Police speeding priorities
Discussion
Does it concern anyone else that speeding is seen mainly as a way of filling the financial black hole the force has, from what i can see? Two examples for your thoughts. 1) Even though cars regularly do 60 mph or more past the care home my mother is in (the limit is 30 and the road includes many houses and several junctions), they will not set up a speeding van or put a camera up because of the cost in surveying and all other manner of red tape. Yet they got my friend 2 weeks ago in his 1969 Fiat 500, 36 mph in a Lincolnshire 30 mph limit at a point just after suburbia has ended and it's all cows and grass and a national limit. They literally set up as it 'went national' and where most of us would have had our toe down a bit. 2) A motorway camera i read about, i forget which one now, is getting countless people for high 70s when we know that with thought to other traffic and road conditions, weather, etc., it's perfectly safe in a modern car. Yes i am aware that we should stick to 70 BUT here's the thing. Defending the huge income they are getting, a police representative explained that the cameras at that bridge pay for 5 police officers' wages, ''officers who are very much needed''. SO, by definition, the LAST thing they want you to do is 70 mph! Because if you do 5 police will have to go, one way or another. I won't even do 30 past my doctor's surgery or local school, but i'm no angel. Why is there no common sense with speed anymore? There's another stretch of road 7 miles or so from us and it's a 40 mph, but cars and motorcycles often ''try to break the ton before the bend'' as an acceleration contest. 100+ in a 40 FGS. Yet again, no camera or patrols ''unless someone is killed'' i was told once by a cop pal of mine. He said after fatalities their rules change on these things.
The speed camera vans seem to be out in force in south Yorkshire. Think I may have got caught out yesterday on the Sheffield parkway dual carriageway.
I would not have classed my driving as speeding either although technically it is as I was above the limit.
Was just following the flow of traffic in outside lane my Speedo probably read between 55 and 60 when I noticed the van while going around a sweeping bend with a car in front of me. I did manage to reduce speed but whether I did so in time, there's a few weeks to find out eh!
I would not have classed my driving as speeding either although technically it is as I was above the limit.
Was just following the flow of traffic in outside lane my Speedo probably read between 55 and 60 when I noticed the van while going around a sweeping bend with a car in front of me. I did manage to reduce speed but whether I did so in time, there's a few weeks to find out eh!
Bennyjames28 said:
The speed camera vans seem to be out in force in south Yorkshire. Think I may have got caught out yesterday on the Sheffield parkway dual carriageway.
I would not have classed my driving as speeding either although technically it is as I was above the limit.
Was just following the flow of traffic in outside lane my Speedo probably read between 55 and 60 when I noticed the van while going around a sweeping bend with a car in front of me. I did manage to reduce speed but whether I did so in time, there's a few weeks to find out eh!
I was just thinking that. They were just before the bingo turn off last week in the layby after the corner. I think (hope) I slowed down enough.I would not have classed my driving as speeding either although technically it is as I was above the limit.
Was just following the flow of traffic in outside lane my Speedo probably read between 55 and 60 when I noticed the van while going around a sweeping bend with a car in front of me. I did manage to reduce speed but whether I did so in time, there's a few weeks to find out eh!
Everyone doing the same speed (55 - 60) safely as well.
Grindle said:
Yet they got my friend 2 weeks ago in his 1969 Fiat 500, 36 mph in a Lincolnshire 30 mph limit at a point just after suburbia has ended and it's all cows and grass and a national limit. They literally set up as it 'went national' and where most of us would have had our toe down a bit.
If he was in the 'national limit' as you claim, why did he get a ticket? Should be an easy appeal. Or day in court.
cobra kid said:
Bennyjames28 said:
The speed camera vans seem to be out in force in south Yorkshire. Think I may have got caught out yesterday on the Sheffield parkway dual carriageway.
I would not have classed my driving as speeding either although technically it is as I was above the limit.
Was just following the flow of traffic in outside lane my Speedo probably read between 55 and 60 when I noticed the van while going around a sweeping bend with a car in front of me. I did manage to reduce speed but whether I did so in time, there's a few weeks to find out eh!
I was just thinking that. They were just before the bingo turn off last week in the layby after the corner. I think (hope) I slowed down enough.I would not have classed my driving as speeding either although technically it is as I was above the limit.
Was just following the flow of traffic in outside lane my Speedo probably read between 55 and 60 when I noticed the van while going around a sweeping bend with a car in front of me. I did manage to reduce speed but whether I did so in time, there's a few weeks to find out eh!
Everyone doing the same speed (55 - 60) safely as well.
Grindle said:
Does it concern anyone else that speeding is seen mainly as a way of filling the financial black hole the force has, from what i can see? Two examples for your thoughts. 1) Even though cars regularly do 60 mph or more past the care home my mother is in (the limit is 30 and the road includes many houses and several junctions), they will not set up a speeding van or put a camera up because of the cost in surveying and all other manner of red tape.
Police don't set up fixed speed cameras. The local authority do and they have to make a business case to central government that usually includes fatalities along with alternatives. Grindle said:
Defending the huge income they are getting, a police representative explained that the cameras at that bridge pay for 5 police officers' wages, ''officers who are very much needed''. SO, by definition, the LAST thing they want you to do is 70 mph! Because if you do 5 police will have to go, one way or another
Primarily because of statements like that Police forces no longer get any money from speeding fines. Rovinghawk said:
They get money from their SACs, though.
Yep works out at just over a million p/a per force which is orders of magnitude less than they spend on speed enforcement so it's not really a strong argument, that it's revenue collection anymore. I suspect that administration of speed awareness is slightly higher than fixed penalties as well. Edited by Graveworm on Monday 9th July 10:28
Grindle said:
Does it concern anyone else that speeding is seen mainly as a way of filling the financial black hole the force has, from what i can see? Two examples for your thoughts. 1) Even though cars regularly do 60 mph or more past the care home my mother is in (the limit is 30 and the road includes many houses and several junctions), they will not set up a speeding van or put a camera up because of the cost in surveying and all other manner of red tape.
If it was all about money, that'd be an easy spot for a van.What kind of "surveying and red tape" do you think is stopping them?
Graveworm said:
Yep works out at just over a million p/a per force which is orders of magnitude less than they spend on speed enforcement so it's not really a strong argument, that it's revenue collection anymore. I suspect that administration of speed awareness is slightly higher than fixed penalties as well.
But the private businesses that run them get very rich out of it, and there is certainly a lot of trousering going of by ex chief constables etc.I think you will find the 'administration' exactly matches the income.Edited by Graveworm on Monday 9th July 10:28
I don't think they are allowed to use the money generated to fund budget holes.
I believe it has to go back into road safety expenditure only so it's not that simple that its all about the money. I find safety camera vans a very blunt instrument that doesn't achieve their goal of slowing people down, which notionally why they are there.
Having said that people who drive illegally, not tax, mot insurance and vehicles seem to be getting away with it while otherwise law-abiding motorists for minor speeding offences. Now seeing a shed of a transit badly painted with england stuff on it with no mot insurance and tax daily. Chap at the local hospital the other same deal he caused a load of trouble and left in a car with no licence etc.
Seems just have an illegal car not registered to you and you can't be got by anpr parking and safety cameras as no driver to trace.
I believe it has to go back into road safety expenditure only so it's not that simple that its all about the money. I find safety camera vans a very blunt instrument that doesn't achieve their goal of slowing people down, which notionally why they are there.
Having said that people who drive illegally, not tax, mot insurance and vehicles seem to be getting away with it while otherwise law-abiding motorists for minor speeding offences. Now seeing a shed of a transit badly painted with england stuff on it with no mot insurance and tax daily. Chap at the local hospital the other same deal he caused a load of trouble and left in a car with no licence etc.
Seems just have an illegal car not registered to you and you can't be got by anpr parking and safety cameras as no driver to trace.
Trax said:
But the private businesses that run them get very rich out of it, and there is certainly a lot of trousering going of by ex chief constables etc.I think you will find the 'administration' exactly matches the income.
ISTR the trousering chief Constable (Singular) set up a not for profit on behalf of ACPO, as was, and all that gets for middling the running of the courses is £5 per student to cover costs. The companies delivering the actual training get a little less than running most courses someone might have to pay for. They in turn pay taxes on turnover, profits and salaries which is good news because it is less tax you and I need to pay. JM said:
Grindle said:
Yet they got my friend 2 weeks ago in his 1969 Fiat 500, 36 mph in a Lincolnshire 30 mph limit at a point just after suburbia has ended and it's all cows and grass and a national limit. They literally set up as it 'went national' and where most of us would have had our toe down a bit.
If he was in the 'national limit' as you claim, why did he get a ticket? Should be an easy appeal. Or day in court.
Me?? i keep to 30 going out and then hit the loud pedal as i pass the sign AND on entering a 30 ensure my speedo is showing the new limit as i pass it.
Do i p
s off the' know it alls' behind? possibly 99% of the time, but i dont give a flying fk, it is my licence not theirs i am worried aboutJM said:
Grindle said:
Yet they got my friend 2 weeks ago in his 1969 Fiat 500, 36 mph in a Lincolnshire 30 mph limit at a point just after suburbia has ended and it's all cows and grass and a national limit. They literally set up as it 'went national' and where most of us would have had our toe down a bit.
If he was in the 'national limit' as you claim, why did he get a ticket? Should be an easy appeal. Or day in court.
Grindle said:
JM said:
Grindle said:
Yet they got my friend 2 weeks ago in his 1969 Fiat 500, 36 mph in a Lincolnshire 30 mph limit at a point just after suburbia has ended and it's all cows and grass and a national limit. They literally set up as it 'went national' and where most of us would have had our toe down a bit.
If he was in the 'national limit' as you claim, why did he get a ticket? Should be an easy appeal. Or day in court.
If you don’t say what you mean, do we have to guess?
I presume not ‘literally’ before the national board, either!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff