police hide a speed camera inside a tractor!

[black-k1]

StuB said:

black-k1 said:

LoonR1 said:

black-k1 said:

Those FOI questions won't give the "financial justification". Because a marked vehicle will be spotted, people (particularly bikers) will warn on coming traffic that the speed camera is there thus the number of victims is reduced. With the unmarked vehicle, no one will be pre-warned thus a higher number of tickets, meaning the cost per ticket issued is lower. That'll be the financial justification.

Who gets that money? There is no financial justification in spending your budget raising money that then goes somewhere else and you then have to bid to get a share of the national pot.

It doesn't matter who gets the money. There will be a "perceived problem" with speeding bikers. The approach to dealing with the problem is to issue lots of tickets. The use of stealth tactics allows lots of tickets to be issued at the lowest cost per ticket. The result is that the police can claim to be dealing with the problem saying "look how many tickets we've issued" and can respond to the cost question by saying that the national cost per ticket is X where their local cost per ticket is 75% of X which proves the approach is cost effective and efficient. Job done!

The daftest justification is "cost per ticket" as it's irrelevant.

The whole can of worms comes from the accident statistics and these may or may not be affected by this crude & lazy form of policing.

I really wish that the ABD/Inst of Adv Drivers/Motorcyclists should seek proof that there is direct correlation between Speed & accident/casualty rates in a scientifically verified study. This wont happen, as we all know the subtext is revenue & massaging statistics.

Simple fact of the matter is that if you go ballistic, you can expect custodial, stick to sub 100, fine or course about looking out for the guy in the gorilla suit (the wife told me about this, I've never done a speed awareness course), stick to the speed limits of you want...... crazy idea...... or how about we all get enduro bikes & ride the green lanes & make their job much less easy.

Oh, by the way, just remind me as I can't recall, what's the course of action the police take if you are stopped and your number plate has been stolen or has dropped of???

The whole process is "irrelevant" other than as a justification of being seen to be doing something. It's not about revenue (as income) as the income from speeding fines is peanuts, regardless who receives it. What it's about is avoiding expenditure. If they really wanted to reduce accidents then they'd put a significant number of marked, highly visible vehicles out on the roads. It would not only stop speeding (which may or may not contribute to accidents) but it would stop aggressive driving, phone usage and general poor driving. Punters could either be ticketed or educated as appropriate and that really would help reduce accidents, but it would cost a lot of money. They can't "do nothing" so they have to do something that doesn't cost a lot yet has some way of demonstrating "effectiveness". A large number of speeding tickets issued shows they are doing something and it's being effective in enforcing the law on those who have broken it.

[gareth_r]

black-k1 said:

The whole process is "irrelevant" other than as a justification of being seen to be doing something...

This has always been the raison d'etre for speed cameras. The financial benefit (the saving on road improvements and the income from fines and courses) is a bonus.

Pressure group says "Something must be done".
The government/council/police/SCP erect a few "safety" cameras, say "Look! We have done something!", and don't have to worry about the difficult, expensive stuff, like fixing a dangerous junction, or teaching people to drive properly, or catching and educating or prosecuting them when they don't (unless the video has been posted on YouTube ).

[Sheepshanks]

LoonR1 said:

They have said that his specifically targeting people travelling over 90mph. This is way beyond the SAC threshold. Read what the police have said its targeting and the SAC argument doesn't stack up.

You never struck me as a gullible person.

[LoonR1]

Sheepshanks said:

LoonR1 said:

They have said that his specifically targeting people travelling over 90mph. This is way beyond the SAC threshold. Read what the police have said its targeting and the SAC argument doesn't stack up.

You never struck me as a gullible person.

It was in response to your comment that it's all about SACs. The only one we've heard of who has been caught is slap bang in their target range and well out of SAC territory.

[Yoda400]

I'm at the Ploughing Match in Cheshire. The police have a nice exhibition of taxidermy. Not sure why. Perhaps they were killed by speeding motorcyclists. I asked tongue in cheek if they were eyeing up the tractors for their speed trap fleet. The police officer replied earnestly "oh yes, I'd love one" and looked a bit wistful. But they gave me a nice colourful pencil.

[Sheepshanks]

Yoda400 said:

I'm at the Ploughing Match in Cheshire. The police have a nice exhibition of taxidermy. Not sure why. Perhaps they were killed by speeding motorcyclists. I asked tongue in cheek if they were eyeing up the tractors for their speed trap fleet. The police officer replied earnestly "oh yes, I'd love one" and looked a bit wistful. But they gave me a nice colourful pencil.

I live in Cheshire and (touch wood) it's nothing short of amazing that I've only been done once. They hide a lot - I got caught by a cop using a laser hiding in the shadow of a bridge with the sun behind him. No hi-viz and he was impossible to see until too late - they can check your speed at up to 1Km. Just round curves on fast roads is common too.

[anonymous-user]

jj996 said:

They have been targeting bikers in our area for a few years now, last year they walked into a bikers cafe private car park with a piece of card which mimicked a bike number plate and if any plate was smaller than that size they issued a fine. They aren't supposed to do that on private property but it didn't stop them.

There's no problem issuing FPNs on that type of private property.

Vroom101 said:

In Essex they even use their helicopter!

jj996 said:

I really wish it was a hoax, humberside police also use a helicopter to target motorcyclists.

I've never known of a prosecution for excess speed based off helicopter evidence. They usually only provide evidence for vehicles failing to stop / dangerous driving etc.

They certainly aren't specifically deployed for that purpose given the cost and that most force's need to share their helicopters to save money.

jj996 said:

You need to visit the area to understand how the police have become mentally obsessed about motorcyclists.

Humberside's traffic department has contracted as much as anyone else's. In fact, I think they do a lot of 'duel role' stuff form what I understand so have even less time for normal traffic work. They no doubt look for bikes given the higher-risk nature of group and probably being off late when another over-confident rider kills himself.

StuB said:

I really wish that the ABD/Inst of Adv Drivers/Motorcyclists should seek proof that there is direct correlation between Speed & accident/casualty rates in a scientifically verified study. This wont happen, as we all know the subtext is revenue & massaging statistics.

There are plenty of studies out there if you look. There's even one which looks at the holy grail for speed advocates; the Autobahn. They found the places where the roads were restricted resulted in fewer casualties.

[chillo]

La Liga said:

here are plenty of studies out there if you look. There's even one which looks at the holy grail for speed advocates; the Autobahn. They found the places where the roads were restricted resulted in fewer casualties.

Care to comment on the negative PR this has created?
Apart from the perception of targeting motorists to milk them for every penny possible It's definitely not winning any hearts and minds. Surely visible deterrent is the best PR and has more associated benefits then hiding tractors behind trees no?

[anonymous-user]

Are the police in the business of PR or of trying to reduce deaths on the roads? Also don't assume everything thinks like people on here. There are lots of people who support speed enforcement. The police are contacted a lot by people concerned by speeding.

This is quite a specific operation where they are targeting people who are doing 'grossly' excessive speed, hence the tractor and check-point being used. If you're trying to change the behaviour of one of the highest-risk groups (bikers travelling well over the speed limit on hazardous A roads), then merely getting them to slow down through visibility won't be enough, as there's no consequence and is most likely to be temporary in nature.

People will change their behaviour to avoid a loss, that being the potential loss of their licence etc.

[StuB]

La Liga said:

StuB said:

I really wish that the ABD/Inst of Adv Drivers/Motorcyclists should seek proof that there is direct correlation between Speed & accident/casualty rates in a scientifically verified study. This wont happen, as we all know the subtext is revenue & massaging statistics.

There are plenty of studies out there if you look. There's even one which looks at the holy grail for speed advocates; the Autobahn. They found the places where the roads were restricted resulted in fewer casualties.

Thank you for that nugget. If you could share a link (I am not prepared to go trying to find the statistically relevant evidence), I would sincerely be grateful enough to buy you a beer, but I'm guessing that might not be your thing?

Anyhoo, how on earth do you get to 'restricted autobahn casualty rates < unrestricted casualty rates' provides conclusive evidence?

Andy Green is still alive and well.

It's about Appropriate speed!

I regularly exceeded 100 mph, as much as I possibly could, on a motorcycle, for a couple of years, even in the wet/rain/snow. I crashed loads of times, sometimes well over 100mph and I didn't die. I put this is because I did it at the appropriate place and had the correct equipment/infrastructure to make it possible.

Hopefully you can understand what I am saying?

Speed does not kill. Crashing does, at almost no speed unfortunately if you look at fatalities for Horse riders, cyclists, skiers, extreme ironingists....

Motorcyclists need to learn & be taught skills, control, restraint, perception, planning, little things like that IMHO. This needs practise, away from crowded streets, houses, schools, people, you know, the Countryside!!!

This type of policing to me is counter productive, naive and cynical massaging of statistics.

Anyhoo, had my 2p worth of t'internet tonight.

[anonymous-user]

A beer not my thing, or providing the links?

This is the one which mentions the Autobahn. They say 'clear evidence' where I'd say 'indication' in the relevant parts: http://archive.etsc.eu/documents/Speed_Fact_Sheet_...

Drivers choosing the appropriate speed for the circumstances would be the ideal scenario. The reality is that isn't going to occur. We have a crude risk-management system instead which tries to reduce the impact of when people do get it wrong. Most people see driving as a way in which to get to A to B. They have no interested in the things people on here are interested in.

StuB said:

This type of policing to me is counter productive, naive and cynical massaging of statistics.

Massaging what statistics? It's not overly efficient having a handheld gun and people on check-points, dealing with speeds which result in a fair chunk of time and paperwork.

[Yoda400]

StuB said:

Thank you for that nugget. If you could share a link (I am not prepared to go trying to find the statistically relevant evidence), I would sincerely be grateful enough to buy you a beer, but I'm guessing that might not be your thing?

Anyhoo, how on earth do you get to 'restricted autobahn casualty rates < unrestricted casualty rates' provides conclusive evidence?

Andy Green is still alive and well.

It's about Appropriate speed!

I regularly exceeded 100 mph, as much as I possibly could, on a motorcycle, for a couple of years, even in the wet/rain/snow. I crashed loads of times, sometimes well over 100mph and I didn't die. I put this is because I did it at the appropriate place and had the correct equipment/infrastructure to make it possible.

Hopefully you can understand what I am saying?

Speed does not kill. Crashing does, at almost no speed unfortunately if you look at fatalities for Horse riders, cyclists, skiers, extreme ironingists....

Motorcyclists need to learn & be taught skills, control, restraint, perception, planning, little things like that IMHO. This needs practise, away from crowded streets, houses, schools, people, you know, the Countryside!!!

This type of policing to me is counter productive, naive and cynical massaging of statistics.

Anyhoo, had my 2p worth of t'internet tonight.

Practising "skills, control, restraint, perception, planning, little things like that" can be done anywhere. It's needed most of the time. If you're talking high speed stuff, I was expecting you to say it should be done on trackdays. IMO that's the only place you can truly focus purely on your riding (at speed) without distractions like reading unfamiliar roads, watching out for junctions, gravel, potholes etc. All skills in themselves too. Personally, I don't have the confidence to crash at over 100mph in an appropriate place like you. It's not like choosing an appropriate place for a picnic is it, I mean, crashing is generally unintentional. And besides, the countryside here is awash with muck, gravel and 4x4s coming round corners on the wrong side, etc, so doing silly speeds round it doesn't seem the best plan.

Edited by Yoda400 on Thursday 1st October 07:58

[Sebo]

Haven't read it myself but I saw on the papers review on the news that the front page of The Sun has a story about Police hiding cameras and the Govt. changing the rules on cameras etc

[Prof Prolapse]

Whats the penalty for displaying fake plates?

[agtlaw]

Depends on the charge.

The penalty is generally much lower for not displaying plates.

[Prof Prolapse]

agtlaw said:

Depends on the charge.

The penalty is generally much lower for not displaying plates.

Oh right, I didn't realise it was so complicated. I suppose you could get done for something like trying to prevent the course of justice of something then?

Yes definitely, but personally I've yet to be stopped by a fixed safety camera.

[moanthebairns]

we all need one of these, however I never understood the logic of it on a db5 at the time.

I mean how many of these were kicking about that a bad guy wouldn't go "ah Mr Bond you tried to evaded us by changing your reg on the most exotic British cars on the road, just how stupid do you think we are, we built a nuclear rocket launching station in a fking volcano"

[Prof Prolapse]

And the fact he seems to go by just one name.

[southgate]

The currant bun are now covering this. Must be important.



http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/6669137/...

Sneaky buggers

[moanthebairns]

Prof Prolapse said:

And the fact he seems to go by just one name.

Movie Alias
From Russia with Love David Somerset
You Only Live Twice Mr. Fisher
On Her Majesty's Secret Service Sir Hilary Bray
Diamonds Are Forever Peter Franks
Diamonds Are Forever Mr. Jones
Diamonds Are Forever Klaus Hergescheimer
Diamonds Are Forever Burt Saxby
The Man With The Golden Gun Fransisco Scaramanga
The Spy Who Loved Me Robert Sterling
A View to a Kill James St. John Smythe
A View to a Kill James Stock
The Living Daylights Jerzy Bondov
The World Is Not Enough Dr. Mikhal Arkov
Die Another Day Van Bierk
Casino Royale Arlington Beech