything to do with safety, they would have a marked car complete with flashing lights.

Again, humans will change the way they behave when they face a loss. This is called 'loss aversion'.

BullyB said:

By actually allowing the vehicles to continue driving fast and not stopping/slowing them down, they are proving there actually isn't any danger...

A flawless understanding of risk It's behaviour change over a sustained period that reduces the risk, not reducing one short period of inappropriate speed between the camera and the check-point.

[HantsRat]

Hackney said:

Discuss with reference to visible, static cameras (GATSO etc) as well as the vast number of additional offences that a marked police car can detect and prevent.

People know where Gatso's are located if they know the area and most Sat Navs alert drivers to these so they slow down for the camera then speed up again when they pass. Not knowing if an unmarked car/tractor/horse box is on the road will make motorists drive at a lower speed as they will not have a warning about a speed enforcement zone. They will be wary if there is a police officer somewhere. Yes a marked car will prevent other offences such as mobile phone use but motorbike riders don't use mobile phones. This Op is to reduce speeding motorists and it seems motorbikes on this route are the main offenders which is why they are being targeted.

If someone drove by on their phone, there is nothing stopping the officer sending a NIP in the post if they want to. I'd suggest though that as this is a specific operation targeting speed. This will be all they are focusing on.

[Bradley1500]

Having read the article in full, it seems that the Police are only targeting 'high-end' speeders, figures of 90-100MPH+ being mentioned. Despite employing sneaky tactics to catch these 'high-end' speeders, I don't feel this is entirely unreasonable, if the unmarked vehicles are placed in the appropriate places that is.

I like to imagine if you were to stray a little over the limit, you wouldn't necessarily be booked for the offence.

Having said that I wonder how many of the 76 collisions over the past decade were caused by speed, or whether other factors (mobile phone use, driver error) were the real causes.

[RobinOakapple]

If this is sneaky behaviour on the part of the police, isn't equally sneaky for bikers to speed only when they are sure there's no cameras around?

[Pete317]

HantsRat said:

A marked police car will only slow people down when they see it or due to being flashed approaching it. Speed enforcement from an unmarked vehicle will catch more people but once word gets around such as this article, it will slow more drivers down as they never know if there will be a police camera or not. I can guarantee bikers have slowed right down along this route since they know police target speeders in unmarked vehicles.

Overall aim - More people slow down in the long run and not just when the see a police car or get flashed.

Edited by HantsRat on Wednesday 30th September 12:23

Do you have any evidence that it works the way you say it does?

[Pete317]

Bradley1500 said:

I like to imagine if you were to stray a little over the limit, you wouldn't necessarily be booked for the offence.

What's the bet that most people caught will be those less than 10mph over the limit?

[loose cannon]

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

this thread about it is comedy gold

[anonymous-user]

I expect to make make biker friends in that thread.

[ClassicMercs]

The tractor is little surprise.
I had already heard about use of a horse box trailer around the Flamborough area.
And from a force that previously relied upon Protons !

[Johnnytheboy]

Bradley1500 said:

Having read the article in full, it seems that the Police are only targeting 'high-end' speeders, figures of 90-100MPH+ being mentioned. Despite employing sneaky tactics to catch these 'high-end' speeders, I don't feel this is entirely unreasonable, if the unmarked vehicles are placed in the appropriate places that is.

I like to imagine if you were to stray a little over the limit, you wouldn't necessarily be booked for the offence.

That's how it'll start...

[14-7]

RobinOakapple said:

If this is sneaky behaviour on the part of the police, isn't equally sneaky for bikers to speed only when they are sure there's no cameras around?

Don't be silly, most cock sockets on SP&L think it is their god given right to do what they want when they want but if the police try to enforce the law in a way they disagree with it's unfair and all about revenue.

I would quite happily bet that less than 1% of the police's time is spent on speed enforcement and nearly all officers are just responding to jobs. Unfortunately nearly all the usual suspects on this forum think that's all they do just because the Christmas fund is short .

[Rovinghawk]

14-7 said:

I would quite happily bet that less than 1% of the police's time is spent on speed enforcement.

It's mostly automated.

[Ken Figenus]

14-7 said:

Don't be silly, most cock sockets on SP&L think it is their god given right to do what they want when they want but if the police try to enforce the law in a way they disagree with it's unfair and all about revenue.

I would quite happily bet that less than 1% of the police's time is spent on speed enforcement and nearly all officers are just responding to jobs. Unfortunately nearly all the usual suspects on this forum think that's all they do just because the Christmas fund is short .

I love my Gran. For every 1000 grannies they catch doing 35 on the exit of a 30 limit they must miss 10 drink drivers, 10- drug drivers and half a dozen bald tyres. They didn't even check her insurance or MOT when they invoiced her - it was just about handing over her pension for the week. Result. I feel safer and protected.

[Dammit]

Take the fixed penalty fine out of it then - how do you make a person averse to doing it again, community service?

Given that every single person in the UK speeds we'd certainly have a very tidy country if we went that route.

[RobinOakapple]

Ken Figenus said:

14-7 said:

Don't be silly, most cock sockets on SP&L think it is their god given right to do what they want when they want but if the police try to enforce the law in a way they disagree with it's unfair and all about revenue.

I would quite happily bet that less than 1% of the police's time is spent on speed enforcement and nearly all officers are just responding to jobs. Unfortunately nearly all the usual suspects on this forum think that's all they do just because the Christmas fund is short .

I love my Gran. For every 1000 grannies they catch doing 35 on the exit of a 30 limit they must miss 10 drink drivers, 10- drug drivers and half a dozen bald tyres. They didn't even check her insurance or MOT when they invoiced her - it was just about handing over her pension for the week. Result. I feel safer and protected.

I'm guessing that's sarcasm, am I right?

[Greendubber]

Pete317 said:

Do you have any evidence that it works the way you say it does?

I'd imagine years of being a police officer and also a driver is pretty obvious evidence that folk slow down for marked cars?

Certainly the case for me anyway.

[Ken Figenus]

RobinOakapple said:

I'm guessing that's sarcasm, am I right?

Sadly not. I was also filming a lovely older lady the other week and they had taken her Motability car off her since the insurer wouldn't insure her as she'd had 4 SP30's in 5 years. She'd never had a totting up ban but they just wouldn't now insure her. She is now housebound. Bang to rights some 'black and whiters' may say but again these were trivial offences with a huge end consequence that was totally unforseen - this was not fast and furious nailing it at 45 past the school at 3pm; she couldnt get her knee down if she tried! But big brother says NO whereas a proper copper wouldn't have troubled her, or would just have had a word (or 4)!

Some of the 'tough guys' here may say serve the old bag right but they didn't make society better or the roads safer; I just remember a time where it used to be better, more human and policed in a cleverer way (with a focus on bigger issues: 'alcohol on your breath sir' happened as more than a once a year media PR stunt). I also know a charming old Spitfire pilot who was banned (again for 'by the book' trivialities) but I wont bore you with that (the law is the law innit - and it applies to old fogeys too), but I'm sure glad he could nail it in the skies for us a few decades ago.

Edited by Ken Figenus on Thursday 1st October 09:15