Discussion
turbobloke said:
That's not what we have now. There is discretion available, but no requirement to prove danger & no defence in showing there was none.
But that's what we have been saying.
The choices are absolute limits OR advisory only limits.
It's beginning to look like you're over-achieving on some posts and are really hard of thinking.
No, that is the basic first fundamental choice. Even the de-restricted sections of autobahn have an advisory limit.
What limits are set at etc is a subset of the above choice & a different side issue once you have decided on the above first choice.
>> Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 7th May 23:13
GreenV8S said:
I covered that above. It's not the same thing with a GATSO but it's still opinion based.
Camera vans of course the operator can use their discretion.
Yes, I missed your reply while I was writing mine. That isn't really discretion though is it? It's more a policy that sets the prosecution thresholds for cameras in a given operational area. There's no discretion in the sense that drivers who are dangerous are targetted in preference to drivers who are safe.
But is there in the discretion used by Police officers either in truth.
Do they select & show demonstrative actual danger present or do they just say "that's just too much over the limit for me" & report ?
>> Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 7th May 23:12
vonhosen said:
If and only if the discretion was only used to prosecute dangerous speeding, and lack of danger was a defence, fine.
Arbitrary speed are fundamentally obnoxious as they offend against natural justice by criminalising reasonable behaviour; any small utility pales into insignificance.
That's not what we have now. There is discretion available, but no requirement to prove danger & no defence in showing there was none.
Which is why what we have is oppressive; it criminalises reasonable behaviour.
fluffnik said:
If and only if the discretion was only used to prosecute dangerous speeding, and lack of danger was a defence, fine.
Arbitrary speed are fundamentally obnoxious as they offend against natural justice by criminalising reasonable behaviour; any small utility pales into insignificance.
That's not what we have now. There is discretion available, but no requirement to prove danger & no defence in showing there was none.
Which is why what we have is oppressive; it criminalises reasonable behaviour.
We'll have to agree to differ over it.
I prefer to see a more restrictive performance range made available to drivers given the current skill base, whilst you prefer to see more freedom.
There will always be differing views over where the line should lay in the compromise between control & freedom.
vonhosen said:
Given the current situation on the roads, is increased enforcement of the speed limits desirable, or undesirable?
I pointed out several reasons why speed limit enforcement will tend to make roads less safe. Speed limit enforcement is a mistake, and the more strictly the limit is enforced the worse a mistake it is.
The "general" level of speed enforcement was about right & dropped to too little as trafpol numbers dropped. In the wake of that cameras have plugged a gap left by reduced trafpol numbers as they concentrate on other things, but cameras by their nature will report far more offenders than a trafpol officer would.
Once known - people slow fro scam und speed up again. Und it does not detect the tailgater. I engineer a ping at one near a garage forecourt on road which I get tailgated ... und only reason why tailgated all the time on this road ist because I KNOW of the scam und drive at steady pace. Unfortunately, my temper get better of me with the tailgater - so nip into garage forecourt - he accelerate und get NIPpped
But by und large Lancs may have high number of pinged people - but high level of KSI all the same.
Is that situation the most desireable ?
vonhosen said:
I disagree that speed limit enforcement is a mistake I believe it is necessary. I would agree that if it were to be the focus to the exclusion of everything else, that would be a mistake.
>> Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 7th May 20:19
But that ist the danger - nicht? Ist only the licenced blipper who get pinged und make up the millions of fines nationwide.
The camera cannot detect the solid white straddler, dangerous overtaker of cyclist or tailgater who ist either high in drugs, drink or simply "cream crackered"
Und not that good at nabbing stolen cars or even buses.
WildCat said:
Given the current situation on the roads, is increased enforcement of the speed limits desirable, or undesirable?
I pointed out several reasons why speed limit enforcement will tend to make roads less safe. Speed limit enforcement is a mistake, and the more strictly the limit is enforced the worse a mistake it is.
The "general" level of speed enforcement was about right & dropped to too little as trafpol numbers dropped. In the wake of that cameras have plugged a gap left by reduced trafpol numbers as they concentrate on other things, but cameras by their nature will report far more offenders than a trafpol officer would.
Once known - people slow fro scam und speed up again. Und it does not detect the tailgater. I engineer a ping at one near a garage forecourt on road which I get tailgated ... und only reason why tailgated all the time on this road ist because I KNOW of the scam und drive at steady pace. Unfortunately, my temper get better of me with the tailgater - so nip into garage forecourt - he accelerate und get NIPpped
But by und large Lancs may have high number of pinged people - but high level of KSI all the same.
Is that situation the most desireable ?
vonhosen said:
I disagree that speed limit enforcement is a mistake I believe it is necessary. I would agree that if it were to be the focus to the exclusion of everything else, that would be a mistake.
>> Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 7th May 20:19
But that ist the danger - nicht? Ist only the licenced blipper who get pinged und make up the millions of fines nationwide.
The camera cannot detect the solid white straddler, dangerous overtaker of cyclist or tailgater who ist either high in drugs, drink or simply "cream crackered"
Und not that good at nabbing stolen cars or even buses.
I wasn't under the impression that we were talking exclusively about camera enforcement here.
Talking about enforcement of limits being necessary generally (ie by Police officers).
vonhosen said:
Any officer can make that decision, they don't even have to be a driver.
A uniform und helmet does not suddenly magic the ability to judge speed of car into someone.
vonhosen said:
Just as a pedestrian non licence holder can express a valid opinion on speed limits,
Despite over 100 statements - they never ever caught the dangerous idiot who caused an accident in Kent which killed a 12 year old. No one could give conclusive lead.
In recent case in North West which also result in tragedy - no one could agree on the speed of the vehicle in question.
So I doubt very much if non pedestrian non licence holder can express a valid opinion on basis of these und other similar cases. None could deliver enough for police to make arrest in one case und no one could provide conclusive proof that driver was over twice speed limit in question on some roads leading up to this incident.
As for civilian talivan ops - they target anything which move.
WildCat said:
Any officer can make that decision, they don't even have to be a driver.
A uniform und helmet does not suddenly magic the ability to judge speed of car into someone.
So what are you saying ?
We can never have any control/enforcement of speed so be damned with it & a free for all because
a) absolute limits are unfair
b) opinion of safe speed is subjective & therefore not reliable ?
>> Edited by vonhosen on Monday 8th May 00:12
vonhosen said:
Any officer can make that decision, they don't even have to be a driver.
A uniform und helmet does not suddenly magic the ability to judge speed of car into someone.
So what are you saying ?
We can never have any control/enforcement of speed so be damned with it & a free for all because
a) absolute limits are unfair
b) opinion of safe speed is subjective & therefore not reliable ?
>> Edited by vonhosen on Monday 8th May 00:12
If officer does not drive car even - then nnot perhaps skilled to judge.
If officer ist "officer" after the initial 15 weeks training - then they still not trained to judge PROFESSIONALLY as 15 weeks training does not maketh a police officer any more than a 12 month training course post graduation maketh a school teacher and more than medics are fully professionally conversant after 6 years of university study.
Und opinion of speed ist subjective if not professionally und objectively formed. People perception ist never 100% und if you are police officer or anything to do with police - then you would know from sleuthing that no two witnesses ever describe exactly the same thing or form same opinion. You have to look for matches in statements which make the "jigsaw puzzle" per Hercule Poirot!
This could be proven to some extent by that old Krypton Factor thing where the candidates had to watch a video sketch und were asked a number of obervation questions after it. Not one person scored highly in this section during the entire series per a nerdy "Did You Know" book I have.
Und the doo-dah ist supposedly to verify "professional opinion" per these much quoted guidelines und these are also repeated in the hand books to certain useful gadgets
Wildy, as we know the whole approach is rotten to the core - wrong principles, wrong focus, wrong result. Automated enforcement of silly limits at narrow margins is only possible through a well-funded spin machine to keep less interested and more gullible folk in a state of passive belief.
Can I suggest someone padlock this thread - it's been going around in circles for a while, as different participants bang their heads against the SCP PR machine that must be vonhosen (I was wrong in my earlier assessment - he's got to be a troll!).
Is ANYONE actually getting any benefit from this anymore?
Is ANYONE actually getting any benefit from this anymore?
havoc said:
Can I suggest someone padlock this thread - it's been going around in circles for a while, as different participants bang their heads against the SCP PR machine that must be vonhosen (I was wrong in my earlier assessment - he's got to be a troll!).
Is ANYONE actually getting any benefit from this anymore?
I've been following this carefully from the start because I was concerned it could easily get out of hand. I don't agree with the views posted by Vonhosen, but I am fascinated by his/her stance. I think for most of us this presents a good opportunity to "know your enemy" and gain a valuable insight into the thought processes of people who support the other end of the debate.
I welcome Vonhosen's input as much as I welcome those of BiB. I do think this particular thread has essentially run its course though.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff