Interesting thought on "safety camera" vans.
Discussion
Situation that happened to me back in summer which is almost garunteed to make any government-spin following policeman stop to think....!
Here goes...
When I was driving down the A30 in Cornwall (NSL Dual carrageway dead straight section nothing for miles clear dry day barely any cars in sight etc...) I drove past a woman in a newish astra that was driving at 25ish MPH. 2 other cars that I saw in the rear view almost drove into the back of her.
Here is the question, since safety camera vans are there to change our driving habits and make the road safer, will she be recieving a NIP for dangerous driving?
And
If speed kills, then does this make her the worlds safest driving for going at under half the speed limit on a fast road?
I am thinking of posting this to the Devon&Cornwall police website as its a valid point.
Here goes...
When I was driving down the A30 in Cornwall (NSL Dual carrageway dead straight section nothing for miles clear dry day barely any cars in sight etc...) I drove past a woman in a newish astra that was driving at 25ish MPH. 2 other cars that I saw in the rear view almost drove into the back of her.
Here is the question, since safety camera vans are there to change our driving habits and make the road safer, will she be recieving a NIP for dangerous driving?
And
If speed kills, then does this make her the worlds safest driving for going at under half the speed limit on a fast road?
I am thinking of posting this to the Devon&Cornwall police website as its a valid point.
Obvious police response.
It sounds like she's an excellent driver who would probably ensure all round good visibility for herself and other road users by judicious application of fog lights whenever her glasses steam up.
Bet she'd also give herself plenty of space at all times by driving in the middle lane where possible.
The box of kleenex on her parcel shelf is used to wipe up any lentil sauce she spills onto her mobile phone whilst eating and driving (it's hard for her to concentrate when she's applying her makeup).
It's all ok though. She doesn't speed.
Law states if you go into the back of someone it's your fault, therefore the drivers who nearly piled into the back of her were at fault for not slowing down.
She is the safest driver ever as there is no way she could crash on the road you describe at 25mph.
It sounds like she's an excellent driver who would probably ensure all round good visibility for herself and other road users by judicious application of fog lights whenever her glasses steam up.
Bet she'd also give herself plenty of space at all times by driving in the middle lane where possible.
The box of kleenex on her parcel shelf is used to wipe up any lentil sauce she spills onto her mobile phone whilst eating and driving (it's hard for her to concentrate when she's applying her makeup).
It's all ok though. She doesn't speed.
Such a prosecution requires a judgement call as to the standard of driving, which scameras can't do. Scameras wil however free up police to monitor such situations. Who knows, once we get a police service with the bottle to stop such drivers we might get somewhere. Probably only as far as a CPS which will only bring no-brainers to court, i.e. the camera said you were doing ... mph, so you were.
If you want the system to assess driving standard, then expect the number one phrase in courts up and down the land to change from "It wasnae me" from the accused, to "Oh, my brain hurts" from the prosecution and star witnesses.
If you want the system to assess driving standard, then expect the number one phrase in courts up and down the land to change from "It wasnae me" from the accused, to "Oh, my brain hurts" from the prosecution and star witnesses.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff