RE: Police trash speed cameras policy
Discussion
victormeldrew said:
It's a national disgrace.
It truly is.
Have you looked over the Pepipoo and / or SafeSpeed sites for help and advice?
I guess it was a dodgyscope and (as I'm sure you know) there's been plenty of discussion in the media and elsewhere as to their frequent innacuracy (and high readings).
dcb said:
She knows she wasn't speeding, so do I,
If you are sure, then time to go to court and fight then, isn't it ?
Mistakes do get made - the system isn't perfect.
Two of you against one of them and a dodgyscope. Should be easy, shouldn't it!
Yes, it does take a brush with the law before many people realise the truth of the situation. But then again, there's an extra 2m-plus each year getting that brush. No wonder the police are starting to distance themselves from their own partners -- with friends like that, etc.
dear Mr. Darling,
Please send me a bill at the beginning of the tax year for how much you want to charge me to drive on our roads. I will reply in kind with a cheque.
Feel free to skim some of the money from it, and then piss off to a.n.other country sir. There is a country missing an......
>> Edited by Steve-B on Friday 16th December 08:58
Please send me a bill at the beginning of the tax year for how much you want to charge me to drive on our roads. I will reply in kind with a cheque.
Feel free to skim some of the money from it, and then piss off to a.n.other country sir. There is a country missing an......
>> Edited by Steve-B on Friday 16th December 08:58
daver said:
"The irresponsible siting of speed cameras for income generation has been a highly effective means of eroding public support for the police. Their benefits are strictly limited to speeding offences and do nothing to tackle the array of other dangerous driving offences."
Wise words, mate, but what about mobile scameras manned by the Police?
Last Sunday on A31 Dual Carriageway between Alton and Farnham there was a Hants BiB busy zapping people where a stretch of the outside lane was coned off and a temporary 40 limit in place. No workmen working, just an empty outside lane and very light traffic using the remaining lane. This kind of thing erodes public support for the police too.
Yes, we'd like to see more cops than cameras. As you say, however, we'd like to seem them spending their time "tackling the array of other dangerous driving offences" - not standing there holding the scameras themselves!
I agree entirely
IMHO Talivans (or whatever you prefer to call them) are even worse than fixed cameras, for a start cameras have to be clearly visible, whereas a lot of talivans appear to be as well-hidden as their operators can make them regardless of the ACPO rules. They are used in the same automated, non-discretionary, mindless, moronic way as fixed cameras - "durrrrrrr, hes doing 80mph, lets get him, we've got a clear view down the motorway as theres nobody else around and its a lovely sunny day"
Bearing in mind a lot of talivan crews are police officers working overtime, until the Police Federation come out against talivans as well as fixed cameras I will treat their statement as little more than a hypocrital attempt to regain some public support by jumping on a popular bandwagon
lucozade said:
It's refreshing to here of this "new" type of view from this lot.
However, it's all too convenient for them to jump on the new bandwagon after all the money has been made.
Looks more like th ratzzzzz are jumping the sinking ship to be honest but dont be fooled, it never stopped them hiding behind road signs in hoards waiting for a radio message from the scamera van, it never stopped tham hounding me for the 60 notes and calling me a dangerous speeder in letters while findind any excuse not to attend any other kind of crime I have ever reported, as far as I'm concerned they have got something else coming in which they have been puting together for months, just as Blair has started to give our rebate away (as I predicted) they will forsake road safety and lives to make money, the so-called "self-financing@ system as I call it will always take prescedance over real safety measures
Monkeylegend said:
[quote=victormeldrew]Mrs Meldrew just received a NIP today, and she's spitting feathers!
37 in a 30, mobile van.
Itchy finger, posted reply before I typed anything.
I got pulled over by the police with a hand held, late last week doing 38 in a 30, They told me I was speeding which I couldn't deny, asked me if I would take a breathalyser which I did, then told me I was ok to go. Mentioned nothing more about speeding, just used that as a reason to stop and breathalyse me. Would have been sitting on 3 points with a speed camera, but could have been well over the limit and got away with it.
They were very polite, and used common sense, something lacking with speed cameras. And I drove away with a much better feeling towards them.
Bring back the police, get rid of cameras.
Monkeylegend said:
[quote=victormeldrew]Mrs Meldrew just received a NIP today, and she's spitting feathers!
37 in a 30, mobile van.
Itchy finger, posted reply before I typed anything.
I got pulled over by the police with a hand held, late last week doing 38 in a 30, They told me I was speeding which I couldn't deny, asked me if I would take a breathalyser which I did, then told me I was ok to go. Mentioned nothing more about speeding, just used that as a reason to stop and breathalyse me. Would have been sitting on 3 points with a speed camera, but could have been well over the limit and got away with it.
They were very polite, and used common sense, something lacking with speed cameras. And I drove away with a much better feeling towards them.
Bring back the police, get rid of cameras.
This ist per the Traffic Cops episode where the Cheshire mob were filmed doing this in Wilsmlow/Alderley Edge area. They only targetted those they judged to be speeding - but as we all know to our costs - a drunk or someone who know they are above a limit or in Mellanby Effect will dirve on or just below speed limit und still have accident
This ist what was also reported as quote by les flics in the article which appear in "Le Figaro" about revising the law on advertising which Claude Evin introduced some years ago. But
on aggregate a decent und true cop will look at whole picture of the alleged speeding with a discreet professional judgement. A jobsworthy politically correct muppet will behave like the wooden top he really ist 
But in reality - targetting with speed gun does not cop an erratic driver - they have to follow und judge the driving standard much more professionaly than this. Ist too simplistic to judge everything by speed!
If the cynics are right (and I hope they aren't) that this isn't simply touting for a few brownie points off the public, then it won't work.
Unfortunately for our BiB here, and the other serving officers, the longer this goes on the worse it will get.
The only real solution is a bonfire of the quangos, which includes the Scamera prats, but also involves all the other monitoring, targeting, special unit bulls**t that our f**kwit leaders foist upon anyone they can.
Unfortunately for our BiB here, and the other serving officers, the longer this goes on the worse it will get.
The only real solution is a bonfire of the quangos, which includes the Scamera prats, but also involves all the other monitoring, targeting, special unit bulls**t that our f**kwit leaders foist upon anyone they can.
My position on this is
fixed speed cameras = bad
'safety camera' vans, whether operated by police or civilian operators, where drivers are not stopped at the time and fines are issued automatically = bad
policeman standing on the side of the road or in his car, using his judgement to decide who to stop and whether to issue a rebuke or a ticket = good (unless its me that gets stopped 
)
I have an absolute hatred of the so called Safety Partnerships and how they go about their business, and that hatred extends to anything or anyone who supports or is involved with them, hence I have a complete lack of respect for the Police Federations statement and will continue to do so until they come out against talivans as well.
All the actual police officers I have met have been fine, and I want to make sure that the individual officers on here realise that my comments are not aimed at them personally but at the body that is supposed to represent them
>> Edited by njwc on Saturday 17th December 11:20
>> Edited by njwc on Saturday 17th December 11:29
fixed speed cameras = bad 'safety camera' vans, whether operated by police or civilian operators, where drivers are not stopped at the time and fines are issued automatically = bad policeman standing on the side of the road or in his car, using his judgement to decide who to stop and whether to issue a rebuke or a ticket = good (unless its me that gets stopped ) I have an absolute hatred of the so called Safety Partnerships and how they go about their business, and that hatred extends to anything or anyone who supports or is involved with them, hence I have a complete lack of respect for the Police Federations statement and will continue to do so until they come out against talivans as well.
All the actual police officers I have met have been fine, and I want to make sure that the individual officers on here realise that my comments are not aimed at them personally but at the body that is supposed to represent them
>> Edited by njwc on Saturday 17th December 11:20
>> Edited by njwc on Saturday 17th December 11:29
njwc said:A little simplistic. Speed cameras outside schools, hospitals and shopping centres make a lot of sense. Speed cameras AT (i.e. within 100yds of) a genuine accident blackspot make a fair amount of sense.
My position on this is
Talivans and fixed cameras anywhere else are just revenue raising.
havoc said:
A little simplistic. Speed cameras outside schools, hospitals and shopping centres make a lot of sense. Speed cameras AT (i.e. within 100yds of) a genuine accident blackspot make a fair amount of sense.
Talivans and fixed cameras anywhere else are just revenue raising.
Up to a point, yes, but personally I'd rather see the Partnerships making the roads physically safer at these locations instead of trying to catch people out, e.g. by installing traffic calming measures rather than cameras. That way everyone has to slow down where its needed, nobody gets ticketed, and the Partnerships can genuinely claim to have done something worthwhile. Plus, we may even start to just dislike them instead of hating them
>> Edited by njwcat7 on Saturday 17th December 14:44
>> Edited by njwc on Saturday 17th December 15:11
Am I alone or would others of you out there like to see more BiB out on their solos, I insure, tax and mot my TVR and to within very small margins of error obey the rules of the road, I do, however, get pissed off by halfwits racing down the outsides of waiting traffic, mounting the pavement to gain 20 yards, dumping their heaps of s..t anywhere to prevent walking more that 6 feet to the shops not to mention stuffing me up the arse because their Fiesta/Corsa/Escort(delete as necessary) has no brakes, MOT or Insurance.
havoc said:
My position on this is
They did not install cameras outside Altwood school in Maidenhead even after the so-called "cameras save lives report" sad but my guess is even they know cameras dont ultimately work. They installed speed tables, same for the mobile cameras they just stick to the same spots, Braywick road into maidenhead is a favourite, my guess is they do this to catch the through town traffic and not locals keeps tempers down, of course if I'm right then so much for safety eh...you cant have cameras where cars are slowing down as it cost big bucks to run them, see you gotta put them where the most cars are speeding might not be dangerous there as say a junction down the road but waiting for that one car to come speeding by per day just gonna pay for the camera, plus you got to remeber a certain amount has to go into Labours coffers for them waste would not be a proper labour government now would it
Talivans and fixed cameras anywhere else are just revenue raising.
victormeldrew said:
Mrs Meldrew just received a NIP today, and she's spitting feathers!
37 in a 30, mobile van. I was in the car, saw them, check her speed, 30 dead on. I had a rant about what a pack of tw@ts they were, sitting on the exit of a village where the NSL was an unfeasible distance away from the last property in the village. Prime scam territory, they'll catch a few there to flesh out their Christmas bonus I said.
Four days later NIP arrives.
She knows she wasn't speeding, so do I, but now the penny has just dropped for her over exactly what I've been banging on about for so long - it matters not a jot that we both know she wasn't speeding, they say she was and its up to her to prove otherwise; if she doesn't roll over then the fine/points might be worse. It's not fair says she - welcome to the club says I. It wasn't fair when they rolled me either pet!
It's a national disgrace.
I mentioned this to my wife this morning as we were driving through Nottingham. Her response was perhaps perceptive. She said it's no wonder that people slow down to 10mph below the speed limit when they see cameras. At least that way there's less chance of them getting done erroneously.
Perhaps that's what we should all do when we see the talivans, just in case the operators aren't very good at handling the slippage -- or is it more a case of them being extremely good? I mean, you do get what you measure and if you're measuring catches and it's a slow day, well why not try manufacturing a few? Who can prove you wrong when you have the machine to back you up?
>> Edited by Peter Ward on Sunday 18th December 20:55
Peter Ward said:
Perhaps that's what we should all do when we see the talivans, just in case the operators aren't very good at handling the slippage -- or is it more a case of them being extremely good? I mean, you do get what you measure and if you're measuring catches and it's a slow day, well why not try manufacturing a few? Who can prove you wrong when you have the machine to back you up?
That would be immoral though? Are you suggesting that some scamera operators are immoral?!?
;o)
After all...our courts would NEVER doubt the word of a scamera operator!
WildCat said:
[quote=victormeldrew]Mrs Meldrew just received a NIP today, and she's spitting feathers!
37 in a 30, mobile van.
Itchy finger, posted reply before I typed anything.
I got pulled over by the police with a hand held, late last week doing 38 in a 30, They told me I was speeding which I couldn't deny, asked me if I would take a breathalyser which I did, then told me I was ok to go. Mentioned nothing more about speeding, just used that as a reason to stop and breathalyse me. Would have been sitting on 3 points with a speed camera, but could have been well over the limit and got away with it.
Yep...
They were very polite, and used common sense, something lacking with speed cameras. And I drove away with a much better feeling towards them.
Bring back the police, get rid of cameras.
This ist per the Traffic Cops episode where the Cheshire mob were filmed doing this in Wilsmlow/Alderley Edge area. They only targetted those they judged to be speeding - but as we all know to our costs - a drunk or someone who know they are above a limit or in Mellanby Effect will dirve on or just below speed limit und still have accident
But
But in reality - targetting with speed gun does not cop an erratic driver - they have to follow und judge the driving standard much more professionaly than this. Ist too simplistic to judge everything by speed!
havoc said:
Speed cameras outside schools, hospitals and shopping centres make a lot of sense.
Speed cameras AT (i.e. within 100yds of) a genuine accident blackspot make a fair amount of sense.
Talivans and fixed cameras anywhere else are just revenue raising.[/quote]
Gotta disagree with you Havoc for the following reasons.
Anything that creates a distraction in the areas youve mentioned is a cause of danger.
If attention isnt focussed fully on anticipation and avoidance then the risk of hitting something/someone goes up.
Cameras create diversion of attention from the road to the speedo, every single time someone comes into to their field of influence.
If youre not looking at the road, you cannot react to a situation. Its that simple.
It takes 0.8 seconds to do a speedo check and at 30 mph (if my maths isnt shot
) thatll equate to around 43 feet per second travelled without any attention focussed on the road at all. It gets even worse the longer you travel for.
If you take a conservative figure for speedo checks at say 7 times per mile and your journey is 100 miles; thats over 9 whole minutes with your attention off the roads. You May as well have your eyes shut for those 9 minutes.
And the very last place you want some cash cow camera is outside a school where attention is diverted off of the little beasts exiting the school to your speedo where you effectively have your eyes shut.
The rest of the roads also have no need for cameras for the reasons stated.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff