Scamera van caught by scamera
Wednesday 7th December 2005
The biter bitThe biter bit: a mobile police station van has been caught speeding -- by a speed camera, according to the Cambridge Evening News.
Mobile copshop Gatsoed
Police driver accused of speeding
The biter bit
It was clocked as it went through roadworks on the A1 neat St Neots, and allegedly driven by Sergeant Ted Bloodworth who could suffer a fine for driving at over 50mph in a 40mph zone.
According to the story, he was not attending an emergency at the time, which would be a legitimate excuse for exceeding the limit.
The procedure is that, once the notice of intention to prosecute (NIP) is issued, the police officer has to report to his commander, who determines whether there was a legitimate reason for the offence. He can then either apply for an exemption or allow the issue of a speeding ticket to proceed -- and this is the point which Sgt Bloodworth's case has reached. A summons is to be issued which Sgt Bloodworth will have to deal with as any private individual would.
Discussion
Quite obviously this man should lose his job, no question about it.
You simply cannot have convicted speeders involved in road safety policing. After all it's people like him who are to blame for a third of all deaths on the roads.
This nutjob should think on: Does he really think it was worth that rush of excitement to drive so wrecklessly and with scant regard for his own personal safety and that of others.
SM
You simply cannot have convicted speeders involved in road safety policing. After all it's people like him who are to blame for a third of all deaths on the roads.
This nutjob should think on: Does he really think it was worth that rush of excitement to drive so wrecklessly and with scant regard for his own personal safety and that of others.
SM
Cooperman said:
It wasn't a talivan, it was a mobile police incident vehicle/mobile police station.
Just the same problem for plod though. No excuses for that type of vehicle to exceed the limit as it's not an emergency vehicle.
www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/huntingdon/2005/12/06/20f41d61-232d-44b6-a515-a3f4f3b20149.lpf
Do as I say, not as I do.
two legs good, four legs bad.......Reading the report I can hardly believe it.
So this nutjob was racing out of control through roadworks in a truck at 10mph over the safe speed of 40mph. Supposing there was a child playing in the road!? What if a stationary bus full of pensioners (some of whom might have been disabled, don't forget!) suddenly appeared in front of him!
This kind of lunacy would be bad enough if it was a general member of the public, but from a police officer...? I'm disgusted.
If course, he'll argue that given the conditions, the time of day, yada, yada, yada, it was safe.
Well what kind of message do you think you're sending out then, buddy? That it's possible to drive at 50 in a 40 safely, given favourable conditions??? Send him down.
SM
So this nutjob was racing out of control through roadworks in a truck at 10mph over the safe speed of 40mph. Supposing there was a child playing in the road!? What if a stationary bus full of pensioners (some of whom might have been disabled, don't forget!) suddenly appeared in front of him!
This kind of lunacy would be bad enough if it was a general member of the public, but from a police officer...? I'm disgusted.
If course, he'll argue that given the conditions, the time of day, yada, yada, yada, it was safe.
Well what kind of message do you think you're sending out then, buddy? That it's possible to drive at 50 in a 40 safely, given favourable conditions??? Send him down.
SM
Cooperman said:
Local news for me.
It wasn't a talivan, it was a mobile police incident vehicle/mobile police station.
Just the same problem for plod though. No excuses for that type of vehicle to exceed the limit as it's not an emergency vehicle.
With respect, it doesn't need to be an emergency vehicle, nor does it have to be driven by a police officer.
I dont concur with the sentiments expressed here that he should be fired/fined.
We all know that just cos a scamera flashes you, its not because youre driving in an unsafe manner, contrary to the name of the "safety" cameras themselves.
I can see the point that people are making, but i dont think anyone, cops included should be screwed over just cos the system stinks.
What we really need is to get a precedent set, one which cant be wriggled out of.
Id say our best chance may well be that the cops get off with it scott free, even if they wernt attending a call, cos eventually then the penny will drop and the cries of "foul" will reach a fever pitch.
Maybe then something will get done. Maybe.
We all know that just cos a scamera flashes you, its not because youre driving in an unsafe manner, contrary to the name of the "safety" cameras themselves.
I can see the point that people are making, but i dont think anyone, cops included should be screwed over just cos the system stinks.
What we really need is to get a precedent set, one which cant be wriggled out of.
Id say our best chance may well be that the cops get off with it scott free, even if they wernt attending a call, cos eventually then the penny will drop and the cries of "foul" will reach a fever pitch.
Maybe then something will get done. Maybe.
Rather than sack the cop, a better idea would be to sack a scameratum every time a ticket is issued. Obviously, if a ticket is issued then the scammers have failed in their aim to make speeding a thing of the past, and are thus not worth employing; ie they're crap at their jobs. Or, to be more word-efficient, they're crap!!!
deltafox said:
I dont concur with the sentiments expressed here that he should be fired/fined.
We all know that just cos a scamera flashes you, its not because youre driving in an unsafe manner, contrary to the name of the "safety" cameras themselves.
I can see the point that people are making, but i dont think anyone, cops included should be screwed over just cos the system stinks.
Agreed. Too much schadenfreude here. 50 in a 40-limit roadworks? So what. Most roadworks USED to be 50, until someone decided that was far too dangerous.
Let him get the NIP, let him sort it out, end of story. Neither the driver NOR the vehicle has anything to do with road safety, so we can't even call the driver a hypocrite - he probably privately sides with the majority opinion on here about speed cameras!
deltafox said:
I dont concur with the sentiments expressed here that he should be fired/fined.
havoc said:I think you should both go and look up irony and sarcasm in the dictionary.
Agreed. Too much schadenfreude here. 50 in a 40-limit roadworks? So what.
We all know that just cos a scamera flashes you, its not because youre driving in an unsafe manner, contrary to the name of the "safety" cameras themselves.
As far as I am aware, this chap is not a Class 1 Driver - he has the same (possibly less) driving experience / ability as many of us. So the hypocracy of the system is revealed no matter the outcome.
>> Edited by JonRB on Wednesday 7th December 13:36
The message it sends to me is "...of course the speed I was doing was safe, it was appropriate in the circumstances. The posted limit was too low and this is no way to comment on quality of driving.
Yet more support against the speed-obsessed from a BIB.
..."
>> Edited by james_j on Wednesday 7th December 13:39
Yet more support against the speed-obsessed from a BIB.
..." >> Edited by james_j on Wednesday 7th December 13:39
Can I just say, after reading that report...... Ahahahahahahahahaahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Bad luck Mr PC plod! Welcome to the world of the UK nanny society where it seems that you can't do anything these days for fear of being 'poltically incorrect'... not even if you're a copper.
Yes I aggree that speed these days in unacceptable in most situations, however I don't agree with the so called statistics (www.pistonheads.com/speed/default.asp?storyId=12532), and am a believer that many camera's are either poorly placed causing panic breaking etc., or are simply located in a spot where its a guaranteed money spinner (I can't think of one single camera in my local area that's remotely near a school, for example)
I'm also a believer that the driving test doesn't do enough to educate people about the physics of driving, and concentrates mostly on the highway code - for example the classic one is what to do if you get into a skid; sure you turn into it, but many people don't know what that actually involves?! There seems to be a lot of incompitentcy on the road which is equally dangerous, or causes frustration which has a knock on effect: for example poor lane discipline on motorways and dual-carriageways can lead to someone undertaking in frustration!
The test should also have a clause that if you wish to drive a big 4x4, or a performance car then you should undergo a seperate assessment to show you are confident, compitent and educated enough to drive it.
Similar to Jamie Oliver's push to get parents/cooks educated about food in schools, the nation should be better educated about driving tecnique in my opinion.
>> Edited by dredgey on Thursday 8th December 13:07
Bad luck Mr PC plod! Welcome to the world of the UK nanny society where it seems that you can't do anything these days for fear of being 'poltically incorrect'... not even if you're a copper.
Yes I aggree that speed these days in unacceptable in most situations, however I don't agree with the so called statistics (www.pistonheads.com/speed/default.asp?storyId=12532), and am a believer that many camera's are either poorly placed causing panic breaking etc., or are simply located in a spot where its a guaranteed money spinner (I can't think of one single camera in my local area that's remotely near a school, for example)
I'm also a believer that the driving test doesn't do enough to educate people about the physics of driving, and concentrates mostly on the highway code - for example the classic one is what to do if you get into a skid; sure you turn into it, but many people don't know what that actually involves?! There seems to be a lot of incompitentcy on the road which is equally dangerous, or causes frustration which has a knock on effect: for example poor lane discipline on motorways and dual-carriageways can lead to someone undertaking in frustration!
The test should also have a clause that if you wish to drive a big 4x4, or a performance car then you should undergo a seperate assessment to show you are confident, compitent and educated enough to drive it.
Similar to Jamie Oliver's push to get parents/cooks educated about food in schools, the nation should be better educated about driving tecnique in my opinion.
>> Edited by dredgey on Thursday 8th December 13:07
dredgey said:
...and am a believer that many camera's are either poorly placed causing panic breaking etc., or are simply located in a spot where its a guaranteed money spinner (I can think of one single camera in my local area that's remotely near a school, for example).
Let's be thankful that cameras aren't located outside schools otherwise child fatalities would surely increase.
Andy
My first thought on hearing of a mobile police station was a building on wheels.... 
However, this is what they're like:
So they have seats, video and a kettle (no doughnut maker?) Must be a hard life, driving a stretch limo. Perhaps he was watching the video and not the road. Or perhaps the light ropes distracted him? I wonder if it has blue neon underneath -- after all as a police vehicle it could legitimately show blue lights!
However, this is what they're like:
newspaper article said:
....one of the Bedfordshire force's mobile police stations - a longwheel-base van converted to house a seating area, video and tea and coffeemaking facilities.
So they have seats, video and a kettle (no doughnut maker?) Must be a hard life, driving a stretch limo. Perhaps he was watching the video and not the road. Or perhaps the light ropes distracted him? I wonder if it has blue neon underneath -- after all as a police vehicle it could legitimately show blue lights!
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff