Are speed cameras being used appropriately, is 75 too slow?
Discussion
The Former Police Chief, Peter Joslin, who was responsible for introducing them, interestingly now suggests 75mph maybe too slow!See article below:-
Former police chief who brought speed cameras to Britain, Peter Joslin, said "Having been responsible for persuading government that we should have speed cameras, I now feel it has gone too far." In an interview with the Mail on Sunday he said "If the public are so upset - and there is no doubt they are - perhaps it is time to take a fresh look. Policing is about balancing priorities and keeping the public on your side... I have no doubt about speed cameras in principle but we have to be convinced there are in locations where speed is a danger." Mr Joslin feels that too much reliance has been placed on cameras. "Traffic officers are the force's eyes and ears - the people in the front line. They are the ones who catch joyriders, drug dealers and robbers. If you have more traffic police on the streets there is a good chance of hardened criminals being arrested." On the issue of speed limits, Mr Joslin called for a fresh look at variable limits as there was no sense in enforcing 20mph zones outside schools at weekends or during holidays. On motorways even 75mph could be too low in good conditions.
Former police chief who brought speed cameras to Britain, Peter Joslin, said "Having been responsible for persuading government that we should have speed cameras, I now feel it has gone too far." In an interview with the Mail on Sunday he said "If the public are so upset - and there is no doubt they are - perhaps it is time to take a fresh look. Policing is about balancing priorities and keeping the public on your side... I have no doubt about speed cameras in principle but we have to be convinced there are in locations where speed is a danger." Mr Joslin feels that too much reliance has been placed on cameras. "Traffic officers are the force's eyes and ears - the people in the front line. They are the ones who catch joyriders, drug dealers and robbers. If you have more traffic police on the streets there is a good chance of hardened criminals being arrested." On the issue of speed limits, Mr Joslin called for a fresh look at variable limits as there was no sense in enforcing 20mph zones outside schools at weekends or during holidays. On motorways even 75mph could be too low in good conditions.
I think this Chief officer is also in favour of increased speed limits too!
www.radar-detectors.co.uk/news_police_chief_behind_britains_speed_camera_revolution_is_caught_twice.asp
>> Edited by gilberninvader on Saturday 13th May 16:14
www.radar-detectors.co.uk/news_police_chief_behind_britains_speed_camera_revolution_is_caught_twice.asp
>> Edited by gilberninvader on Saturday 13th May 16:14
Cheers,isn't it the case we are still being told to 'do as we say, not do as we do.'
One rule for them and another for the rest of us.(mostly)
There have been a few cases where the Bib , politicians etc have been fined as normal Mop, but how many get off as a matter of course. The old adage, Its not what you know its who you know is still true!
My card has already been well and truely marked- me thinks!
One rule for them and another for the rest of us.(mostly)
There have been a few cases where the Bib , politicians etc have been fined as normal Mop, but how many get off as a matter of course. The old adage, Its not what you know its who you know is still true!
My card has already been well and truely marked- me thinks!
gilberninvader said:
Hello Greenv8s, From your reply i cant make out if your a BiB or a Mop?
We all want to be treated equally don't we whatever our background!
However some will still get preferential treatment!
It is a case of them & us.
Police, Fire, Ambulance & SOCA have an exemption where it is necessary for their purposes. Nobody else does.
Where it isn't for a lawful purpose, they can expect to be prosecuted like anyone else (as you displayed on another thread referring to the Head of GMP road Policing who was prosecuted & convicted.)
D_Mike said:
unless of course they don't have a valid purpose and are just "testing" their cars.
The issue there was "training" not testing.
The Police purpose exemption also includes "training".
The officer claimed he was "training".
The officer in question's colleagues, supervisors & the CPS didn't consider what he was doing was "training".
The court disagreed.
The CPS appealed.
Appeal awaits.
>> Edited by vonhosen on Saturday 13th May 22:59
In the case you mention The Chief of GMP, in his statement said he was with 14 other police at the time driving at the same speed,(approx. 100mph) if the law is as you say impartial, then surely these other 14 should have also been convicted.
If the chief were driving in an official capacity on an emergency etc. then he would have had an exemption. As he was fined then one can assume he wasn't exempted, likewise the other 14 in the 'convoy'would also not have been on an emergency call too and also not exempted!
Can you explain why they weren't fined aswell? Perhaps it wouldn't have been in the 'best public interest' to have had such a large group fined altogether, it may have been even more embarrassing!
Perhaps the chief can remember who the other drivers are and is able to give evidence to the courts to put the record straight.
If the chief were driving in an official capacity on an emergency etc. then he would have had an exemption. As he was fined then one can assume he wasn't exempted, likewise the other 14 in the 'convoy'would also not have been on an emergency call too and also not exempted!
Can you explain why they weren't fined aswell? Perhaps it wouldn't have been in the 'best public interest' to have had such a large group fined altogether, it may have been even more embarrassing!
Perhaps the chief can remember who the other drivers are and is able to give evidence to the courts to put the record straight.
gilberninvader said:
In the case you mention The Chief of GMP, in his statement said he was with 14 other police at the time driving at the same speed,(approx. 100mph) if the law is as you say impartial, then surely these other 14 should have also been convicted.
If the chief were driving in an official capacity on an emergency etc. then he would have had an exemption. As he was fined then one can assume he wasn't exempted, likewise the other 14 in the 'convoy'would also not have been on an emergency call too and also not exempted!
Can you explain why they weren't fined aswell? Perhaps it wouldn't have been in the 'best public interest' to have had such a large group fined altogether, it may have been even more embarrassing!
Perhaps the chief can remember who the other drivers are and is able to give evidence to the courts to put the record straight.
I haven't seen any evidence that 14 others were with him (have you a reliable link) & I have no idea if they were, what they were doing. So I can't answer your question, because like you I would just be speculating. The *fact* (not speculation) is that he was convicted.
Please see the link from BBC attached it holds the quote from the Assitant Chief Constable, Steve Thomas. Is this evidence enough for you or you could get a written copy of the statement, i'm sure?
Let me know what you think should happen to the other 14 drivers?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/ma
copied below too:-
Traffic police chief did 104mph
Thomas is responsible for roads policing in Greater Manchester
The police chief in charge of traffic in Greater Manchester has been caught speeding along a motorway at 104mph.
Assistant Chief Constable Steve Thomas was fined £450 and given six penalty points by North Staffordshire magistrates on Thursday.
He said he sincerely regretted his "error of judgement", but had thought he was driving safely at the time.
Thomas said he remained committed to reducing the number of traffic accidents caused by speeding.
I considered that my manner of driving was safe
Assistant Chief Constable Steve Thomas
Magistrates heard Thomas had been clocked doing 104mph on the M6 Toll road near Birmingham.
After appearing in court, he defended his actions on the day.
In a statement he said: "On the day in question, the driving and road conditions were good, and I was part of a group of around 15 cars all doing around the same speed.
"I considered that my manner of driving was safe. However, exceeding the speed limit by this amount is unacceptable and I sincerely regret my error of judgement.
"Excessive speed is a contributory factor in many road traffic incidents and it's everyone's duty to drive safely and at a reasonable speed at all times."
He added: "I remain committed to reducing the number of serious road traffic accidents that occur in Greater Manchester."
Trauma and bereavement
A GMP spokesman confirmed: "Assistant Chief Constable Thomas has responsibility for traffic issues at GMP and those responsibilities will remain."
As well as being in charge of roads policing, Thomas is head of divisional policing in Greater Manchester.
A spokesman for anti-speeding campaigners, Brake, said: "Driving at excessive speeds like this greatly increases the chance of a car crash.
"Someone in Mr Thomas' position, who has seen at first hand the consequences of speeding, should know better."
Let me know what you think should happen to the other 14 drivers?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/ma
copied below too:-
Traffic police chief did 104mph
Thomas is responsible for roads policing in Greater Manchester
The police chief in charge of traffic in Greater Manchester has been caught speeding along a motorway at 104mph.
Assistant Chief Constable Steve Thomas was fined £450 and given six penalty points by North Staffordshire magistrates on Thursday.
He said he sincerely regretted his "error of judgement", but had thought he was driving safely at the time.
Thomas said he remained committed to reducing the number of traffic accidents caused by speeding.
I considered that my manner of driving was safe
Assistant Chief Constable Steve Thomas
Magistrates heard Thomas had been clocked doing 104mph on the M6 Toll road near Birmingham.
After appearing in court, he defended his actions on the day.
In a statement he said: "On the day in question, the driving and road conditions were good, and I was part of a group of around 15 cars all doing around the same speed.
"I considered that my manner of driving was safe. However, exceeding the speed limit by this amount is unacceptable and I sincerely regret my error of judgement.
"Excessive speed is a contributory factor in many road traffic incidents and it's everyone's duty to drive safely and at a reasonable speed at all times."
He added: "I remain committed to reducing the number of serious road traffic accidents that occur in Greater Manchester."
Trauma and bereavement
A GMP spokesman confirmed: "Assistant Chief Constable Thomas has responsibility for traffic issues at GMP and those responsibilities will remain."
As well as being in charge of roads policing, Thomas is head of divisional policing in Greater Manchester.
A spokesman for anti-speeding campaigners, Brake, said: "Driving at excessive speeds like this greatly increases the chance of a car crash.
"Someone in Mr Thomas' position, who has seen at first hand the consequences of speeding, should know better."
My mistake then Von, but he made the biggest mistake and should have had an automatic ban at over 100mph, why didn't he!
If one wants to continue at pace, all one needs to do then is just go with the flow of traffic, behind Bib.
This head Bib must have condoned the actions of the 'group of 15 cars'he was in, all travelling at 100 or he would have pulled one himself!!! Do you agree?
>> Edited by gilberninvader on Sunday 14th May 01:08
If one wants to continue at pace, all one needs to do then is just go with the flow of traffic, behind Bib.
This head Bib must have condoned the actions of the 'group of 15 cars'he was in, all travelling at 100 or he would have pulled one himself!!! Do you agree?
>> Edited by gilberninvader on Sunday 14th May 01:08
gilberninvader said:
My mistake then Von, but he made the biggest mistake and should have had an automatic ban at over 100mph, why didn't he!
If one wants to continue at pace, all one needs to do then is just go with the flow of traffic, behind Bib.
This head Bib must have condoned the actions of the 'group of 15 cars'he was in, all travellling at 100 or he would have pulled one himself!!! Do you agree?
Was he in a car equipped to stop vehicles (blues & twos equipped) ?
Was he in uniform in order for him to have the power to stop them ?
Many many people do not get banned for 100mph+. He was not unique on that score
gilberninvader said:
The Former Police Chief, Peter Joslin, who was responsible for introducing them, interestingly now suggests 75mph maybe too slow!See article below:-
Former police chief who brought speed cameras to Britain, Peter Joslin, said "Having been responsible for persuading government that we should have speed cameras, I now feel it has gone too far." In an interview with the Mail on Sunday he said "If the public are so upset - and there is no doubt they are - perhaps it is time to take a fresh look. Policing is about balancing priorities and keeping the public on your side... I have no doubt about speed cameras in principle but we have to be convinced there are in locations where speed is a danger." Mr Joslin feels that too much reliance has been placed on cameras. "Traffic officers are the force's eyes and ears - the people in the front line. They are the ones who catch joyriders, drug dealers and robbers. If you have more traffic police on the streets there is a good chance of hardened criminals being arrested." On the issue of speed limits, Mr Joslin called for a fresh look at variable limits as there was no sense in enforcing 20mph zones outside schools at weekends or during holidays. On motorways even 75mph could be too low in good conditions.
It should also be remembered that although the officer mentioned here was in part responsible for the idea of utilising cameras, the actual introduction of them was by way of Steven Norris, the Junior Minister of Transport for the Government of the day, a Conservative Government incidentally, and a man who now, as part of the transport industry, has nothing but endless disregard and criticism for their continued usage, or more accurately abuse.
The naivety of both these individuals is staggering in the extreme if they assumed that such a device with its massive revenue earnings potential would not be exploited to the full by future governments.
gilberninvader said:
I think this Chief officer is also in favour of increased speed limits too!
www.radar-detectors.co.uk/news_police_chief_behind_britains_speed_camera_revolution_is_caught_twice.asp
From the same article:
Brigitte Chaudry of RoadPeace said:
Some 3,500 people are killed on the roads in Britain each year and that figure is not going down.
So much for the notion that Speed Camera Partnerships are part of the solution!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff