Checking speed through gap in hedge
Discussion
This is a new one on me.
Plod estate parked on parallel road to a dual-carriageway & FACING oncoming southbound traffic. Parked behind a hedge & via opened passenger door camera aimed through gap in hedge at cars ascending hill after probably being frustrated by long roundabout queues at bottom of hill. All this at 8am rush hour - when else?
Location A24 south of Ashington roundabout north of Worthing. West Sussex.
Was stuck in northbound queue & now wished I had leaped out of car & photographed the Plod car, it was SO sneakily parked.
Plod estate parked on parallel road to a dual-carriageway & FACING oncoming southbound traffic. Parked behind a hedge & via opened passenger door camera aimed through gap in hedge at cars ascending hill after probably being frustrated by long roundabout queues at bottom of hill. All this at 8am rush hour - when else?
Location A24 south of Ashington roundabout north of Worthing. West Sussex.
Was stuck in northbound queue & now wished I had leaped out of car & photographed the Plod car, it was SO sneakily parked.
cmaguire said:
vonhosen said:
I hear they use surveillance teams to catch robbers too.
Catching robbers is probably a significantly bigger public service than padding out targets on an Excel sheet of trivialities.The poster just needs to be honest that he objects to Police gathering evidence of speeding rather than trying to mask that by intimating that his problem is with covert evidence gathering.
If the problem was genuinely with covert evidence gathering then that would stand across all offending, not just offences you don't particularly like seeing people prosecuted for.
Police dealing with offending using both overt & covert methods is a fact of a life as well as being an entirely sensible approach.
WJNB said:
wished I had leaped out of car & photographed the Plod car, it was SO sneakily parked.
Why on earth would you bother considering photographing a police car?I actually agree with Vonhosen here. The police are attempting to catch people breaking the law. So what? It doesn't matter how they do it.
The only time I've ever been caught speeding in my life was when I was clocked doing 52mph in a 40, and it was an empty road at night after dark. The officer was hiding behind a building at the side of the road, and poked the gun round the corner of the building to clock me. He then stepped out into view to stop me once he had recorded my speed.
My thoughts on the matter were that it was my own stupid fault for doing 12mph over the speed limit and getting caught doing it. I wasn't annoyed that the officer was hiding in order to catch me.
cmaguire said:
Vaud said:
Targets?
I could call it something else if you like, but either way the majority of speed enforcement has politics as its only relevance. It is achieving nothing else.I'm no fan of cameras, I prefer education. Well signed cameras are "ok". I prefer the speed advisory signs - for example when I go from an NSL to a 30 that remind me that I'm still doing 40. That has impact and makes me think.
vonhosen said:
cmaguire said:
vonhosen said:
I hear they use surveillance teams to catch robbers too.
Catching robbers is probably a significantly bigger public service than padding out targets on an Excel sheet of trivialities.The poster just needs to be honest that he objects to Police gathering evidence of speeding rather than trying to mask that by intimating that his problem is with covert evidence gathering.
If the problem was genuinely with covert evidence gathering then that would stand across all offending, not just offences you don't particularly like seeing people prosecuted for.
Police dealing with offending using both overt & covert methods is a fact of a life as well as being an entirely sensible approach.
Von, I am at a loss as to how you see speeding in the same light as serious crime: it is simply not the case.
J
jith said:
He most probably objects to the police blatantly practicing entrapment with a vengeance; and sadly it is legal to do so in this country. He also probably objects to having his intelligence seriously insulted by attempting to convince the public that this is in the interests of road safety; is not political; is not revenue raising; does not involve substantial private company profits, etc, etc. Or worse still, has a deterrent effect.
Von, I am at a loss as to how you see speeding in the same light as serious crime: it is simply not the case.
J
I don't think you know what entrapment is.Von, I am at a loss as to how you see speeding in the same light as serious crime: it is simply not the case.
J
jith said:
vonhosen said:
cmaguire said:
vonhosen said:
I hear they use surveillance teams to catch robbers too.
Catching robbers is probably a significantly bigger public service than padding out targets on an Excel sheet of trivialities.The poster just needs to be honest that he objects to Police gathering evidence of speeding rather than trying to mask that by intimating that his problem is with covert evidence gathering.
If the problem was genuinely with covert evidence gathering then that would stand across all offending, not just offences you don't particularly like seeing people prosecuted for.
Police dealing with offending using both overt & covert methods is a fact of a life as well as being an entirely sensible approach.
Von, I am at a loss as to how you see speeding in the same light as serious crime: it is simply not the case.
J
I just don't have a problem with Police enforcing the law (that's what it's been enacted for, to be enforced) & I don't have a problem with them using a mixture of overt & covert methods to do it. As I said earlier a mixture of both is an entirely sensible approach (whatever the offence).
Vaud said:
OK, so not targets but measurement of how many people broke the law?
I'm no fan of cameras, I prefer education. Well signed cameras are "ok". I prefer the speed advisory signs - for example when I go from an NSL to a 30 that remind me that I'm still doing 40. That has impact and makes me think.
Wow, we agree. But then urban limits are something that most reasonable people can accept and understand. Most of those who wilfully ignore urban limits will continue to do so whether a new 20mph limit is applied or not, much as they will slow for the camera and speed up again afterwards. The flashing speed signs are adequate for most of us, and that's what counts.I'm no fan of cameras, I prefer education. Well signed cameras are "ok". I prefer the speed advisory signs - for example when I go from an NSL to a 30 that remind me that I'm still doing 40. That has impact and makes me think.
My angst is with non-urban limits and enforcement. Increasingly restrictive limits combined with high enforcement on the safest roads. Now what is that about?
vonhosen said:
I don't see speeding in the same light as robbery.
I just don't have a problem with Police enforcing the law (that's what it's been enacted for, to be enforced) & I don't have a problem with them using a mixture of overt & covert methods to do it. As I said earlier a mixture of both is an entirely sensible approach (whatever the offence).
I agree with you entirely, provided what is being enforced is reasonable. Unfortunately, with regard to speed this is just not the case in so many cases.I just don't have a problem with Police enforcing the law (that's what it's been enacted for, to be enforced) & I don't have a problem with them using a mixture of overt & covert methods to do it. As I said earlier a mixture of both is an entirely sensible approach (whatever the offence).
cmaguire said:
Vaud said:
OK, so not targets but measurement of how many people broke the law?
I'm no fan of cameras, I prefer education. Well signed cameras are "ok". I prefer the speed advisory signs - for example when I go from an NSL to a 30 that remind me that I'm still doing 40. That has impact and makes me think.
Wow, we agree. But then urban limits are something that most reasonable people can accept and understand. Most of those who wilfully ignore urban limits will continue to do so whether a new 20mph limit is applied or not, much as they will slow for the camera and speed up again afterwards. The flashing speed signs are adequate for most of us, and that's what counts.I'm no fan of cameras, I prefer education. Well signed cameras are "ok". I prefer the speed advisory signs - for example when I go from an NSL to a 30 that remind me that I'm still doing 40. That has impact and makes me think.
My angst is with non-urban limits and enforcement. Increasingly restrictive limits combined with high enforcement on the safest roads. Now what is that about?
cmaguire said:
Wow, we agree. But then urban limits are something that most reasonable people can accept and understand. Most of those who wilfully ignore urban limits will continue to do so whether a new 20mph limit is applied or not, much as they will slow for the camera and speed up again afterwards. The flashing speed signs are adequate for most of us, and that's what counts.
My angst is with non-urban limits and enforcement. Increasingly restrictive limits combined with high enforcement on the safest roads. Now what is that about?
Good question. Outside of accident blackspots and well signed dangers within higher limit areas, I don't know.My angst is with non-urban limits and enforcement. Increasingly restrictive limits combined with high enforcement on the safest roads. Now what is that about?
cmaguire said:
Vaud said:
OK, so not targets but measurement of how many people broke the law?
I'm no fan of cameras, I prefer education. Well signed cameras are "ok". I prefer the speed advisory signs - for example when I go from an NSL to a 30 that remind me that I'm still doing 40. That has impact and makes me think.
Wow, we agree. But then urban limits are something that most reasonable people can accept and understand. Most of those who wilfully ignore urban limits will continue to do so whether a new 20mph limit is applied or not, much as they will slow for the camera and speed up again afterwards. The flashing speed signs are adequate for most of us, and that's what counts.I'm no fan of cameras, I prefer education. Well signed cameras are "ok". I prefer the speed advisory signs - for example when I go from an NSL to a 30 that remind me that I'm still doing 40. That has impact and makes me think.
My angst is with non-urban limits and enforcement. Increasingly restrictive limits combined with high enforcement on the safest roads. Now what is that about?
You make no sense.
drf765 said:
Why does a flashing sign work when another sign is not sufficient?
You make no sense.
It makes sense. A flashing sign has more impact, in the same way that in very recent cars a head up display reminding you of the limit works. Signs are one means - technology gives us ways of reminding the driver in a different way.You make no sense.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff