Why they love cameras.
Friday 22nd July 2005
M4 (but not the cameras)Yet more research from road safety group, the Association of British Drivers (ABD), today damned the M4 speed cameras as "a massive mistake". The Association was also charged £111 for access to vital information about the causes of crashes which, it believes, should have been made public.
New research undermines M4 cameras
Not heard enough about the cameras yet?
M4 (but not the cameras)
In data provided by Wiltshire Constabulary, driver inattention topped the list of accident causes, followed by poor lane changing and careless/reckless behaviour. In fact, not one single accident had excess speed as the sole cause.
But included in the crashes that allowed the Partnership to use speed cameras were:
- an accident where a pedestrian fell from a bridge
- an accident where a gust of wind pushed one lorry into another
- several tyre blowout accidents
- a crash where a car drove the wrong way up the motorway
"Excess speed" came fifth on a list of accident causes along with driver fatigue. "Excess speed includes accidents where vehicles were travelling within the speed limit but too fast for the conditions -- such as fog -- where cameras could have no effect.
ABD road safety spokesman Mark McArthur-Christie said: "These statistics show clearly that speed is far from the most significant factor in crashes - but no matter what the causes, the Partnership still thinks cameras are the solution. These figures show that cameras on the M4 will do absolutely nothing for road safety. They should be withdrawn immediately."
In investigating the causes of M4 crashes, the ABD found that hard data was next to impossible to acquire. The camera Partnership even initially denied that they held data on the causes of crashes. After requesting information from a range of departments and organisations, a request under the Freedom of Information Act was also turned down. The ABD was finally forced to pay £111 to Wiltshire Constabulary for the data.
McArthur-Christie said: "Now we've forced it into the public domain, this data raises very serious questions about the use of speed cameras on the M4. It also raises questions about why the data has not been made public before."
ABD chairman Brian Gregory said: "This work shows clearly that we need to get away from the whole "The answer's a speed camera, now what's the question?" approach to road safety. We also want to see them forced to publish the causes of crashes they use to justify cameras."
Discussion
Plod loves cameras for two reasons. The first reason is that every jobsworth involved in law enforcement had, before cameras, witnessed everyone around them breaking speed limits most of the time. It frustrated them that they could not stop it. It didn't really matter to them if it was dangerous or not. To them 'the law is the law' and that's it. It isn't important to them that road safety has declined, because they are too busy nicking loads more people than they used to. Which leads to the second reason and that is that they are an income source. The way the fines are channelled and ring fenced perpetuates an empire building culture amongst the scamera partnerships. That and the fact that they are constantly under attack means that they are only ever going to defend their position and try to add more cameras to their empires.
nisman said:
"But included in the crashes that allowed the Partnership to use speed cameras was an accident where a pedestrian fell from a bridge"
Did they get a photo of that
Seriously though, it's unbelievable
Just think if its being done here with road safety then where else are their games being applied
Mark MacArthur-Christie said "These figures show that cameras on the M4 will do absolutely nothing for road safety". They also show that the authorities are prepared to massage statistics. What they will certainly do is swell the coffers of the Safety Camera Partnership and that of the chancellor too.
Just read a review of the new AA atlas that shows the speed camera locations which reckons that 3,000,000 motorists are ticketed each year. So at £60 a pop that's £180,000,000 worth of fines a year. And of course when you tell your insurer that you have a conviction, your premiums rise and on top of your premium there is insurance premium tax which goes up pro rata.
Good thing it's not about the money
Good thing it's not about the money
GreenV8S said:
3,000,000 tickets means there could be something like half a million drivers being banned every year, which is probably the real reason the government is allowing the scamera partnerships to keep fleecing the public.
That's why they were recently trying to reduce the points per offence. Because if they carry on as they are they will run out of criminals/mugs/marks/customers.
Delete your least favourite expression.
Be good to see 'genuine bobbies' ON THE ROAD, booking idiots that occupy the middle and outside lanes with no thought of keeping left. Road safety has declined disastrously - I do a LOT of miles along the M4 corridor, and I see near-fatal incidents due to driver inattention/stupidity on almost EVERY JOURNEY!
It's not good enough - driving standards have declined out of all proportion and much of this is due to SCAM policy. I have 6 points...both FPs for 80 to 85mph on clear rural motorway/dual carriageways in dry, clear conditions while driving top end performance cars. There's NO F*CKING WAY that I was driving dangerously - I was WAY within the cars' and my abilities. These days people are constantly watching for SCAM vans on M'way bridges...safe??? Hardly! And don't say stick to the 70mph limit - MUCH more dangerous thanks to the lorries & brainless
-heads that lane-hog and change lanes without checking blind-spots/mirrors. It's no wonder public respect for traffic policing has disintegrated. Major policy change is required or all respect for the so called 'law' will disappear. My points have cost me £hundreds and I resent every last penny because I KNOW I wasn't any sort of danger.
The truth is that current driving standards are bloody appalling, the motorways are now far more dangerous than pre-SCAM days, and joe-average views the police as part of the problem, not the solution. BLIAR OUT, SCAMS OUT!
It's not good enough - driving standards have declined out of all proportion and much of this is due to SCAM policy. I have 6 points...both FPs for 80 to 85mph on clear rural motorway/dual carriageways in dry, clear conditions while driving top end performance cars. There's NO F*CKING WAY that I was driving dangerously - I was WAY within the cars' and my abilities. These days people are constantly watching for SCAM vans on M'way bridges...safe??? Hardly! And don't say stick to the 70mph limit - MUCH more dangerous thanks to the lorries & brainless
-heads that lane-hog and change lanes without checking blind-spots/mirrors. It's no wonder public respect for traffic policing has disintegrated. Major policy change is required or all respect for the so called 'law' will disappear. My points have cost me £hundreds and I resent every last penny because I KNOW I wasn't any sort of danger. The truth is that current driving standards are bloody appalling, the motorways are now far more dangerous than pre-SCAM days, and joe-average views the police as part of the problem, not the solution. BLIAR OUT, SCAMS OUT!
xxplod said:
I can state quite categorically that the majority of Police Officers hate cameras as much as everyone else. It is the genuine bobby who bears the anger of the public due to the w@nkers in the Revenue Partnerships.
Indeed, and for the poster, Mr elmslie, for your information the majority of Police Officers, especially those on PH are not jobsworths who prior to camera's had a problem 'nicking' people. In fact 'nicking' (if you mean arresting rather than reporting for summons/speeding matters) is simple. Discretion, and dealing with matters in other ways takes a more learned approach that can only be gained by experience at the pointy end.
3 posts and calling us all jobsworths, this will be entertaining then.
silverback mike said:
I can state quite categorically that the majority of Police Officers hate cameras as much as everyone else. It is the genuine bobby who bears the anger of the public due to the w@nkers in the Revenue Partnerships.
Indeed, and for the poster, Mr elmslie, for your information the majority of Police Officers, especially those on PH are not jobsworths who prior to camera's had a problem 'nicking' people. In fact 'nicking' (if you mean arresting rather than reporting for summons/speeding matters) is simple. Discretion, and dealing with matters in other ways takes a more learned approach that can only be gained by experience at the pointy end.
3 posts and calling us all jobsworths, this will be entertaining then.
Unfortunatey SB, since SCP's FPN's come with the local police seal on it, and since the scamera keep their motives and processes hidden from the public, how is the public at large supposed to know the difference?!
If a person from my company arrives at someones doorstep and he just says he is "John from Companyname", how is the customer supoosed to know if he is a salesman or an engineer? He doesnt.
If the general police population are so disgusted with the cameras and the SCP's - do something about it!! At least make it clear to the public the distinction between the two so when the populous do finally snap, the police will bear less of a brunt than it does now.
I know the difference because I read these forums. There are a lot of people that dont...
This was also the reason that I declined to send in my app form for the police again - while driving home from work I saw a scam van on the A38 in an area that has not had any accidents for years and years, whereas 15 miles up the road there had been 3 major incidencts in 3 months!!!!!! The difference? This bridge was on a straight bit of road where he could pick them off from miles away whereas the other place was a bendy part
I cannot with good conciounce work directly for any government that allows this.
xxplod said:
I can state quite categorically that the majority of Police Officers hate cameras as much as everyone else. It is the genuine bobby who bears the anger of the public due to the w@nkers in the Revenue Partnerships.
It's a shame that all the warning signs round my area say "Police enforcement cameras", then.
nisman said:
"But included in the crashes that allowed the Partnership to use speed cameras was an accident where a pedestrian fell from a bridge"
Did they get a photo of that
Seriously though, it's unbe
I understand this ist case on A666 in Bolton from local newspaper und fact that Mad Doc used to treat the would- be suicides und their motorist victims when a junior doc based in that area.
Und they reduced speed limit to 50 mph und enforced by series of scams along this stretch. Ist being going on some time...
silverback mike said:
Indeed, and for the poster, Mr elmslie, for your information the majority of Police Officers, especially those on PH are not jobsworths who prior to camera's had a problem 'nicking' people. In fact 'nicking' (if you mean arresting rather than reporting for summons/speeding matters) is simple. Discretion, and dealing with matters in other ways takes a more learned approach that can only be gained by experience at the pointy end.
3 posts and calling us all jobsworths, this will be entertaining then.
I can second that, Mike has been extremly helpful on a couple of occasions I have needed "off the record" advice. I think I still owe him a couple of 
Cheers Alan...did the matter get sorted out?WildCat said:
....
I understand this ist case on A666 in Bolton from local newspaper und fact that Mad Doc used to treat the would- be suicides und their motorist victims when a junior doc based in that area.
Ist being going on some time...
In a way wouldn't you be at more risk of hitting a suicide jumping off a bridge due to it taking longer to pass through the 'danger zone'?
More so in the dark and/or with attention primarily focussed on keeping to the low speed limit and looking out for scams.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff