5,000 police cars speeding in Essex - no prosecutions
Discussion
^Slider^ said:
The main point for me is that they were logged as exceeded the limit...without a problem.
Why is that a main point?
'cos police officers can speed past cameras 5000 times without incident.Doesn't this make the "speed kills" mantra out to be a bit of a lie? (If this is not what you meant James, then I apologise)
I wrote this earlier:
I know there has been a debate about the quality of police drivers in the past, but we are trained to drive on immediate, something the general public do not get trained in, you can have IAM training but that will never encompass immediate response.
And to the above post about ambulances and fire. They have the same exemptions too would there be a similar response if it was fire or ambulance???
Remind me,how many civvies were killed by rtas with trained police drivers last year?I suppose the difference with fire brigade and ambulance is that they aren't the ones booking us for speeding?
jamesson said:
njwcat7 - as a serving police officer, I can tell you that we DO cut the public some slack, it all depends on the circs. If you are seen to be speeding by a police officer - me for example - then I will take in to account whether or not your car is roadworthy, the weather, levels of traffic etc. and use my discretion as to whether or not you get a ticket. The problem with Gatsos is no discretion is available and please don't blame the police for installing those cameras, that comes from government guidelines which forces are obliged to follow.
I cant argue with that, my beef is not with the police officers who stop people on the roads but with the automated, mindless, discretionless systems that are replacing them.
If I get caught travelling a few mph over the limit by someone in a camera van (who often appears to have done his best to hide it out of sight), I get a ticket regardless of road conditions etc at the time and there is no escape. If you catch me you'll give me a ticket and/or a b*ll*cking, but its at your discretion and I'll accept your judgement in the matter.
However, if you caught by someone in a camera van whilst on a job and travelling a few mph over the limit , you get the opportunity to present a case for dropping the charge.
Thats my problem with the system in general and this story in particular. I, like many others, have a deep dislike of the mindless rush into automatically convicting people who are travelling at more than 10%+2mph regardless of circumstances, and the bottom line (IMHO) is that the reputation of the police in general is being tarnished by association with the 'safety' partnerships.
jamesson said:
njwcat7 - as a serving police officer, I can tell you that we DO cut the public some slack, it all depends on the circs. If you are seen to be speeding by a police officer - me for example - then I will take in to account whether or not your car is roadworthy, the weather, levels of traffic etc. and use my discretion as to whether or not you get a ticket. The problem with Gatsos is no discretion is available and please don't blame the police for installing those cameras, that comes from government guidelines which forces are obliged to follow.
As for police breaking the speed limit, let me just say that I have yet to hear a single complaint from somebody who needed our help along the lines of "You got here too early"...
Trust me when I say that my force sends out NIPs any time one of us goes through a speed (not safety) camera and it is checked against logs to see what kind of job we were on our way to. A shoplifter would come in as an immediate response but I would hardly be justified in putting on lights and sirens to get there. On the other hand, I would be criticised for NOT putting on lights and sirens to attend a violent domestic.
A lot of the posts saying "why can they speed and we can't?" really do sound like sour grapes to me. If people want to put their foot down, they either accept the punishment if they get caught or they go to the track for a day, it's their choice.
Agree entirely, the only thing that does not ring true is that for all of the 5,269 occurrences for the Essex force NOT A SINGLE ONE was found to be in breach of the regs. It does not, IMHO, seem to indicate that the Essex force is playing the game.
This can only serve to degrade further the respect that the MOP have for the BiB. I have a great deal of respect for all the BiB, that I have met, both the ones I meet professionally and when I am off duty, and am appalled by the gulf I see developing between the MOP and BiB. It is not, entirely, the fault of the BiB, although some of your senior officers seem to think that this is a good idea, but rather a failing pressed upon you by our political lords and masters who are only thinking about getting elected again or a lucrative book deal!
It is happening to all of the previously well thought of institutions, the military, doctors, nurses, teachers, police, firemen, etc, etc, etc. I am beginning to believe that politicians harbour a deep seated feeling of inadequacy compared to all these institutions and feel the need to try and drag them down to the same level as politicians in the publics view. Just a thought, and breath!
^Slider^ said:
As an aside it is interesting that the exemption is rigorously applied to non emergency vehicles. I was travelling with a colleague last week who was on the last Op FRESCO as the CO’s (equivalent of Gold Command I believe) driver. On the way to an incident, whilst they were being escorted by a patrol car which was leading with blues and twos on, he got flashed, consequence 3 points and a £60 fine! The system (military) tried to help and was fobbed off by the scameras, and unfortunately the BiB, and the consequences of a court appearance for him, swerving NCO driving etc, meant that he could not risk taking it to court. This inflexibility is precisely why more BiB are required and less scameras. The police need the exemption and the public need intelegent enforcement of the law.
If we are refering to cameras id agree with cameras where appropriate and necessary and here's that word again, justifiable.
So in reality that would be less cameras and more BiB
YES, YES, YES! Only no as a BiB costs more than a camera and given that you do use discretion would produce less income. It would actually cut KSI and improve road safety but as income generation is the name of the game it will not happen!
esselte said:
The main point for me is that they were logged as exceeded the limit...without a problem.
Why is that a main point?
'cos police officers can speed past cameras 5000 times without incident.Doesn't this make the "speed kills" mantra out to be a bit of a lie? (If this is not what you meant James, then I apologise)
I wrote this earlier:
I know there has been a debate about the quality of police drivers in the past, but we are trained to drive on immediate, something the general public do not get trained in, you can have IAM training but that will never encompass immediate response.
And to the above post about ambulances and fire. They have the same exemptions too would there be a similar response if it was fire or ambulance???
Remind me,how many civvies were killed by rtas with trained police drivers last year?I suppose the difference with fire brigade and ambulance is that they aren't the ones booking us for speeding?
And how many MOP's were killed by non trained civilians. A damed sight more than by police drivers.
I dont want this to be a training argument batting off petty arguments.
And i hasten to add The majority of police do not support cameras and prefer to enforce personally.
Just because the cameras are there dont give us stick over a government initiative which is brought in by people of a much higher rank than i can ever attain!
I'm not fond of scameras, but I do appreciate what the majority of trafpol do for us motorists. These automated devices (which seem to criminalise us all) do impact on this MOP's impression of police, and whether or not they actually care about what's going on on our roads.
But trafpol (the living, breathing ones, not the yellow boxes) here seem to care more about educating the motorist and taking a sensible approach than where I come from (Totornto, Canada, where they don't seem to give a rat's - just come out from their hiding place and talk to you like you're murdering scum for going a few miles over, then issue your ticket) so to the squaddies here I say hats off to you, but if there's any way you can make your collective voices more clearly heard over your displeasure of automated enforcement, please do. I think the public would sit up and take notice much more keenly, and (maybe?) cause the politcos to do something constructive about road safety for a change.
But trafpol (the living, breathing ones, not the yellow boxes) here seem to care more about educating the motorist and taking a sensible approach than where I come from (Totornto, Canada, where they don't seem to give a rat's - just come out from their hiding place and talk to you like you're murdering scum for going a few miles over, then issue your ticket) so to the squaddies here I say hats off to you, but if there's any way you can make your collective voices more clearly heard over your displeasure of automated enforcement, please do. I think the public would sit up and take notice much more keenly, and (maybe?) cause the politcos to do something constructive about road safety for a change.
So, Essex Police set off about 30 camerasa day? That's only 30 across the whole county. I don't know how many cameras Essex have but its probably at least 100? You only have to have 1 camera situated close to the nick, urgent call comes in and three cars leave with blues and two's, past the camera which then activates three times. Extrapulate that for other stations and maybe 100 immediate response calls per day per nick................
Hardly herrendous. I think someone else said that they were suprised that the figure wasn't higher.
>> Edited by purpleheadedcerb on Thursday 8th December 14:46
Hardly herrendous. I think someone else said that they were suprised that the figure wasn't higher.
>> Edited by purpleheadedcerb on Thursday 8th December 14:46
^Slider^ said:
The main point for me is that they were logged as exceeded the limit...without a problem.
Why is that a main point?
Because they didn't crash and thus exceeding the limit wasn't dangerous. In fact, I'm sure they would each say they were driving safely (and that's OK).
esselte said:
The main point for me is that they were logged as exceeded the limit...without a problem.
Why is that a main point?
'cos police officers can speed past cameras 5000 times without incident.Doesn't this make the "speed kills" mantra out to be a bit of a lie? (If this is not what you meant James, then I apologise)
Yes, thanks - that's what I meant.
Dear PH friends
the serious bit
I honestly believe you are a little bit unfair. It is a tough job being in the Police and we all wish they were all more catching the bad motorists and tell Tony Tony that speed limits could be more reasonable and flexible.
So who cares how much they are going fast and how many speed cameras they trigger? I could not care less in all fairness.
the funny bit
Now bear with me to see the POSITIVE side for a second (and see the fun as well): for every speed camera flash generated by a speeding cop you have an innocent motorist speeding ticket LESS. So pushing the irony to a higher level, you should have cops speeding all the time to fill the film roll in your place.
Try to see it like this: they are doing you a favour.
and on that bombshell...
A67
the serious bit
I honestly believe you are a little bit unfair. It is a tough job being in the Police and we all wish they were all more catching the bad motorists and tell Tony Tony that speed limits could be more reasonable and flexible.
So who cares how much they are going fast and how many speed cameras they trigger? I could not care less in all fairness.
the funny bit
Now bear with me to see the POSITIVE side for a second (and see the fun as well): for every speed camera flash generated by a speeding cop you have an innocent motorist speeding ticket LESS. So pushing the irony to a higher level, you should have cops speeding all the time to fill the film roll in your place.
Try to see it like this: they are doing you a favour.
and on that bombshell...
A67
I think most of you are not thinking this through.As an ex BIB (A good few years ago before speed cameras)I feel that if any of you if were being assaulted,or lying in a crashed car,or were calling 3x9's for a burglary in progress,you would want the police there bloody quick wouldn't you?Or would you prefer that they stick to the speed limit and hang the consequences?
There has to be 1 law for the BIB and another for the public.(IMO)
Steve
There has to be 1 law for the BIB and another for the public.(IMO)
Steve
sb-1 said:
I think most of you are not thinking this through.As an ex BIB (A good few years ago before speed cameras)I feel that if any of you if were being assaulted,or lying in a crashed car,or were calling 3x9's for a burglary in progress,you would want the police there bloody quick wouldn't you?Or would you prefer that they stick to the speed limit and hang the consequences?
There has to be 1 law for the BIB and another for the public.(IMO)
Steve
I don't think anyone here disagrees with that sentiment.I think the gist of the initial post is that out of 5000 camera activations by Essex Police in the first 6 months of this year,none were found to be anything other than "Immediates".Just seems a bit odd that all these were kosher.How many cars does the Essex plod have?
sb-1 said:
I feel that if any of you if were being assaulted,or lying in a crashed car,or were calling 3x9's for a burglary in progress,you would want the police there bloody quick wouldn't you?Or would you prefer that they stick to the speed limit and hang the consequences?
There has to be 1 law for the BIB and another for the public.(IMO)
^Slider^ said:
If i get caught speeding on a blue light run im exempt if justified.
If i get caught speeding with no justification i get stuck on.
If i kick a door in or break a window because i suspect that someone may need help (saving life or limb) then i am exempt if justified.
If i kick a door in or smash a window and cant justify it i get done for criminal damage.
Just want to say I totally agree with you guys and think you're doing a good job joining in the discussion and not getting too irate!
However I think everyone else has a point too..:
Kicking in a door does not 'kill people' so fair enough you can do it if justified. But if the government/whoever really are trying to make us believe that speeding is sooo dangerous and equals killing people, it comes across as cynical and unconvincing that the police may do it whenever they want to justify it. I feel sorry for you plod guys here
There are only two solutions to people's moaning A) Government don't be so speed obsessed and admit speed doesn't automatically equal death, B) Fall to the lowest-common-denominator and NO-ONE is allowed to speed even ambulances.
It's pretty obvious that B is not the way to go, but as it's not the style of the government (or the British way
) to admit defeat and go back on something, B is what we will end up with, just so they can show us who's boss. IMHO.
yours dramatically,
Russell
I think in reality everyone thinks 5000 is a high figure to be on immediate alone.
If you work it out. 5000 activations justified in 6 months = 833 a month = 166ish a week = 23 a day.
23 a day from say 400 cameras.
Each shift will have enough cars to double crew the shift. so say average shift strenght per station is 10 thats 5 cars a shift per station not including traffic, ABO,s specialist units.
In essex say there are 40 stations.
So thats 200 cars. Average time im on shift i will deal with maybe 4 immediate commitments.
So thats 20 potential activations depending on location per shift per station.
Over 40 stations this could mean potential 800 immediates per shift.
3 shifts a day 2400 immediate commitments per day with only 23 activations in essex.
Lets put it into perspective please people.
I appreciate my figues are assumptions, in TVP my shift strength at minumum is 5 in other areas min strength is 20 so i dont hink my estimates are that far out.
If you work it out. 5000 activations justified in 6 months = 833 a month = 166ish a week = 23 a day.
23 a day from say 400 cameras.
Each shift will have enough cars to double crew the shift. so say average shift strenght per station is 10 thats 5 cars a shift per station not including traffic, ABO,s specialist units.
In essex say there are 40 stations.
So thats 200 cars. Average time im on shift i will deal with maybe 4 immediate commitments.
So thats 20 potential activations depending on location per shift per station.
Over 40 stations this could mean potential 800 immediates per shift.
3 shifts a day 2400 immediate commitments per day with only 23 activations in essex.
Lets put it into perspective please people.
I appreciate my figues are assumptions, in TVP my shift strength at minumum is 5 in other areas min strength is 20 so i dont hink my estimates are that far out.
5,269 camera flashes and every single one of them was justified - Bollocks!
The other police forces didn't have as many camera flashes as Essex, yet they admit that some were unjustified. Essex police can't or won't admit that. Do they therefore seriously expect us to believe Essex is that much more of a dangerous county than the others that it warrants this type of statistics?
This does absoluitely nothing exept enlarge the gulf between Jo Public and the Police.
If Speed Kills, it kills if you are in a Police car or in a Silver Ford Focus - end of argument. If someone is going to step out from the pavement it doesn't matter if you are an advanced Police driver or not, if you are travelling with excessive speed you will hit them, and this is where the cameras are placed - in areas of danger (apparantly), although we all know this to be shite aswell, anyone travelled down the A12 extension into London? speed camers up before there was even a chance for there to be an accident black spot!
It reeks boys, and it cannot be justified. Again, if speed kills, you can kill if you are a copper or Joe public.
The other police forces didn't have as many camera flashes as Essex, yet they admit that some were unjustified. Essex police can't or won't admit that. Do they therefore seriously expect us to believe Essex is that much more of a dangerous county than the others that it warrants this type of statistics?
This does absoluitely nothing exept enlarge the gulf between Jo Public and the Police.
If Speed Kills, it kills if you are in a Police car or in a Silver Ford Focus - end of argument. If someone is going to step out from the pavement it doesn't matter if you are an advanced Police driver or not, if you are travelling with excessive speed you will hit them, and this is where the cameras are placed - in areas of danger (apparantly), although we all know this to be shite aswell, anyone travelled down the A12 extension into London? speed camers up before there was even a chance for there to be an accident black spot!
It reeks boys, and it cannot be justified. Again, if speed kills, you can kill if you are a copper or Joe public.
^Slider^ said:
I think in reality everyone thinks 5000 is a high figure to be on immediate alone.
If you work it out. 5000 activations justified in 6 months = 833 a month = 166ish a week = 23 a day.
23 a day from say 400 cameras.
Each shift will have enough cars to double crew the shift. so say average shift strenght per station is 10 thats 5 cars a shift per station not including traffic, ABO,s specialist units.
In essex say there are 40 stations.
So thats 200 cars. Average time im on shift i will deal with maybe 4 immediate commitments.
So thats 20 potential activations depending on location per shift per station.
Over 40 stations this could mean potential 800 immediates per shift.
3 shifts a day 2400 immediate commitments per day with only 23 activations in essex.
Lets put it into perspective please people.
I appreciate my figues are assumptions, in TVP my shift strength at minumum is 5 in other areas min strength is 20 so i dont hink my estimates are that far out.
^Slider^ I agree that 5,000, and loose change, incidents may well be very low the actual number is irrelevant to me. The statistical breakdown of the exact call outs is irrelevant to me. I know that you BiB have a very difficult job to do and need to exceed the posted limits, in the course of your duties, in order to complete them. I am in complete agreement that this is both required and necessary. The only bit that I, personally, have a problem with is the insistence, by the Essex alone, that every single one of the instances recorded was legit. Not one, not a single one was a slight miscalculation by an honest Bib, or a clerk rushing to get to court for a case, or someone late to be somewhere. That is the bit that I have a problem with. Now if they had said that 4,999, plus loose change, were legit and 1 was being investigated I would be shouting from the rooftops that this is not a story and can we please let the BiB get on with their day job! Now I am aware the it is, probably, not a BiB who has said this but it has been stated on your behalf and me, the MOP, see it as official BiB position and it just serves to undermine your position.
The sooner the scameras are abolished or at least a clear dividing line is put between the BiB and the scamerati the better for all concerned. You have a difficult enough job on your hands without the added strain of being tarred with the “income generation” brush. You, the entire BiB community IMHO, need to fight this one with us, the MOP, until we get back our British Bobby who can be seen as the good person that he/she is.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff