Flawless driving conditions = Speed vans everywhere?

[EU_Foreigner]

Expressed by a minority I might add. After all, it only takes one or two busy bodies to get a lower limit in place, whilst it takes a huge movement to get it raised.

[Rigs]

I wanted to try and avoid this becoming another limit bashing thread

(Thus several edits above to remove potentially flammable material)

Edited by Rigs on Wednesday 23 June 22:25

[EU_Foreigner]

Bit difficult as the (incorrect) limit is directly related to the presence of vans though. The vans will only be there, as you said, specially when the weather is good in incorrect speed limit areas as that will get the biggest catch.

You won't see them in the rain near a school ....

[vonhosen]

EU_Foreigner said:

Bit difficult as the (incorrect) limit is directly related to the presence of vans though. The vans will only be there, as you said, specially when the weather is good in incorrect speed limit areas as that will get the biggest catch.

You won't see them in the rain near a school ....

When I've been around schools a kicking out time I haven't witnessed much speeding going on.
Kids (as a rule) don't tend to knocked over & killed directly outside the school, it happens further away.

Edited by vonhosen on Wednesday 23 June 22:37

[F i F]

Back to the original point of the thread though.

I drive up and down a road several times a day which has mobile and static camera sites. Clearly the statics are there night/day & rain and shine. The vans however are not. Of course they cover other sites.

In fact on one day with very changeable weather I passed the van, conditions fine & it was operating, when I came back fifteen minutes later it was now raining and the operator was reading the paper and with a cuppa on the dash. A couple of hours later it was dry again, if black skies and he'd moved a mile down the road and was now operating. An hour later it was absolutely hissing down and he'd packed up and moved on.

I can understand how the OP gets the impression he does. My observations could simply be coincidence, but it's my impression too, very rainy days = vans stay home.

Could be utter tosh but it's how it looks. Never yet seen a van operating in bad weather.

[14-7]

vdp1 said:

If everyone played the system when they are caught then the whole sham would fall apart overnight. If you want to blame anyone then blame your fellow apathetic man. I do my bit and have cost the system far more than they have got out of me.

So my taxes have paid for your pathetic attempts at trying to wriggle out of something you were guilty of?

I understand and support the system of someone electing a court hearing if you believe you are not guilty, which you clearly didn't, but I fail to see a decent, honest, respectful person at someone who does so just to cost the court system more money.

[Guybrush]

Most speed limits are too low for the road in question.

Where will you see speed traps mostly? Of course, where it's easy to exceed such low limits. Why? For the revenue. They wouldn't site a trap on a road where it would be dangerous to exceed a speed limit because they would catch hardly anyone.

Many studies have shown accidents occuring because of excess speed for the conditions account for only about 6 or 7% of accidents. Speed traps do nothing for the other 94% of accidents.

Speed traps catch mainly the safer driver. How can I say this? Those who are in the most accidents are the elderly and the under 25s. Those two groups are also the least caught exceeding speed limits. So speed traps catch mainly those in the other group, the safer driver. Why do the speed trap people continue their endeavours then? One has to conclude for the revenue and to employ the otherwise unemployable. Hopefully, under the new government such communist tendencies will be curtailed.

[Mr E Driver]

The government/police/courts all need money and the easiest way to 'earn' some money is to go out with a speed gun
All the people employed by the scamera partnerships need to earn their keep somehow.
Get a device in your car to avoid paying their wages.

[TuxRacer]

Rigs said:

How come?

Bank holiday weekends; more targets and triple time pay.

[EU_Foreigner]

vonhosen said:

EU_Foreigner said:

Bit difficult as the (incorrect) limit is directly related to the presence of vans though. The vans will only be there, as you said, specially when the weather is good in incorrect speed limit areas as that will get the biggest catch.

You won't see them in the rain near a school ....

When I've been around schools a kicking out time I haven't witnessed much speeding going on.
Kids (as a rule) don't tend to knocked over & killed directly outside the school, it happens further away.

Edited by vonhosen on Wednesday 23 June 22:37

That also means, that as a rule, the drivers adjust the speed appropriately where needed.

As they are also not out when it rains (again, the drivers adjust their speed where needed), therefore the conclusion is that no traps are needed (and also explains why they are only on the sunny days on the clearest of roads).

[davidjpowell]

How abotu reversing the question.

Why are there (or seem to be) fewer enforcement operations when driving conditions are poorer eg dark, wet etc?

[TuxRacer]

Again, because there's less money in it.

[J500ANT]

However a trip to Llanelli and back yesterday saw no camera vans anywhere.

[Mr E Driver]

I have been to a Ducati event in South Wales and riding down Friday we didn't see one police vehicle or any scamera vans.
On the way home Sunday morning we were stopped by two 'roadside checks' with VOSA and police and further down the road we came round a bend and there was a scamera van parked at the end of the straight road 60 limit.
The guy riding at the front knew it was a favourite place and had slowed us all down to 30 and as soon as we passed it, down a couple of gears and back to our reasonable making safe progress speed.

If this isn't cynical cash collecting I don't know what is.

[vonhosen]

EU_Foreigner said:

vonhosen said:

EU_Foreigner said:

Bit difficult as the (incorrect) limit is directly related to the presence of vans though. The vans will only be there, as you said, specially when the weather is good in incorrect speed limit areas as that will get the biggest catch.

You won't see them in the rain near a school ....

When I've been around schools a kicking out time I haven't witnessed much speeding going on.
Kids (as a rule) don't tend to knocked over & killed directly outside the school, it happens further away.

Edited by vonhosen on Wednesday 23 June 22:37

That also means, that as a rule, the drivers adjust the speed appropriately where needed.

As they are also not out when it rains (again, the drivers adjust their speed where needed), therefore the conclusion is that no traps are needed (and also explains why they are only on the sunny days on the clearest of roads).

The limit has still to be enforced if it's in place, even if it's in place for reasons other than safety.

[Mr E Driver]

When you are out driving on a nice sunny day on a nsl road and there is no traffic around Mr vH, do you ever exceed the speed limit?

[vonhosen]

Mr E Driver said:

When you are out driving on a nice sunny day on a nsl road and there is no traffic around Mr vH, do you ever exceed the speed limit?

I've said many times, I 'try' to stick to speed limits, but I'm fallible.
Because there is a degree of tolerance in prosecutions that works in the favour of people who try to stick to the posted limit as displayed on their speedo, I have thus far managed to be successful in not only avoiding a speeding conviction, but also avoiding prosecution in the first place.

[Yertis]

It's an existential question. Is the speed limit broken, if there's no speed van there to record it?

[vonhosen]

Yertis said:

It's an existential question. Is the speed limit broken, if there's no speed van there to record it?

Whether a speed limit is broken or not is a matter of fact. Whether it can be shown beyond all reasonable doubt to have been, is an entirely different matter.

[tylerama]

vdp1 said:

vonhosen said:

vdp1 said:

vonhosen said:

otolith said:

Depends whether you think the enforcement is in the interests of safety or of the blind obedience of law. If the former, targeting speeding when it does least harm is idiotic, if the latter it's perfectly logical.

I don't see it like that.

The general premise of limiting speeds is partly for safety, but if we are to then have them prosecuting for simply not obeying them (whatever the conditions) is perfectly logical. The law in relation to them is written for blind obedience in relation to the upper limit, with no requirement to show a lack of safety in the driving. Other legislation exists for that (where it occurs above or below the limit).

So whats the other part for then?

There are other factors in limits being what they are. Green issues such as noise, economy & anti social behaviour. Speed limits are an expressed compromise.

Edited by vonhosen on Wednesday 23 June 22:15

So why is nothing done about the pikeys then?

Because the pikey generally won't pay because they are cheeky tuesdays! The law abiding citizens with jobs are easy to track down and fine, because we will generally be the owner of the vehicle, have a registered address and will cough up to save ourselves the hassle of contesting it. The pikeys may well be underage too, all the usual stereotypes !

Edited by tylerama on Thursday 24th June 17:35