RE: Man trashes speed camera

[CraigAlsop]

Streetcop said:

yeah...right.... Street

No worries mate....

[Themoss]

[80Bob]

Streetcop said:

Leave alone this crap about drivers who are 7km over the limit...The majority of disq drivers are due to drink driving, repeated no insurance and other such crimes. The excessive speed people only amount to a very small number of disq drivers and their bans are usually over a short period of times... Oh...you'd be banging on the door of the empty police station if one of these drivers damaged your car or mowed down your loved ones, wouldn't you? That's my Street

In Australia however the majority of drivers are being banned for exceeding the speed limit. This is due to the large number of speed cameras in use (particularly in Victoria) and the low tolerances. In Vic for example it's about 3km over for a ticket. I have a friend who got booked for 103km/h in a 100km/h zone. In the UK you're right, driver disqualification is normally drink driving but in Oz it's speeding. In NSW you will lose your license for driving over 130Km/h regardless of where you are or the conditions and the cops here have no understanding of the word discretion.

[V8 Archie]

Streetcop said:

Only the guilty need worry though... Street

True, we all know the law and if you break it you have what is coming to you...

But, I'm getting a bit sick of that idea because the reality is that the existing speed limits we set in a time when most cars struggled to reach 70mph and had crap brakes. The rules have not moved with the times and the speed limit, more often than not, only serves to needlessly impede peoples progress.

The speed limit is the only law I know of that runs counter to the instincts of a large proportion of the population. Yet it is enforced by machines that (obviously) cannot understand the human condition and cannot explain why they have (effectively) convicted you of a (victimless) crime and have no knowledge of how safely you were driving.

As friendly, entertaining and informative as our resident BiB can be, I do wish they'd show some sympathy towards "natural law" as opposed to the crap that's in the statute books.

[Streetcop]

Sympathy is one thing...turning a blind eye or neglecting your duty is another...

If I disagreed with the traffic laws of this country so much, I'd resign...or at the very least not have applied to become a Traffic cop...

So consequently, I have to uphold the law...a case of put up or shut up....

My personal view on speed is that some people can handle vehicles at speed and some cannot. We, as the police, have to therefore police the limits which are set at the lowest denominator...

Street

[supraman2954]

Streetcop said:

Sympathy is one thing...turning a blind eye or neglecting your duty is another... If I disagreed with the traffic laws of this country so much, I'd resign...or at the very least not have applied to become a Traffic cop... So consequently, I have to uphold the law...a case of put up or shut up.... My personal view on speed is that some people can handle vehicles at speed and some cannot. We, as the police, have to therefore police the limits which are set at the lowest denominator... Street

I know some of these lower denominators; their standards are horrifically low! If these guys were not allowed onto the road, the lowest common denominator would be higher, there would be fewer accidents, and so the speed limits could be increased.

Driving IS a privilege (although it is your right to attempt to prove that you are road worthy)

[ben_london]

One question, if the standard of cars and technology for any reason began to deteriate. (sp) i.e. Cars no longer coming with ABS... Airbags (basically cars go back 20 - 30 years) would speed limits fall with them?? Do the government really expect us to believe that 70mph is as fast as you can safely go on an empty motorway.

To really enforce a law it must be one that people agree with, there are very few laws that somebody wouldn't help a policeman enforce (e.g. theft / murder / hit and runs) all evoke a response from the general public. When a law does the opposite and people warn each other of camera's, speed traps and spend hundreds of pounds protecting themselves from what they see as stealing then the authorities must sit up and take notice. German cars dont spin off the road at 160mph on Autobahns and funnily enough I dont consider my driving to be unsafe at 80mph. If I did then I wouldnt go anywhere near motorways. In general speeding laws and the way they are enforced are laughable and to consider it road safety is a complete joke.

[Streetcop]

Trouble is Ben...while vehicle have improved..humans haven't.

Street

[ben_london]

Indeed,

Camera's dont catch unsafe drivers. They catch "speeding" drivers. There is a difference in my eyes, a very large one.

[Streetcop]

while I agree there is a difference...speed IS linked to death and serious injury...

Even if you are a decent driver and your car is suitable....speeding could just mean that you end up dead or injured because of the actions of another unsafe driver, who might be under the speed limit...

Don't get me wront..i'm not lecturing you or anyone else and I'm far from perfect...but the fact remains that the faster we driver the higher chance of being involved in a major collision and the higher chance of being killed or seriously injured..

Now if you are happy with those odds...then speed away...but one cannot then later bleat about getting caught for speeding. We all know the limits, if we exceed them and get caught...tough shit...we must take it on the chin....Like one of our members recently posted...we'll have sped uncaught 1000s of times before actually getting caught...

Street

[V8 Archie]

Streetcop said:

Sympathy is one thing...turning a blind eye or neglecting your duty is another...

Gary, you are absolutely correct. If you're prepared to do the job, you have a duty to do it to the best of your ability. That doesn't mean you have to agree with the parameters within which you work though. It is as much my job as it is yours to change the parameters because it can only be done by elected representatives.

On the other hand, in many industries the introduction of unthinking automisation is strongly resisted by the workforce, especially when it is accompanied by a reduction in numbers of skilled workers. For some reason, the traffic cops in this country have not made made such opposition known to the public. Equally, they have not shown support. As a result the public are beginning to see the police as a bunch of mindless automatons who will only follow up the most minor transgressions (as long as little or no manpower is required) or the high profile cases. This leaves most of the population feeling unprotected from all of the crime that they are most likely to encounter. As a result the public are beginning to feel that they are not served by the police force that they retain (i.e. employ) which leads to resentment and only makes your job harder.

I think that if the BiB (rank and file to top brass) publicly showed more understanding of the average person's day-to-day life we would more chance of changing laws that impede the majority of peoples lives, focussing policing on the areas that truly effect the population and diverting the attention of politicians from irrelevant trifles about which they know nothing.

[Streetcop]

Hi Archie..

The problem is...the public will see the police in whatever light they like...

Look at the scenes of last week...the police haven't banned fox hunting, but it's the police that came in for the flak from the public...always has been..we are the tools and the public face of government rule and therefore are easy targets and legitimate ones in some people's eyes...

A change in the ruling political party is what is required and a 'X' in the suitable spot come the next election should sort that out. Although I'm not holding my breath. The UK is ok a bleating behind closed doors, but embracing change is quoffed at..

Street

[Themoss]

V8 Archie said:

I think that if the BiB publicly showed more understanding of the average person's day-to-day life we would more chance of changing laws that impede the majority of peoples lives

No offence meant Archie, but are Police Officers not 'average people' too? Do these laws not 'impede' those same Officers when they're off duty?

Don't get me wrong, as i've stated before i detest speed camera's. However, we all know roads where we can take the p**s a bit and enjoy our cars, or book a track day for not a lot of money. I don't enjoy driving slowly, but speed limits don't exactly impede my life. A pain in the arse at times yes, but thats all.

What exactly IS the average persons day to day life? I would suggest that theres no such thing........

[V8 Archie]

Streetcop said:

The problem is...the public will see the police in whatever light they like... ..we are the tools and the public face of government rule and therefore are easy targets and legitimate ones in some people's eyes...

Hi Gary (I'll have too meet you some time).

You are wrong. The public will see the police in the light of the publicity that the police get (and personal experience). Given that most people do not see a policeman from on week to the next (which in itself is an unfortunate change) their perception is guided by the media. Now, I wouldn't suggest that the media portray a 100% accurate picture because that's not their job, but the image portrayed is as I've stated above.

You are right. The police are "tools and the public face of government rule and therefore are easy targets". I would argue that any employee is the tool and (in many roles) the public face of their employer. That does not mean that employees cannot question the validity of the parameters within which they are required to work. It is very easy to say that an "X" is all it takes to change the management, but you are lucky, most people don't have that option. We have to work things out from inside or get out of the job.

[Streetcop]

Themoss touched the real point there..

What is the problem with speed limits?

Is it the fear of points and a fine...?
Is it because we want to get to places faster?
Is it because we like the thrill of speed?
or do we just not like to be told how to drive? The old saying about "Insult a man's wife, but don't complain about his driving..."

Street

[V8 Archie]

Themoss said:

No offence meant Archie, but are Police Officers not 'average people' too? Do these laws not 'impede' those same Officers when they're off duty?

No offence taken .

Of course the BiB are 'average people'. I'm sure the laws impede them as much as they do you or I. My point is that if you believe there is something wrong with your working environment (be it in the rules, the policies or the lack of a coffee machine) it is you that is best placed to put it right.

I wouldn't ask you, Themoss, to try to change the conditions under which I work. It seems, however, that many BiB seem to think that it is our job to change their working conditions. Granted, we are in the privileged position to have some influence. But, given the size of the police force, if they have a beef it shouldn't be hard to make their case felt. The train drivers can do it, and there's only a few thousand of them!

[Themoss]

Can see where you're coming from Archie, but remember the Police have no unions and aren't allowed to strike.

[V8 Archie]

Streetcop said:

What is the problem with speed limits?

And there's the rub! If you can't tell me I don't know who can!

As I see it speed limits shouldn't be required. People should be taught to drive in a responsible manner and there is no numerical speed that represents a dividing line between responsible and irresponsible. If we must have speed limits, they should be there purely as a way of beating the irresponsible driver. Such a philosophy requires BiB on the roads to make the judgement as to whether a driver is acting responsibly or not. It is not a call that an automated system can make because there are too many variables and the system cannot respond to them.

Of course a side effect of more BiB on the street would be that there would be more BiB around to respond to the everyday events such as street crime, car crime, house-breaking etc.. As a result people would feel that they were geting a better service from the force that they pay for and police/public relations would improve.

[Streetcop]

V8 Archie said:

Streetcop said: What is the problem with speed limits? And there's the rub! If you can't tell me I don't know who can!

We've buggered it then...

V8 Archie said:

As I see it speed limits shouldn't be required. People should be taught to drive in a responsible manner and there is no numerical speed that represents a dividing line between responsible and irresponsible.

That's where the problem starts..We're talking about humans...a percentage of which are w@ankers, irresponsible, ill-educated, careless, selfish etc etc

V8 Archie said:

If we must have speed limits, they should be there purely as a way of beating the irresponsible driver. Such a philosophy requires BiB on the roads to make the judgement as to whether a driver is acting responsibly or not.

What? In the UK? It's a hard enough task at the moment to convict someone of an offence where their driving standards have been at fault. We, the police, also have a duty of care to the public and the enforcement of speed limits (along with other motoring offences) goes some way to providing that duty of care. I've seen my fare share of widows, widowers and orphans whos loved ones have been killed by a speeding driver. You try telling them that it's a nanny state or to try justifying the need to 'feel the speed' on the open road, because I for one daren't.

V8 Archie said:

Of course a side effect of more BiB on the street would be that there would be more BiB around to respond to the everyday events such as street crime, car crime, house-breaking etc.. As a result people would feel that they were geting a better service from the force that they pay for and police/public relations would improve.

If people would be prepared to pay more in taxes....then I'm sure something could change, but people want the world for the £1.98 of council tax that goes to their local police force.

Street

[V8 Archie]

Themoss said:

Can see where you're coming from Archie, but remember the Police have no unions and aren't allowed to strike.

The Police may have no unions, but there are associations (some of which must, surely, represent the Constables rather than the Chief Inspectors). As to strike action, that would be pretty scary were it to happen (even though it's not allowed). But think on this: who or what would stop the Police from striking? What sanction could be placed on the strikers that would not hurt the country at least as much as the strikers themselves?

Where am I coming from: the BiB here often hint that they are not happy with current traffic policing policy. (Street made his personal views clear the other day). The BiB here are also fond of taking the line that "if you are caught, take it like a man - you know you were doing wrong". Generally I agree with both viewpoints. That doesn't mean that all laws are correct though, and I'm sure that some BiB here would agree. My point is that they sre in a better position to create changes in law that you or I as they have the authoritative position. All they need is to make their voice heard.

I maintain that the speed limit (and camera enforcement inparticular) is unique because it only addresses symptoms of a problem and does so in such a draconian fashion that it is more of an excercise in totalitarianism that of community.