Community speedwatch...
Discussion
I've just received a letter (actually two) from the Police, claiming that my car was recently detected exceeding the 30mph speed limit in a local village on a certain date and at a certain time.
On that journey I recall seeing three old chaps in hi-vis jackets standing at the roadside on the way out of the village (actually after any houses or other 'safety' concern), non of whom were visibly brandishing any kind of speed measuring equipment and I know that I was not exceeding the limit as I make a point of not doing so through villages - and this one is particularly slow as there are always lots of parked cars and other hazards.
I received two identical letters, both for the same date but one nine minutes later than the first and although I can't actually prove it; I know that I wasn't speeding and that neither time was the actual time I was in said location (I had an appointment to which I arrived on time and know when I left home, meaning I would have passed through there around 10 minutes earlier than even the earliest stated time) plus, even if I had been speeding at that time, I certainly didn't turn around, go back and do it again 9 minutes later.
I assume it's a case of their word against mine as to the speed and time? and as such the Police wouldn't even be interested in hearing my story but it seems to me that the speedwatch crew just make it up as they go along and with full Police support.
Now I'm not worried as the letter is purely advisory and even states that no further action will be taken but how & why is this kind of amateur hour monitoring/vigilantism allowed? especially with the consent of the Police.
Also, and I certainly wouldn't condone it but, if these schemes are widespread then I would be surprised that altercations haven't or won't ensue when said vigilantes target the 'wrong' person...
On that journey I recall seeing three old chaps in hi-vis jackets standing at the roadside on the way out of the village (actually after any houses or other 'safety' concern), non of whom were visibly brandishing any kind of speed measuring equipment and I know that I was not exceeding the limit as I make a point of not doing so through villages - and this one is particularly slow as there are always lots of parked cars and other hazards.
I received two identical letters, both for the same date but one nine minutes later than the first and although I can't actually prove it; I know that I wasn't speeding and that neither time was the actual time I was in said location (I had an appointment to which I arrived on time and know when I left home, meaning I would have passed through there around 10 minutes earlier than even the earliest stated time) plus, even if I had been speeding at that time, I certainly didn't turn around, go back and do it again 9 minutes later.
I assume it's a case of their word against mine as to the speed and time? and as such the Police wouldn't even be interested in hearing my story but it seems to me that the speedwatch crew just make it up as they go along and with full Police support.
Now I'm not worried as the letter is purely advisory and even states that no further action will be taken but how & why is this kind of amateur hour monitoring/vigilantism allowed? especially with the consent of the Police.
Also, and I certainly wouldn't condone it but, if these schemes are widespread then I would be surprised that altercations haven't or won't ensue when said vigilantes target the 'wrong' person...
HantsRat said:
Chill out and don't worry about it.
It's just a letter and no criminal conviction will come from it.
If someone decides to assault a community speed watch member then they are the d*ck and would be prosecuted.
I agree but since they are in this case at best mistaken or at worst lying, how can the Police support it or even allow it?It's just a letter and no criminal conviction will come from it.
If someone decides to assault a community speed watch member then they are the d*ck and would be prosecuted.
As for assault, yes it would be a dick move but if it hasn't already happened, I could certainly envisage that it will/might at some point somewhere, especially if it gets down to a personal feud between locals/rivals? Surely another good reason that only the Police should be doing it?
Dave Hedgehog said:
FTFY
I take you are just joking? It would never be morally right to assault a speed watch member. I live in a village and cars/bikes fly through at 60/70+ through the 30. We have a park on the opposite side of the road to houses where children often cross, 2 bus stops and a school. I can see why residents get annoyed and join something like this.
Obviously I'm not a member as I can do it for 'real' and actually report and evidence speeding through official channels but if they want to try help then I'm all for it.
It does work too, drivers slow down when they see them. You get 1 or 2 t
tish drivers who feel they are holier than thou and speed up flicking the finger having a giggle about how funny they are to their passenger but overall, it does slow down traffic. CSWs usually operate in villages plagued by selfish tts who seem to think that the very simple courtesy of being careful in villages where kids could be about is beneath them. My own being case in point where on my road, there are at least three families with young kids and we are opposite the village playing fields so it stands to reason that there might be kids about on bikes, kicking balls etc. Kids may well check the road for cars crossing as they should have been taught by their parents however, they cannot judge the closing speed of a vehicle the same way you and I can.
The speed some people come past my house is ridiculous and as such, I fully support our own CSW which has been operating for a few weeks now. We have already noticed a general slowing down on our road, even when the CSW isn't about which means as a deterrant, it seems to be working.
Nothing will come of the letters sent to you but if their CSW works like ours does, a note will be made of repeat offenders reg plates and one day, a real Mr Plod will be lying in wait with his speed gun and armed with said list so you can't say you've not been warned.
Please slow down in villages. It's not vigilantism, it's a genuine concern for safety to the point the locals feel obliged to do something about it.
ts who seem to think that the very simple courtesy of being careful in villages where kids could be about is beneath them. My own being case in point where on my road, there are at least three families with young kids and we are opposite the village playing fields so it stands to reason that there might be kids about on bikes, kicking balls etc. Kids may well check the road for cars crossing as they should have been taught by their parents however, they cannot judge the closing speed of a vehicle the same way you and I can. The speed some people come past my house is ridiculous and as such, I fully support our own CSW which has been operating for a few weeks now. We have already noticed a general slowing down on our road, even when the CSW isn't about which means as a deterrant, it seems to be working.
Nothing will come of the letters sent to you but if their CSW works like ours does, a note will be made of repeat offenders reg plates and one day, a real Mr Plod will be lying in wait with his speed gun and armed with said list so you can't say you've not been warned.
Please slow down in villages. It's not vigilantism, it's a genuine concern for safety to the point the locals feel obliged to do something about it.
Edited by E36GUY on Thursday 26th October 10:57
catso said:
As for assault, yes it would be a dick move but if it hasn't already happened, I could certainly envisage that it will/might at some point somewhere, especially if it gets down to a personal feud between locals/rivals? Surely another good reason that only the Police should be doing it?
You could say that about any volunteering and other non police roles. Community first responders, council street patrols, street pastors, litter/dog poo police. The risks will always be there as there are always dickish people about but that's not a reason to ban everything just because it 'might' happen. The classic pistonheads paradox
We hate speed limits and should be free to do whatever speed we want wherever and whenever it suits us.
We despise the 40mph everywhere brigade, who don’t respect the 30 limits and sit inches off your rear bumper after they’ve held you up for ages in the earlier NSL and you only just managed to get past them.
We hate speed limits and should be free to do whatever speed we want wherever and whenever it suits us.
We despise the 40mph everywhere brigade, who don’t respect the 30 limits and sit inches off your rear bumper after they’ve held you up for ages in the earlier NSL and you only just managed to get past them.
The problem with Community Speedwatch is laid out in the opening post which, if correct, raises basic questions:
1. How are the operatives trained?
2. Who issues the letters, and are there any "common sense" checks built in to the process?
3. How often is the equipment calibrated, and by whom?
There certainly seems to be more than one procedural shortcoming in this instance, which shows up some elementary flaws in the system, which, in turn, undermines the credibility of the scheme.
Nobody, especially the residents, wants to have their lives plagued by idiots speeding past their houses, schools and playgrounds. But having what appears to be a deeply flawed, half-baked scheme won't do anything but annoy people and generate contempt. If you're going to issue letters to motorists telling them that they've broken the law, at least get the facts right.
1. How are the operatives trained?
2. Who issues the letters, and are there any "common sense" checks built in to the process?
3. How often is the equipment calibrated, and by whom?
There certainly seems to be more than one procedural shortcoming in this instance, which shows up some elementary flaws in the system, which, in turn, undermines the credibility of the scheme.
Nobody, especially the residents, wants to have their lives plagued by idiots speeding past their houses, schools and playgrounds. But having what appears to be a deeply flawed, half-baked scheme won't do anything but annoy people and generate contempt. If you're going to issue letters to motorists telling them that they've broken the law, at least get the facts right.
Dermot O'Logical said:
The problem with Community Speedwatch is laid out in the opening post which, if correct, raises basic questions:
1. How are the operatives trained?
2. Who issues the letters, and are there any "common sense" checks built in to the process?
3. How often is the equipment calibrated, and by whom?
There certainly seems to be more than one procedural shortcoming in this instance, which shows up some elementary flaws in the system, which, in turn, undermines the credibility of the scheme.
Nobody, especially the residents, wants to have their lives plagued by idiots speeding past their houses, schools and playgrounds. But having what appears to be a deeply flawed, half-baked scheme won't do anything but annoy people and generate contempt. If you're going to issue letters to motorists telling them that they've broken the law, at least get the facts right.
All 3 of your questions have been answered in previous recent threads on this subject by those (including myself) who have actually taken part in this scheme. Search is your friend as it doesn’t seem worth while answering again to be ignored by those (not yourself 1. How are the operatives trained?
2. Who issues the letters, and are there any "common sense" checks built in to the process?
3. How often is the equipment calibrated, and by whom?
There certainly seems to be more than one procedural shortcoming in this instance, which shows up some elementary flaws in the system, which, in turn, undermines the credibility of the scheme.
Nobody, especially the residents, wants to have their lives plagued by idiots speeding past their houses, schools and playgrounds. But having what appears to be a deeply flawed, half-baked scheme won't do anything but annoy people and generate contempt. If you're going to issue letters to motorists telling them that they've broken the law, at least get the facts right.
) who don’t listen.Let's be honest here, I am sure at times any one of us has done it.
I don't drive a quick car, I live in the South East and it would be pointless.
But I do use back roads and use them at kid hours. It is frustrating as being single all kids mean to me is traffic so the frustration can sometimes get the better of you to speed a bit through a quieter area.
but you can see the dangers and assess them.
What is staggering is the amount of people that don't and simply carry on regardless.
I don't drive a quick car, I live in the South East and it would be pointless.
But I do use back roads and use them at kid hours. It is frustrating as being single all kids mean to me is traffic so the frustration can sometimes get the better of you to speed a bit through a quieter area.
but you can see the dangers and assess them.
What is staggering is the amount of people that don't and simply carry on regardless.
This could be where a dashcam comes in handy, especially ones that record your speed.
If you reviewed the dashcam, and you can't see them with a radar gun but they said you were speeding, and the speed on the video is within the speed limit, couldn't you submit the video to the police and suggest the CSW were wasting Police time?
If you reviewed the dashcam, and you can't see them with a radar gun but they said you were speeding, and the speed on the video is within the speed limit, couldn't you submit the video to the police and suggest the CSW were wasting Police time?
Gavia said:
The classic pistonheads paradox
We hate speed limits and should be free to do whatever speed we want wherever and whenever it suits us.
We despise the 40mph everywhere brigade, who don’t respect the 30 limits and sit inches off your rear bumper after they’ve held you up for ages in the earlier NSL and you only just managed to get past them.
Yes to the latter, but I'm perfectly happy for appropriate 30 limits to be enforced.We hate speed limits and should be free to do whatever speed we want wherever and whenever it suits us.
We despise the 40mph everywhere brigade, who don’t respect the 30 limits and sit inches off your rear bumper after they’ve held you up for ages in the earlier NSL and you only just managed to get past them.
Though if I were in the OP's position and received a letter for something I didn't do at a time I wasn't there to do it, I'd not have a very high opinion of the practice either.
4 motorists caught speeding every minute last year
There's a postcode checker on the link above to see if your area is above average with some historical information.
Where I live, traffic volumes are up due to the development of any green space bigger than a first class stamp, which probably accounts for the increase in arsholery.
There's a postcode checker on the link above to see if your area is above average with some historical information.
Where I live, traffic volumes are up due to the development of any green space bigger than a first class stamp, which probably accounts for the increase in arsholery.
sgtBerbatov said:
This could be where a dashcam comes in handy, especially ones that record your speed.
If you reviewed the dashcam, and you can't see them with a radar gun but they said you were speeding, and the speed on the video is within the speed limit, couldn't you submit the video to the police and suggest the CSW were wasting Police time?
Why? It's just a letter, don't waste any more time on it.If you reviewed the dashcam, and you can't see them with a radar gun but they said you were speeding, and the speed on the video is within the speed limit, couldn't you submit the video to the police and suggest the CSW were wasting Police time?
Had one myself recently. Fair do's, I was closer to 40 than 30, although in my defence it was at the edge of the limit change and not a built up area. All the letter suggests is that if I'm caught again I'll get another letter which is more harshly worded. After that I might get a visit from a uniformed officer.
But I guess it worked, as I am now more careful as I pass through the village and slow down earlier.
InitialDave said:
Yes to the latter, but I'm perfectly happy for appropriate 30 limits to be enforced.
Though if I were in the OP's position and received a letter for something I didn't do at a time I wasn't there to do it, I'd not have a very high opinion of the practice either.
It’s 50/50 though isn’t it. He’ll say he wasn’t speeding, they’ll say he was. If they’ve got measuring equipment then they’re more likely to be right, albeit there’s user error and whatever. I don’t really speed excessively through 30 Limits either, but I’m often over the limit by an amount as 30 is just too painful. Though if I were in the OP's position and received a letter for something I didn't do at a time I wasn't there to do it, I'd not have a very high opinion of the practice either.
The time argument is pretty much irrelevant.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff