Tuesday 31st October 2006

MPs call for road policing change

They want more police but more cameras too

---

MPs want more

MPs are to call for a change in the way that Britain's roads are policed -- specifically, more police on the roads. But that won't mean fewer speed cameras.

A report by the Transport Select Committee points out that the numbers of police on the roads fell by 20 per cent over the five years between 1999 and 2004. One clear result of that shift towards speed cameras as the main method of policing road safety has been an increase in the number of casualties associated with drink-driving.

The report, called Roads Policing and Technology - Getting the Balance Right' reckons that instead of spending the money gained from fines on more cameras, the police should spend it on more police officers on the road.

So far so sensible.

But there's a sting in the tail: not only will the report not call for a drop in the number of cameras, it'll call for the rules over placement -- currently fairly rigid in that a location has to be a proven accident blackspot -- to be relaxed.

In other words, they want more cameras.

Reaction came from road safety campaign Safe Speed. Founder Paul Smith said: "Any effective system of roads policing must have the built-in ability to identify rogue drivers. Speed cameras cannot do this, which is one reason why they have proved to be hopelessly ineffective. But skilled police traffic officers can detect and respond appropriately to all causes of danger.

"'Speed kills' road safety policy has not made our roads safer because it's entirely the wrong solution to a complex problem in human behaviour.

"Speed cameras are supported only by grossly misrepresented and misleading statistics. It is a great tragedy that Department for Transport has not had the courage or decency to highlight the flaws and limitations."

• www.safespeed.org.uk

[sjr202]

50/50 on the flexability of cameras, if they start appearing on dual carriageways and reltively safe country lanes then again cash seems to be the motive, hopefully if relaxation takes place then it will allow some cameras to be placed where they should be out side schools, hospitals and elderly residence. At the moment i believe something has to have happened in these locations for a camera to be deployed. That seems daft for these sort of locations.

Definately not a fan of cameras, i like the idea of speaking with a PC if you get in trouble as the human ability of reason can be taken into account.

I do dispise the mobile cameras though that on your way to work were not there then on the way home i big lense is pointing straight at you!

[althecate1]

Some one must have asked this question.
Of all the motorists prosecuted by cameras for speeding, how many went on to have an accident say within 500 metres of the camera?

[7db]

So they get more trafpol who sit on a corner with a LTI20-20. Is that what you all want?

[stenniso]

sjr202 said:

...hopefully if relaxation takes place then it will allow some cameras to be placed where they should be out side schools, hospitals and elderly residence. At the moment i believe something has to have happened in these locations for a camera to be deployed. That seems daft for these sort of locations.

Studies have shown that speed camera at motorway roadworks have increased injuries/deaths, and you want to put them outside schools? Human nature makes these things a distraction, and I don't want distracted drivers driving past my daughters' schools.

I favour controls on parking outside schools, barriers to control where crossing can take place, convenient crossing locations (prefferably controlled by traffic lights or trained personnel), education for the kids, and education for drivers. I also think that automated warning signs as a back-up/enhancement to traditional warning signs are a good opportunity to remind drivers that they need to be more cautious.

There are so many ways to improve road safety, but I suppose cameras are the only self funding method. Maybe local businesses could sponsor some of my suggestions above. It just needs a bit of creative thinking, but this is sadly missing with revenue obsessed authorities.

[JenkinsComp]

I also received a copy of this report from the Government Media centre this morning.
The report goes into detail on far more subjects than the Pistonheads article mentions, although speed cameras are a main topic within the report.
One of the areas the Pistonheads summary article doesn't touch upon is that the Govt also want Intelligent Speed Adaptors on all cars as soon as possible (thats a speed limiter to you and me); they want the Police to use Automatic Number Plate Recognition information to prosecute for motoring offences as well as finding wanted criminals which is all the Police have the resources for at the moment; they want more average speed cameras; they want more 20mph zones (camera monitored) in residential areas (what is or isn't a residential area I ask myself) and they want to introduce more cameras on rural roads even where there isn't any history of accidents only an apparent speeding "problem" (in whose opinion?).

To give you a feel for the report, which only canvassed Police, road safety Fascists (Roadpeace, Brake, Slower Speeds Initiative) and technology firms with a vested interest in making big brother type devices, I quote from page 49 of the report (Section 134 - Intelligent Speed Adaption).

"There is something ridiculous about allowing excessively fast and powerful cars on the road and then trying, at great expense and with only modest success, to stop people from using that power." (quote EV116 from a "Mr Stephen Plowden" whoever he is)

The report is a mish mash of quotes like these, rather than sensible objective and balanced opinion from people with any clue about what society as a whole wants or needs. The Police generally seemed to give a reasonable and logical response, but were repeatedly criticized by the Government body that wrote the report. Nobody from any kind of driver advanced training groups were canvessed for an opionion and the Motoring Lobby were described within the reporyt as having "too much power in the media".
Obviously we are viewed as the enemy by these safety Fascist bodies, when actually I think most of us would just prefer a sensible, training led approach to safety rather than an arbitrary, in-effective, illegal big brotherish type method that simply serves to raise cash and criminalize innocent people as is being implemented now.

If anyone would like to receive a copy of the report in full please send me a PM and I'll forward it to you.

Edited by JenkinsComp on Tuesday 31st October 13:17

[911motorsport]

TAKE, TAKE, TAKE!!!!! Where will it stop? the scameras are nearly running at peak revenue collection perhaps?! so the government seeks to up the collection rate by putting more cameras in police hands.Get ready to see thousands of fixed penalties being issued (under the sickening guise of addressing the 'real driving problems'that exist (media hype to follow).WHAT is this government giving in return for the £billions it is fleecing from us? I am SICK of this Police State that used to be England.And now enviro taxes are on the agenda, being rolled out to us in the now familiar media drone.

[dula]

stenniso said:

I also think that automated warning signs as a back-up/enhancement to traditional warning signs are a good opportunity to remind drivers that they need to be more cautious.

This type of warning is far more effective in my mind than speed cameras are as they 'remind us' of the speed we are driving or the limit in force rather than instantly punishing us, with the first point of realisation being the flash going off in your rear view mirror. Most of us exceed the speed limit on occasion and the sense of guilt that these signs deliver in bright lights above your head tends to focus your attention rather than distract you further. Having been caught out by a speed camera the immediate thoughts are of ..bugger thats £60 gone and then... thats 3 points as well, and (aarrggghhhh) that means a higher insurance premium next year and...(mile and a half passes) This doesn't help your concentration especially as you pass through the remainder of the 'accident black spot' your blood boiling with the thought of your punishment due to arrive in the post in the coming weeks. Better to be thinking about your driving rather than the fine, adjusting your speed doesn't make you instantly angry speeding fines do.

[E38]

dula said:

stenniso said:

I also think that automated warning signs as a back-up/enhancement to traditional warning signs are a good opportunity to remind drivers that they need to be more cautious.

This type of warning is far more effective in my mind than speed cameras are as they 'remind us' of the speed we are driving or the limit in force rather than instantly punishing us.........

Many people don't realise it until the letter lands on the doormat.

I agree though, these signs are a much more mature way of dealing with the problem. Its shows that 'they' have the proof you have been speeding, but have the trust to let you think about your actions, and re-analyse how appropriate the speed is.

[dandarez]

Hmmmmmm, what with the fact that the government(sic) told us yesterday with their Stern(sic) report that we are heading for a Barry Macguire (eve of destruction - lol) and we will all have to get our hands in our pockets and dig a f.....g sight deeper to fill our tanks etc, pay our taxes, you name it...

and now today, after not long ago it was agreed cameras were too plentiful, it seems they (gov) want them here there and everywhere... (plus the other nanny state bits mentioned above)

methinks the Iraq/Afghanistan conflicts are proving a mite more expensive, not only in lost lives but those magical £££££s than planned, and the government can't admit that so they will get the cash by any means apart from the 'truth' (which to a politician like Blair is like garlic is to a vampire) by saying the world is about to end.

With this shower of sh, that's highly likely!

[seaodyssey]

The Best idea would be to have 1 or 2 automated warning signs before each camera, this would remind the driver he is going too fast and allow him to slow down. It would also mean that the Government would not get that many fines.
After All many cameras are in badly signed speed limit areas.

[711]

So it looks like the anti-car movement has finally gained the confidence to declare full and open war on the car enthusiast and motorist. I guess the years of abuse by Brake, camera partnerships, et al, that we’ve just bent over and taken has given them good reason to grow this confidence.

I’m as guilty as anyone; all I’ve done is write to my MP who is as anti-car as they come. I don’t think he’s too bothered about my motoring concerns. It probably gives him a good laugh reading them over his cornflakes.

Why are the sports and performance vehicle manufactures not helping us? They’re happy to take our money, why are they not using some of their profits to lobby government and help protect their own future?

So what next? How does one send a message to a government that is clearly not listening? Is it now time for taking to the streets? How do we get that started, and what form could it reasonably take? Are there any initiatives that are on the boil already? How far does it have to go before everyone who enjoys driving takes part in a serious countrywide protest? I’m serious. I’ve had enough. I can’t take anymore of the crap this government is ramming down my throat. It sounds melodramatic but it’s true.

For the first time in my life, the feeling of living in a free country has finally evaporated. Answers on a postcard gratefully received.

[countryboy]

dula said:

stenniso said:

I also think that automated warning signs as a back-up/enhancement to traditional warning signs are a good opportunity to remind drivers that they need to be more cautious.

This type of warning is far more effective in my mind than speed cameras are as they 'remind us' of the speed we are driving or the limit in force rather than instantly punishing us, with the first point of realisation being the flash going off in your rear view mirror. Most of us exceed the speed limit on occasion and the sense of guilt that these signs deliver in bright lights above your head tends to focus your attention rather than distract you further. Having been caught out by a speed camera the immediate thoughts are of ..bugger thats £60 gone and then... thats 3 points as well, and (aarrggghhhh) that means a higher insurance premium next year and...(mile and a half passes) This doesn't help your concentration especially as you pass through the remainder of the 'accident black spot' your blood boiling with the thought of your punishment due to arrive in the post in the coming weeks. Better to be thinking about your driving rather than the fine, adjusting your speed doesn't make you instantly angry speeding fines do.

Whilst I'll obviously prefer flashing signs to cameras, flashing signs still need to be sensibly placed. Around where I live, most of the flashing signs are in places where it's safe to go over 30 - and in a lot of them, where the speed limit was recently 40. Which means that they've now effectively become useless and undermine the few which are located in places where you really shouldn't do much above 30.

[johnsam]

Gwyneth Dunwoody interviewed on "Talksport" this morning claimed the the majority of people were in favour of speed cameras. She is presumably the MP for the Planet Zog and may even be closely related to Richard Brunstrom!

[james_j]

...so they want more cameras, now there's a surprise...

...even after the recent (government ) figures highlighting the fact that only about 4% of accidents are attributable to excess speed. Idiots

...so 96% of accidents are notthing to do with speed and yet they want more c£me£as £££££££ I wonder why

[Lord-Flasheart]

johnsam said:

Gwyneth Dunwoody interviewed on "Talksport" this morning claimed the the majority of people were in favour of speed cameras. She is presumably the MP for the Planet Zog and may even be closely related to Richard Brunstrom!

"majority of people were in favour of speed cameras"

Presumably she means all her friends at the green party.

[jasandjules]

No, they mean the Majority of people at the SCP they polled.

Shall we direct them to some of the on-line polls instead?

[alextgreen]

Who voted for these people?

How to annoy people:

Spy on them
Follow them
Take away trust
Take away respect
Penalise them disproportionately
Lie to them

Check, check, check, check, check and check.

If any middle eastern peace keeping forces wish to relieve us of this evil regime please come on over.

[dcb]

alextgreen said:

If any middle eastern peace keeping forces wish to relieve us of this evil regime please come on over.

Especially any that

a) chop the hands off thieves
b) castrate rapists
c) flog delinquents
d) murder murderers
e) aren't too fussy about how fast you drive

Bring it on.

[vonhosen]

dcb said:

alextgreen said:

If any middle eastern peace keeping forces wish to relieve us of this evil regime please come on over.

Especially any that

a) chop the hands off thieves
b) castrate rapists
c) flog delinquents
d) murder murderers
e) aren't too fussy about how fast you drive

Bring it on.

Is that in order of importance or not ?

[JenkinsComp]

I suggest that the best way to balance the argument to account for he views of the majority of people would be to join Brake, Roadpeace etc and to make your views known. If the majority of their members want education of drivers instead of big brother monitoring then they would have to lobby for that. Alternatively, a body that campaigns for sensible policy that doesn't automatically assume that every driver is anti-environment, anti-safety etc then I think that ultimately that point of view is shared by more people and would become more powerful than the existing blinkered seld serving fascists organisations mentioned above.

Then the government would have a body to ask for advice from that might actuallly do some good instead of creating the nightmare that we have to look forward to now.

At present they listen to several very narrow focus bodies and individuals rather than the majority of people, and erode away the "democracy" we apparently live in and fought many wars for. The trouble is that the majority of people have no body that does anything to make our collective voice known.

We have Safe Speed and the ABD, they need to be supported and to do more than they do now to get involved at the time that policies are made, instead of waiting for policy and reacting to it when it's too late.