Disgraceful placement of speed trap
Discussion
An insider tells me that North Wales police were recently operating a speed trap in the 30 limit on the road leading to the local general hospital. The hospital is on the outskirts of a village and there are few pedestrians due to it's remote location.
The road is wide and straight with pavements well set back from the road and wide grass verges to keep walkers well away from traffic.
It looks as if it should be a 40 limit by the small number of pedestrians and cyclists ( government guidelines on limit setting)
So what did they achieve? Several doctors and nurses, no doubt driving perfectly safely for the conditions, were trapped exceeding what is likely a too-low limit.
These people were on their way to do very stressful jobs with vulnerable people and no doubt would then be wondering if they were going to get points on their licenses for harming no-one.
When complaints about this trap location have been voiced in the past, police say it is due to requests from local people to stop speeding drivers.
Given the spin and mis-information often surrounding the speed trap issue, folks could be forgiven for doubting this.
I think it is despicable to trap doctors and nurses on their way to work. Who else did they think they were going to catch?
The road is wide and straight with pavements well set back from the road and wide grass verges to keep walkers well away from traffic.
It looks as if it should be a 40 limit by the small number of pedestrians and cyclists ( government guidelines on limit setting)
So what did they achieve? Several doctors and nurses, no doubt driving perfectly safely for the conditions, were trapped exceeding what is likely a too-low limit.
These people were on their way to do very stressful jobs with vulnerable people and no doubt would then be wondering if they were going to get points on their licenses for harming no-one.
When complaints about this trap location have been voiced in the past, police say it is due to requests from local people to stop speeding drivers.
Given the spin and mis-information often surrounding the speed trap issue, folks could be forgiven for doubting this.
I think it is despicable to trap doctors and nurses on their way to work. Who else did they think they were going to catch?
I wonder how many roads outside spinal units have speed bumps installed? I know of at least one hospital with a series of speed bumps the ambulances have to negotiate.Tafia said:
I think it is despicable to trap doctors and nurses on their way to work. Who else did they think they were going to catch?
The speed limit may be innappropriate, who knows. But since when did doctors and Nurses have dispensation to break the law. Do you, when going to work. No. Do your friends. No. a lot of jobs are stressful and very important. Doctors and Nurses are no different. Perhaps they have a duty to see they remain on the road with a clean licence, so why don't you condemn them for speeding.
Use a reasoned argument about limits set incorrectly, but leave out the empotional blackmail, please.
BFF
Big Fat F'er said:
Use a reasoned argument about limits set incorrectly, but leave out the empotional blackmail, please.
BFF
He did...are you blind?
Would you like to be treated by a medic who'd just discovered he'd been penalised for doing nothing wrong..?
And, before you jump on it, I said FOR DOING NOTHING WRONG.
mybrainhurts said:
Big Fat F'er said:
Use a reasoned argument about limits set incorrectly, but leave out the empotional blackmail, please.
BFF
He did...are you blind?
Would you like to be treated by a medic who'd just discovered he'd been penalised for doing nothing wrong..?
And, before you jump on it, I said FOR DOING NOTHING WRONG.
The Doctors and Nurses were driving to work, they made a conscious decision to break the law (i.e. they did something wrong, even if you tell yourself that they didn't) and they got done.
Why do you think they should be treated any differently to you.
The more you use the emotional blackmail, the weaker the message.
BFF
Of course they made a conscious decision to exceed the speed limit. But if the road is wide and safe, then this sort of speed trap is just so petty.
Whatever those caught do to earn a living has nothing to do with the pettyness in all this which is just to do with the money and control of the person, and nothing to do with safety.
Since draconian enforcement is likely to increase many-fold over the next few years, especially as soon as we get the 'black-boxes' in all our cars, maybe we had just better get used to this increasing sillyness. Let's face it, the pettyness is not going to go away, camera surveillance will continue to grow in the UK, because it can, and breaking of the speed limit anywhere and anytime will, within about 10 years, be a thing of the past. Road safety probably won't improve, but the agenda is one of 'control over the individual', not the safety or environment issues, or anything else except control by the state over each of us at all time.
We'll have 'chipped' ID cards with biometric data to identify, classify us and hold lots of personal information, vehicle black-boxes to collect and record all our journeys (automatically issuing fines for any traffic offences committed including speeding) and CCTV cameras virtually everywhere.
The trouble is that it is a creeping thing and will just happen over time. As was said before "if you don't break the law, you've nothing to worry about" - then the law changes and becomes more restrictive on us all. Just think, you're not even allowed to fit and wire a new electrical socket in your house now unless you pay to get it inspected and verified as OK.
Road-traffic law is just a relatively small part of all this, although it's quite big in revenue generation terms.
The questions is, how do we resist all of this without beeing deemed as 'terrorists' and dealt with accordingly?
Whatever those caught do to earn a living has nothing to do with the pettyness in all this which is just to do with the money and control of the person, and nothing to do with safety.
Since draconian enforcement is likely to increase many-fold over the next few years, especially as soon as we get the 'black-boxes' in all our cars, maybe we had just better get used to this increasing sillyness. Let's face it, the pettyness is not going to go away, camera surveillance will continue to grow in the UK, because it can, and breaking of the speed limit anywhere and anytime will, within about 10 years, be a thing of the past. Road safety probably won't improve, but the agenda is one of 'control over the individual', not the safety or environment issues, or anything else except control by the state over each of us at all time.
We'll have 'chipped' ID cards with biometric data to identify, classify us and hold lots of personal information, vehicle black-boxes to collect and record all our journeys (automatically issuing fines for any traffic offences committed including speeding) and CCTV cameras virtually everywhere.
The trouble is that it is a creeping thing and will just happen over time. As was said before "if you don't break the law, you've nothing to worry about" - then the law changes and becomes more restrictive on us all. Just think, you're not even allowed to fit and wire a new electrical socket in your house now unless you pay to get it inspected and verified as OK.
Road-traffic law is just a relatively small part of all this, although it's quite big in revenue generation terms.
The questions is, how do we resist all of this without beeing deemed as 'terrorists' and dealt with accordingly?
cooperman said:
The questions is, how do we resist all of this without beeing deemed as 'terrorists' and dealt with accordingly?
Normally one would consider doing it at the ballot box.
The problem is that the system of representation in Britain is so biased in favour of Labour to begin with, plus Labour have greatly increased their unfair advantage by adding massive numbers to the public employee rolls, who are expected largely to vote in their own economic interests by returning their bosses to power.
Democracy? Not.
When Margaret Thatcher took power from Callaghan in 1979 the choice was easy to see. Now it's hard to see much difference between 'YoBlair' and 'Call-me-Dave'. If the Conservatives really were organised and committed to wanting power, they could eliminate support for 'New Labour' almost overnight.
All they would have to do would be to strongly advocate the things the average Brit wants to see; like less of the 'PC' nonsense, better and stronger border controls, a shake-up of schooling, an end to the persecution of drivers, harsher sentences for 'real' criminals, removal of much burocracy in the NHS, a stronger line on Europe, less intrusion into peoples lives, a promise of no ID cards, etc, etc. But they don't do that. One might wonder if it's because they are too thick or if they don't want to be in power.
All they would have to do would be to strongly advocate the things the average Brit wants to see; like less of the 'PC' nonsense, better and stronger border controls, a shake-up of schooling, an end to the persecution of drivers, harsher sentences for 'real' criminals, removal of much burocracy in the NHS, a stronger line on Europe, less intrusion into peoples lives, a promise of no ID cards, etc, etc. But they don't do that. One might wonder if it's because they are too thick or if they don't want to be in power.
flemke said:
cooperman said:
The questions is, how do we resist all of this without beeing deemed as 'terrorists' and dealt with accordingly?
Normally one would consider doing it at the ballot box.
The problem is that the system of representation in Britain is so biased in favour of Labour to begin with, plus Labour have greatly increased their unfair advantage by adding massive numbers to the public employee rolls, who are expected largely to vote in their own economic interests by returning their bosses to power.
Democracy? Not.
Well the Tories were in not long ago and labour before that so it can and does change and by the will of the people. Proportional representation seems a little fairer though since it allows smaller groups a voice.
cooperman said:
All they would have to do would be to strongly advocate the things the average Brit wants to see; like less of the 'PC' nonsense, better and stronger border controls, a shake-up of schooling, an end to the persecution of drivers, harsher sentences for 'real' criminals, removal of much burocracy in the NHS, a stronger line on Europe, less intrusion into peoples lives, a promise of no ID cards, etc, etc. But they don't do that. One might wonder if it's because they are too thick or if they don't want to be in power.
For what it's worth that's exactly the line Michael Howard towed into the last election. He lost.
Tafia said:
I think it is despicable to trap doctors and nurses on their way to work. Who else did they think they were going to catch?
I don't defend the enforcement of the speed limit in this particular situation but I don't see why it is any more despicable to punish doctors and nurses on their way to work than it is to punish people of any other profession who have any other destination.
Edited by SamHH on Monday 29th January 16:41
10 Pence Short said:
For what it's worth that's exactly the line Michael Howard towed into the last election. He lost.
Yes, but he was also carrying an awful lot of baggage with him too. He will forever be associated with that interview with Paxman and that alone made him unelectable to a huge swathe of the voting populace.
Big Fat F'er said:
Tafia said:
I think it is despicable to trap doctors and nurses on their way to work. Who else did they think they were going to catch?
The speed limit may be innappropriate, who knows. But since when did doctors and Nurses have dispensation to break the law. Do you, when going to work. No. Do your friends. No. a lot of jobs are stressful and very important. Doctors and Nurses are no different. Perhaps they have a duty to see they remain on the road with a clean licence, so why don't you condemn them for speeding.
All speed limits are inappropriate, at least some of the time.
Why should we condemn people doing valuable work behaving safely when the problem is worthless parasites running a racket based on an unjust law?
Big Fat F'er said:
Use a reasoned argument about limits set incorrectly, but leave out the empotional blackmail, please.
Why? The scamera racketeers are not shy when it comes to emotional blackmail in an attempt to disguise their foul activities as somehow worthy.
judas said:
10 Pence Short said:
For what it's worth that's exactly the line Michael Howard towed into the last election. He lost.
Yes, but he was also carrying an awful lot of baggage with him too. He will forever be associated with that interview with Paxman and that alone made him unelectable to a huge swathe of the voting populace.
"He has 'something of the night about him' was what someone said"
Right ideas - wrong leader.
Personally I liked Haigh, whom I met and had dinner with once, but he also got nowhere in the end. Thatcher liked him, which was probably to his detriment!
Slightly rural positioning is the latest thing for media scared, local police chieftans.
Justification arising from local stories pertaining to the ex-nature of a few over exuberant Sunday merchants who have unfortunately ceased to be.
I have absolutely no issue with speed traps in properly built up areas with fish 'n' chip shops, etc.
However, some fetid turd with a 2" schlonger acting out their grotty inadequacies from behind a mulberry bush in the middle of Exmoor is really a bit much.
But as Flemke suggests, what do you expect from this rump of an executive (not to mention a meedja populated by turtle necked folk who think Lorraine Kelly is a good idea?)
Justification arising from local stories pertaining to the ex-nature of a few over exuberant Sunday merchants who have unfortunately ceased to be.
I have absolutely no issue with speed traps in properly built up areas with fish 'n' chip shops, etc.
However, some fetid turd with a 2" schlonger acting out their grotty inadequacies from behind a mulberry bush in the middle of Exmoor is really a bit much.
But as Flemke suggests, what do you expect from this rump of an executive (not to mention a meedja populated by turtle necked folk who think Lorraine Kelly is a good idea?)
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff