Another positive speeding article: Leamington Courier

[Peter Ward]

This is in today's Leamington Courier. There's a lot of space given to the ABD!! Sad that it's on p28 but better than nothing. I've italicised one great phase as you'll see. Apologies for any errors in my retyping of this article.

Leamington Courier said:

Trapped speeders cough up £4m The number of drivers caught by speed cameras in Warwickshire has risen by 25% in the past 2 years, the Courier can reveal. A total of 101,893 "detected offences" were recorded in the 12 months leading up to April 2005 -- up from 81,083 the previous year. Of those snapped, 6,135 were in Warwick district. About 70% resulted in people being fined -- bringing in around £4m to the treasury from the county's motorists. The figures were released this week by the Warwickshire Casualty Reduction Partnership and, although they could be construed as making the county's roads safer by punishing law-breakers not everyone is happy. Brian MacDowell of the ABD, which as 2500 paid up members, said "This amounts to a war on the motorist. "I'd say that the majority of these were caught just a few yards from the speed cameras going just a few mph over the limit. We have to ask whether all these people really were driving dangerously -- if they were, there would be carnage on Warwickshire's roads. But there evidently is not." Mr MacDowell believes factors other than speed should be considered in deciding whether someone should be fined. He said, "People should not drive by numbers -- they need to take into account the state of the road, what's ahead of them, the weather conditions and what's happening around them. These cameras focus only on one element -- a machine can't decide whether someone is driving safely. "We have noticed people driving a lot more cautiously in recent years, which can be dangerous in itself. Drivers need to be confident." Stephen Rumble, spokesman for the CRP, insists speed is a major cause of road deaths and believes the increase in the number being caught reflects little more than more effective enforcement of the law. He said "There was an increase in the number of cameras installed from that year, and we have to take into account factors such as roadworks".

>> Edited by Peter Ward on Friday 11th November 13:55

[autismuk]

I went through Warwickshire a few weeks ago (not the MWays), there seemed to be Scameras everywhere.

[outrider]

Same old bollox different county.

[Mr Whippy]

They make it sounds so bad that people are caught because they are speeding, and effective enforcement means they catch more people.

Well, clearly everyone does it then, it's not really that dangerous, and people are NOT learning from their mistakes, by consistently getting caught, and in the majority NOT having fatal or bad accidents because of it!

People who get on their high horse about speed camera's being good need to be singled out by us, with mobile speed camera's, and caught as many times as possible for minor offences just over the limit.

Would be cool to send that into the papers then, "Speed camera supporter is a serial speedophile!"

Yay

Dave

[smeggy]

Thanks Peter.

Leamington Courier said:

A total of 101,893 "detected offences" were recorded in the 12 months leading up to April 2005 -- up from 81,083 the previous year. Of those snapped, 6,135 were in Warwick district. About 70% resulted in people being fined........

So what happened to the other 30% of "detected offences"? Were these cases dropped due to LTI slip error?

[Peter Ward]

smeggy said:

Thanks Peter. Leamington Courier said: A total of 101,893 "detected offences" were recorded in the 12 months leading up to April 2005 -- up from 81,083 the previous year. Of those snapped, 6,135 were in Warwick district. About 70% resulted in people being fined........ So what happened to the other 30% of "detected offences"? Were these cases dropped due to LTI slip error?

Yes, I wondered about the other 30%. Perhaps the cameras were set below ACPO guidelines and people below them weren't done? I don't know.

Of course there is the required "balance" provided by the CRP spokesman, but half the article is ABD.

[_VTEC_]

But surely if fines are going up then the speed enforcement isn't working? (apologies for possible ignorance, my authoritative knowledge on this subject is somewhat lacking)

Why can't we focus on other road saftey aspects as well? Concentrating on speed alone will never be good enough.

[outrider]

[[/quote]
So what happened to the other 30% of "detected offences"? Were these cases dropped due to LTI slip error? [/quote]

They couldn't be bothered to chase them up tht's why. In my case I asked for photos then told them i couldn't identify the driver. I haven't heard from them in over two years, they just want people to roll over and admit the offence, I'm not prepared to without making them work for it

[justinp1]

_VTEC_ said:

But surely if fines are going up then the speed enforcement isn't working? (apologies for possible ignorance, my authoritative knowledge on this subject is somewhat lacking) Why can't we focus on other road saftey aspects as well? Concentrating on speed alone will never be good enough.

Of course!!!

This is the most astonishing aspect of the government spin on speed. If the amount of detected offences in increasingly alarmingly, then if their targets are based on reducing speed it is categorically failing.

If NHS waiting lists increased by 25% year on year, or primary school class sizes increased by 25% year on year, there would be ministerial jobs axed and policy changes immediately.

The only difference may be is that if the department in charge of the waiting list or class sizes actually got more funding the worse the situation got, and by having more funding secured the managers of the systems own jobs. That only happens with the camera partnerships though.