Police join the assault on speed cameras
Discussion
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1208040,00.html
Police join the assault on speed cameras
Juliette Jowit, transport editor
Sunday May 2, 2004
The Observer
Speed cameras have long been loathed by motorists, but now Britain's rank-and-file police have turned on them too.
They fear the cameras are replacing traffic officers and that the rising number of fines issued is destroying public trust in the police.
However, the Department for Transport is expected to strongly defend their use with the most comprehensive study yet of accident rates at camera sites.
The Police Federation has organised a debate to discuss members' fears at its annual conference this month. The move comes as the latest Home Office figures show that the number of speeding fines increased from 1.1 million in 2001 to 1.5m in 2002. This year motoring groups forecast the total will top 3m.
Rod Dalley, the federation's vice-chairman, said it did not oppose cameras in principle, but was increasingly worried by the way they were being used to replace officers by cash-strapped forces with many other high-profile policing targets.
Cameras cannot detect other problems such as drivers who are under age or uninsured, under the influence of drink and drugs, not wearing seatbelts, or involved in other criminal activity such as possessing drugs and firearms, said Dalley.
This problem was highlighted by last week's Home Office figures, which showed the number of drink-drive tests had fallen but the proportion of positive tests rose.
The effectiveness of traffic policing also has a significant impact on society: last year 3,400 people were killed and 36,000 seriously injured on Britain's roads, and the cost of congestion - often caused by accidents - has been estimated at more than £20bn a year.
Many of the 'best' arrests of Britain's most wanted criminals have also been by traffic cops, said Dalley. The most famous is probably the Yorkshire Ripper, Peter Sutcliffe.
'You start taking them off the roads and you start taking a core piece of policing off the streets,' he added. 'What we're saying is there should be a balance between properly trained police patrols and the use of these automatic devices.' The second big concern among the 135,000-strong federation was the growing public anger over what is seen as just a way to make money.
Last year the Treasury made £7m profit from cameras and this year the forecast is £20m. Motoring groups and chief constables have called for some offenders to pay for a speed awareness course instead of a fine. 'We can't produce evidence, but people are saying they won't help or assist the police,' said Dalley. 'Whether they carry out that threat we can't measure or quantify, but it raises serious concern.'
The federation move follows concerns raised by other groups such as the RAC Foundation and AA Motoring Trust, as well as the Conservative Party. Safety campaigners and road experts such as the Transport Research Laboratory say strict rules mean cameras can only be used at the worst accident blackspots, and studies show a 35 per cent drop in people killed and seriously injured when cameras are installed.
Last night a government official said the results of a three-year study of cameras in 24 areas were expected to support the effectiveness of cameras when published this summer. However, there are reports that transport Ministers have urged the Home Office to increase the number of traffic officers.
The Home Office said traffic police numbers were distorted because technology meant fewer were needed and many were doing other jobs as well. 'To look at it just in a numbers sense might be a bit naive,' said an official.
A previous Department for Transport review of speed cameras found virtually all were properly sited and the number is expected to rise from 5,000 today to up to 6,500 next year.
+ 
= 
Police join the assault on speed cameras
Juliette Jowit, transport editor
Sunday May 2, 2004
The Observer
Speed cameras have long been loathed by motorists, but now Britain's rank-and-file police have turned on them too.
They fear the cameras are replacing traffic officers and that the rising number of fines issued is destroying public trust in the police.
However, the Department for Transport is expected to strongly defend their use with the most comprehensive study yet of accident rates at camera sites.
The Police Federation has organised a debate to discuss members' fears at its annual conference this month. The move comes as the latest Home Office figures show that the number of speeding fines increased from 1.1 million in 2001 to 1.5m in 2002. This year motoring groups forecast the total will top 3m.
Rod Dalley, the federation's vice-chairman, said it did not oppose cameras in principle, but was increasingly worried by the way they were being used to replace officers by cash-strapped forces with many other high-profile policing targets.
Cameras cannot detect other problems such as drivers who are under age or uninsured, under the influence of drink and drugs, not wearing seatbelts, or involved in other criminal activity such as possessing drugs and firearms, said Dalley.
This problem was highlighted by last week's Home Office figures, which showed the number of drink-drive tests had fallen but the proportion of positive tests rose.
The effectiveness of traffic policing also has a significant impact on society: last year 3,400 people were killed and 36,000 seriously injured on Britain's roads, and the cost of congestion - often caused by accidents - has been estimated at more than £20bn a year.
Many of the 'best' arrests of Britain's most wanted criminals have also been by traffic cops, said Dalley. The most famous is probably the Yorkshire Ripper, Peter Sutcliffe.
'You start taking them off the roads and you start taking a core piece of policing off the streets,' he added. 'What we're saying is there should be a balance between properly trained police patrols and the use of these automatic devices.' The second big concern among the 135,000-strong federation was the growing public anger over what is seen as just a way to make money.
Last year the Treasury made £7m profit from cameras and this year the forecast is £20m. Motoring groups and chief constables have called for some offenders to pay for a speed awareness course instead of a fine. 'We can't produce evidence, but people are saying they won't help or assist the police,' said Dalley. 'Whether they carry out that threat we can't measure or quantify, but it raises serious concern.'
The federation move follows concerns raised by other groups such as the RAC Foundation and AA Motoring Trust, as well as the Conservative Party. Safety campaigners and road experts such as the Transport Research Laboratory say strict rules mean cameras can only be used at the worst accident blackspots, and studies show a 35 per cent drop in people killed and seriously injured when cameras are installed.
Last night a government official said the results of a three-year study of cameras in 24 areas were expected to support the effectiveness of cameras when published this summer. However, there are reports that transport Ministers have urged the Home Office to increase the number of traffic officers.
The Home Office said traffic police numbers were distorted because technology meant fewer were needed and many were doing other jobs as well. 'To look at it just in a numbers sense might be a bit naive,' said an official.
A previous Department for Transport review of speed cameras found virtually all were properly sited and the number is expected to rise from 5,000 today to up to 6,500 next year.
+ = Note the operative sentence in the entire article:
"Last year the Treasury made £7m profit from cameras and this year the forecast is £20m."
So it will come as no surprise that, "the Department for Transport is expected to strongly defend their use".
Of course, the remainder of that statement would more properly read, "with the most comprehensive set of spin, distortions, half-truths and lies yet of accident rates at camera sites"
Streaky
>> Edited by streaky on Sunday 2nd May 22:50
"Last year the Treasury made £7m profit from cameras and this year the forecast is £20m."
So it will come as no surprise that, "the Department for Transport is expected to strongly defend their use".
Of course, the remainder of that statement would more properly read, "with the most comprehensive set of spin, distortions, half-truths and lies yet of accident rates at camera sites"
Streaky
>> Edited by streaky on Sunday 2nd May 22:50
I don't think it takes a great deal of working out that if safety camera partnerships were looking after speed enforcement then Traffic Police could look after all other offences. The offences that are often mooted as being undetectable by the camera:
Drunk driving
drugged drivers
crap drivers
dangerous driving
unlicenced drivers
Traffic Policing sections have a great opportunity to set up operational partnerships with the camera partnerships and make their departments more efficient at getting the dross off our roads.
Joined up thinking for joined up road enforcement of all types.
Drunk driving
drugged drivers
crap drivers
dangerous driving
unlicenced drivers
Traffic Policing sections have a great opportunity to set up operational partnerships with the camera partnerships and make their departments more efficient at getting the dross off our roads.
Joined up thinking for joined up road enforcement of all types.
destroyer said:
I don't think it takes a great deal of working out that if safety camera partnerships were looking after speed enforcement then Traffic Police could look after all other offences. The offences that are often mooted as being undetectable by the camera:
Drunk driving
drugged drivers
crap drivers
dangerous driving
unlicenced drivers
Traffic Policing sections have a great opportunity to set up operational partnerships with the camera partnerships and make their departments more efficient at getting the dross off our roads.
Joined up thinking for joined up road enforcement of all types.
So? Where are the trafpols then - cos I do not see any! (Apart from a couple of weeks ago - like buses - 3 at once and they were
really cr@p and dangersous to be on the stretch as road with!) I upset the BiBs on here when I passed comment on that at the time
! 
ooops (and I bet gone will go for me again!) But where are they? Always reading in the local papers throughout the North West that the accidents (not at the fleece spots
) are still occurring and each case has involved a drunk driver, drugged driver, boy racer, stolen car, uninsured driver, dangerous driver and police drivers! So agreed "They could look after all other offences" But they don't - because they have been downsized and downtrained by
scameras which do all for road safety!destroyer said:
I don't think it takes a great deal of working out that if safety camera partnerships were looking after speed enforcement then Traffic Police could look after all other offences. The offences that are often mooted as being undetectable by the camera:
Drunk driving
drugged drivers
crap drivers
dangerous driving
unlicenced drivers
Traffic Policing sections have a great opportunity to set up operational partnerships with the camera partnerships and make their departments more efficient at getting the dross off our roads.
Joined up thinking for joined up road enforcement of all types.
You just dont get "IT" do you?
Speed cameras are USELESS.
Wanna know why?
Simple, let me explain it ...again.
Most accidents occur within the speed limits, therefore a camera WILL NOT DETECT a car that goes on to have an accident.
Question: Why have them then? Just wtf is the point?
Bear in mind the one third lie is now H-I-S-T-O-R-Y as the dft has recently announced that excess speed as a causer of crashes (includes that of cars WITHIN the limit) is 12%. 12%. Not 33%. 12%, but its most likely even lower.
So answer the question.
To catch a few motorists "breaking a law"?
To make a few million pounds out of people doing something that is acceptable to the majority?
Or to make the roads safer?
Take your pick.
Hint: Its the second option.
There, hope you finally managed to grasp this awfully difficult concept, if not, then never mind.
WildCat said:
But where are they? Always reading in the local papers throughout the North West that the accidents (not at the fleece spots
Come on Wildcat. I had you for someone who at least tried to look at the bigger picture
All those you list are sensitive and newsworthy targets for the press.
Mrs Miggins on her way to school with the kids running into 'Mr Bun the Baker' is not worthy of press attention because there are no points to be made over it. It is also an all too regular occurence
wildcat said:
So agreed "They could look after all other offences" But they don't - because they have been downsized and downtrained by
But thats just the problem wildcat. They do look after other offences but not those related to specific Roads Policing issues which are so close to your heart!
They are taken off these duties to bolster those topics that are politically hot for the moment such as the last one on street crime (robbery) and now that on house burglary! Robbery was reduced by huge a percentage when it became the P.M.s major concern. When street robbers realised they were being caught and sentenced hard for their easy targets, they switched back to breaking into houses which was not having many resources thrown at it and consequently few were being caught.
You just have to face the fact there are not enough Police of any description from 'Roads Policing' to 'Schools Officers' to deal with the demands put on them. There will never be enough until they are paid for (I am not talking about a pay rise either) and that means by you! Look at the strife the recent increase in council tax caused over the Police portion of the revenue they imposed on local tax payers.
>> Edited by gone on Monday 3rd May 11:23
gone said:
You just have to face the fact there are not enough Police of any description from 'Roads Policing' to 'Schools Officers' to deal with the demands put on them. There will never be enough until they are paid for (I am not talking about a pay rise either) and that means by you! Look at the strife the recent increase in council tax caused over the Police portion of the revenue they imposed on local tax payers.
>> Edited by gone on Monday 3rd May 11:23
I'd like to see reform of the system first before we plough more millions fo punds into the police system. We need to find proper ways of reducing paperwork and burecracy (how many forms is it that a Police Officer needs to complete for each arrest?)
This needs to go hand in hand with reform of the CPS, probation, courts, etc..
I'm more than happy to pay more tax for a system that is geared towards 'outcomes' rather than just numbers.
gone said:
But where are they? Always reading in the local papers throughout the North West that the accidents (not at the fleece spots
Come on Wildcat. I had you for someone who at least tried to look at the bigger picture
All those you list are sensitive and newsworthy targets for the press.
Mrs Miggins on her way to school with the kids running into 'Mr Bun the Baker' is not worthy of press attention because there are no points to be made over it. It is also an all too regular occurence
wildcat said:
So agreed "They could look after all other offences" But they don't - because they have been downsized and downtrained by
But thats just the problem wildcat. They do look after other offences but not those related to specific Roads Policing issues which are so close to your heart!
They are taken off these duties to bolster those topics that are politically hot for the moment such as the last one on street crime (robbery) and now that on house burglary! Robbery was reduced by huge a percentage when it became the P.M.s major concern. When street robbers realised they were being caught and sentenced hard for their easy targets, they switched back to breaking into houses which was not having many resources thrown at it and consequently few were being caught.
You just have to face the fact there are not enough Police of any description from 'Roads Policing' to 'Schools Officers' to deal with the demands put on them. There will never be enough until they are paid for (I am not talking about a pay rise either) and that means by you! Look at the strife the recent increase in council tax caused over the Police portion of the revenue they imposed on local tax payers.
>> Edited by gone on Monday 3rd May 11:23
Ach! so we are back to the gripe about the whopping amount of council tax that my hubby and I pay on Wild Moggiecat "mansion" (Actually - it is an old farmhouse and grade two listed which is a right pain - cos it stops us from tarting it up!
) Most members of this family have been burgled, one stalked, one was nearly mugged and got told off (and bound over to keep the peace when he ended up in court! for defending himself - ex Swiss Army conscript - scrote got a couple of bruises and would have spoken in high pitched voice for a while! ) another fell victim in Manchester's carjackers' alley (A57 Regent Road (between Mancunian Way and M602) and A6 Chapel Street - are apparently the places where you should be extra vigilant!) Police were very slow to respond on each occasion. Possibly - due to short staff, absenteeism due to pressures of work - whatever. But - bottom line - we all shell out sizeable chunk of hard-earned income, and expect you lot to respond when we send out the SOS! (And it is our work that makes the world economy work - and if you keep on persecuting us - we will not be able to get there - so we will not be earning to pay you your whopping salary - let alone recruit more of you!) Press will always give you a bashing. And they are in business of selling hard copy - so - of course - they will go for jugulars and attention-grabbers. Trouble is - there are so many to choose from these days. And given the political hot potato of the speed camera - small wonder that the press will focus on the dangerous scrotes you fail to nab - because your bosses are good at maximising revenue by roadside cash machines and employing you for nice bit of overtime looking at photos, but pretty naff at deploying you in the way their employers (me and the rest of the grafting gripers on here) actually want!
My firm (and ultimately myself) get bad press if drug we manufacture fails to bring about instant cure!
Teachers get media-bashing - if the kids pass the exams - the exams are too easy-peasy. (perhaps
) But if the kids fail - teachers are accused of not doing their job properly - when they probably are. Medicos - same thing. Hubby is blood and virus man. Currently - his mob is getting a right media bashing over MRSA, CJD, HIV etc., etc.
Nub of the problem - you are all public servants and we already pay a fortune for you. We expect to see something in return for our cash - and all we seem to see (police-wise) are ... um ... more speed traps
The government promises to increase numbers - yet we see little evidence nor accountability for vast truckloads of dosh paid across - and this is reflected in all public sectors not just the police. But - unfortunately - in your case - we see crimes increasing and very little apperaing to be done about it! WildCat said:
Ach! so we are back to the gripe about the whopping amount of council tax that my hubby and I pay on Wild Moggiecat "mansion" (Actually - it is an old farmhouse and grade two listed which is a right pain - cos it stops us from tarting it up!
You are fortunate indeed. The Gone 'drum' is much less splendid than yours.
wildcat said:
Most members of this family have been burgled, one stalked, one was nearly mugged and got told off (and bound over to keep the peace when he ended up in court!
You do seem to have had many more unfortunate criminal experiences than the majority of people I know. Maybe you and your family need to have a re-think about how you present yourselves in public to make this less likely.
Oh and by the way, Police Officers and their fanilies have been victims a few times too so I know where you are coming from
wildcat said:
(A57 Regent Road (between Mancunian Way and M602) and A6 Chapel Street - are apparently the places where you should be extra vigilant!)
I will inform my LIO (local intelligence officer) when I get back to work tomorrow
Although its a bit off our patch 
wildcat said:
Police were very slow to respond on each occasion.
You forgot lack of vehicles because they are all smashed up due to poor driving standards.
Funny you should pick on absenteeism too. You obviously are aware of the policy involved in having a sicky these days. It really does not pay to do so
But of course. This is a priority when you personally come up against problems of this sort. Exactly the same as the 1500 to 2500 daily priorities that my force alone receives. Everyone wants attention NOW and RIGHT NOW when it is their problem. It is unfortunate that many of those that are available to help are tied up in procedure and paperwork issues and wiping the backsides of people who cannot form any sort of reasonable life or life choices.
wildcat said:
But - bottom line - we all shell out sizeable chunk of hard-earned income, and expect you lot to respond when we send out the SOS! (And it is our work that makes the world economy work - and if you keep on persecuting us - we will not be able to get there - so we will not be earning to pay you your whopping salary - let alone recruit more of you!)
My salary is only whopping because I get off my backside and have other business interests. So you have assumed again wildcat
. I too pay large amounts of tax to Gordon Brown. Many other Police officers do too especially in the South East where it is particularly expensive to live and 2nd jobs are a must to survive 
wildcat said:
Press will always give you a bashing. And they are in business of selling hard copy - so - of course - they will go for jugulars and attention-grabbers. Trouble is - there are so many to choose from these days. And given the political hot potato of the speed camera - small wonder that the press will focus on the dangerous scrotes you fail to nab - because your bosses are good at maximising revenue by roadside cash machines and employing you for nice bit of overtime looking at photos,
But you appear to believe every word they print without a thought for 'the bigger picture'. I had you for more of a pragmatist than you appear to be
wildcat said:
but pretty naff at deploying you in the way their employers (me and the rest of the grafting gripers on here) actually want!
wildcat said:
My firm (and ultimately myself) get bad press if drug we manufacture fails to bring about instant cure!
You have an advertising problem then. Maybe you should be less forthcoming with the effects these pills may have and then no-one will expect to receive miracles from them
(can you send me some gratis so I can make up my own mind? ) wildcat said:
Teachers get media-bashing - if the kids pass the exams - the exams are too easy-peasy. (perhaps
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Where have I heard that before
wildcat said:
Medicos - same thing. Hubby is blood and virus man. Currently - his mob is getting a right media bashing over MRSA, CJD, HIV etc., etc.
Are we all not blood and virus men (of some decription or other)?
wildcat said:
Nub of the problem - you are all public servants and we already pay a fortune for you. We expect to see something in return for our cash - and all we seem to see (police-wise) are ... um ... more speed traps
You get what you pay for!
A bit like the quality of Pills (you should know that
) wildcat said:
The government promises to increase numbers - yet we see little evidence nor accountability for vast truckloads of dosh paid across - and this is reflected in all public sectors not just the police.
You believe them then?
wildcat said:
But - unfortunately - in your case - we see crimes increasing and very little apperaing to be done about it!
Because obviously, the public have no responsibility to protect themselves or their property from theft and other such offences. How many laptop/handbag/golf club wallet/phone thefts have I been called to investigate from flashy cars in pub car parks?
These are 'allegedly' intelligent people, that is why they have laptops/handbags/golf clubs/phones and flashy cars
Sadly as I and other Police Officers have stated on this forum, the public get the Policing they deserve
Sorry we take so long but we are having to drive slower to avoid press attention when we collide with someone else
(and you think I am joking!!!!!) >> Edited by gone on Tuesday 4th May 11:58
The use of speed cameras is loaded to exploit those that make some effort to comply with the law and have their vehicles registered and consequently insured, taxed and MOTed. It is quite simply like taking candy from babies and provides an easy source of very significant revenues.
Properly registered motorists are an easy target in the same way as the government are now nailing us with fines for failing to renew our road tax before expiry of the previous one - miss by a couple of days and the fines on its way. Is it no surprise that there are now 1 in 10 motorists on the roads of this country without insurance and, since the DVLA can link registered vehicles to valid insurance policies, not registered either I suspect. If your vehicle isn't registered, insured, MOTed, etc. you don't get speeding fines either....the automation of these activities is driving this sort of atitude and behaviour. Who ultimately pays for this behaviour....we do...with increased insurance premiums and other increasing charges. Starts to make you wonder who the idiots are doesn't it?
Whilst I have to accept that speeding IS breaking the law, cameras do not allow for any degree of discretion. For example the concealing of speed cameras on open straight sections of motorway and prosecuting drivers for exceeding the speed limit in the middle of the night with nothing else on the road - how is this safety enforcement.
There are that many speed cameras on the roads toady that motorists are spending more time watching the speedometer than watching the road. This is worsening with the increase in the number of forward facing cameras.
Finally, talking to numerous other motorists there is a growing animosity between motorists and the police in general which is counterproductive and will ultimately result in a requirement to increase police numbers and therefore costs as the motoring public distances itself further from assisting the police. I think the police forces of this country and the government need to think long and hard about the impact cameras and other automated fines are having when looking at the bigger picture.
Properly registered motorists are an easy target in the same way as the government are now nailing us with fines for failing to renew our road tax before expiry of the previous one - miss by a couple of days and the fines on its way. Is it no surprise that there are now 1 in 10 motorists on the roads of this country without insurance and, since the DVLA can link registered vehicles to valid insurance policies, not registered either I suspect. If your vehicle isn't registered, insured, MOTed, etc. you don't get speeding fines either....the automation of these activities is driving this sort of atitude and behaviour. Who ultimately pays for this behaviour....we do...with increased insurance premiums and other increasing charges. Starts to make you wonder who the idiots are doesn't it?
Whilst I have to accept that speeding IS breaking the law, cameras do not allow for any degree of discretion. For example the concealing of speed cameras on open straight sections of motorway and prosecuting drivers for exceeding the speed limit in the middle of the night with nothing else on the road - how is this safety enforcement.
There are that many speed cameras on the roads toady that motorists are spending more time watching the speedometer than watching the road. This is worsening with the increase in the number of forward facing cameras.
Finally, talking to numerous other motorists there is a growing animosity between motorists and the police in general which is counterproductive and will ultimately result in a requirement to increase police numbers and therefore costs as the motoring public distances itself further from assisting the police. I think the police forces of this country and the government need to think long and hard about the impact cameras and other automated fines are having when looking at the bigger picture.
If only! In reality speed cameras have served as the excuse to cut road patrols massively - so they are not out there on the roads to detect these offences in the first place!
It could be that in a country with finite resources, cutting police patrols might lead to imrovements in policing of non-motoring offences - all I can say is that there is precious little sign of any such improvement. All I was offered when I was burgled was "counselling".............I hit the roof.
Idris
It could be that in a country with finite resources, cutting police patrols might lead to imrovements in policing of non-motoring offences - all I can say is that there is precious little sign of any such improvement. All I was offered when I was burgled was "counselling".............I hit the roof.
Idris
destroyer said:
I don't think it takes a great deal of working out that if safety camera partnerships were looking after speed enforcement then Traffic Police could look after all other offences. The offences that are often mooted as being undetectable by the camera:
Drunk driving
drugged drivers
crap drivers
dangerous driving
unlicenced drivers
Traffic Policing sections have a great opportunity to set up operational partnerships with the camera partnerships and make their departments more efficient at getting the dross off our roads.
Joined up thinking for joined up road enforcement of all types.
Its much worse than that
12% due to innapropriate speed(at least in part)
but only 1/3 of that exceeds speed limit so 4%
But speed cameras do not reduce speeds beyond their 200 yard zones of influence - totalling at most 3% of our road networks so its 3% of 4% = 0.0012% or single figures nationally of people killed by someone breaking the speed limit, in a speed camera area
But we have 5000 cameras, and say 5 deaths = 1 death per 1000 years per camera at £30,000 pa = £30m per death EVEN IF THEY WORKED to 100% of available efficiency!
Note average speeds across country ROSE in 2003
Idris
12% due to innapropriate speed(at least in part)
but only 1/3 of that exceeds speed limit so 4%
But speed cameras do not reduce speeds beyond their 200 yard zones of influence - totalling at most 3% of our road networks so its 3% of 4% = 0.0012% or single figures nationally of people killed by someone breaking the speed limit, in a speed camera area
But we have 5000 cameras, and say 5 deaths = 1 death per 1000 years per camera at £30,000 pa = £30m per death EVEN IF THEY WORKED to 100% of available efficiency!
Note average speeds across country ROSE in 2003
Idris
deltaf said:
I don't think it takes a great deal of working out that if safety camera partnerships were looking after speed enforcement then Traffic Police could look after all other offences. The offences that are often mooted as being undetectable by the camera:
Drunk driving
drugged drivers
crap drivers
dangerous driving
unlicenced drivers
Traffic Policing sections have a great opportunity to set up operational partnerships with the camera partnerships and make their departments more efficient at getting the dross off our roads.
Joined up thinking for joined up road enforcement of all types.
You just dont get "IT" do you?
Speed cameras are USELESS.
Wanna know why?
Simple, let me explain it ...again.
Most accidents occur within the speed limits, therefore a camera WILL NOT DETECT a car that goes on to have an accident.
Question: Why have them then? Just wtf is the point?
Bear in mind the one third lie is now H-I-S-T-O-R-Y as the dft has recently announced that excess speed as a causer of crashes (includes that of cars WITHIN the limit) is 12%. 12%. Not 33%. 12%, but its most likely even lower.
So answer the question.
To catch a few motorists "breaking a law"?
To make a few million pounds out of people doing something that is acceptable to the majority?
Or to make the roads safer?
Take your pick.
Hint: Its the second option.
There, hope you finally managed to grasp this awfully difficult concept, if not, then never mind.
Wildcat, I'd love to get to where I'm needed quicker, so perhaps the following may give you something to think about...
A few years ago, as a Panda driver, I was dispatched to a complaint of criminal damage to a flagged driveway. I arrive, and the complainant points out to me some very small spots of what look like, to my untrained eye, very much like creosote...
Complainant is whingeing, because his next door neighbour has offered to creosote complainant's side of party fence, and in doing so, has spilt the odd bit here and there on complainant's flag stones...
Instead of going and having a word, complainant thought it was entirely reasonable to ring the BiB and complain about the damage...
(Just for the record, had a word with the friendly fence painting maniac, who said "Sorry", and cleaned the drive with a drop of white spirit or similar. Onbviously, to do this was beyond the wit of our (council tax paying) complainant).
A few years ago, as a Panda driver, I was dispatched to a complaint of criminal damage to a flagged driveway. I arrive, and the complainant points out to me some very small spots of what look like, to my untrained eye, very much like creosote...
Complainant is whingeing, because his next door neighbour has offered to creosote complainant's side of party fence, and in doing so, has spilt the odd bit here and there on complainant's flag stones...
Instead of going and having a word, complainant thought it was entirely reasonable to ring the BiB and complain about the damage...
(Just for the record, had a word with the friendly fence painting maniac, who said "Sorry", and cleaned the drive with a drop of white spirit or similar. Onbviously, to do this was beyond the wit of our (council tax paying) complainant).
WMHV70 said:
Wildcat, I'd love to get to where I'm needed quicker, so perhaps the following may give you something to think about...
A few years ago, as a Panda driver, I was dispatched to a complaint of criminal damage to a flagged driveway. I arrive, and the complainant points out to me some very small spots of what look like, to my untrained eye, very much like creosote...
Complainant is whingeing, because his next door neighbour has offered to creosote complainant's side of party fence, and in doing so, has spilt the odd bit here and there on complainant's flag stones...
Instead of going and having a word, complainant thought it was entirely reasonable to ring the BiB and complain about the damage...
(Just for the record, had a word with the friendly fence painting maniac, who said "Sorry", and cleaned the drive with a drop of white spirit or similar. Onbviously, to do this was beyond the wit of our (council tax paying) complainant).
Why didn't you charge the complainant with "wasting Police time" ?
gone Liebchen!
So! You lot have time to have second job --- that is more than most get. You are very fortunate that your work pattern allows this. I work excessively long hours and so does my equally deranged hubby.
Others in essential professions as yours are not as fortunate. Nurses are too shattered to even think of supplementing their income after their work. Teachers? They have all that marking and lesson prep. They face same problems as you do in South East (and North is now catching up!).
Count my blessings that I settled in just about affordable North - Cumbria is like mini-Switzerland and I love it! May be fortunate now - but both hubby and self spent hours of hard study - on the poverty line most of the time (my parents threw a right wobbly when, in by that time almost family tradition, I blew my student allowance on a fast set of wheels (motorbike) and refused to bale me out of debt! Was worth it - their faces when they met the ... new "boyfriend!" ) His were not impressed when he bought himself a "babemobile" (Stag)on a whopping bank loan during his clinical training days! Again his parents refused to help him out during rocky periods! Our fault - of course - and we had to learn the hard lessons!
Our family have more criminal experiences than average? Above average family in number! (One of just 5 girlies in first blood relations of 28 and all petrolheads!) We cannot help looking "quality" - cos we are
Do I believe everything I read in the papers? I choose what I decide to believe Especially if it winds you and my cousin BiBs up a bit
Do I believe the government's spin? Does a Trabi outclass a Merc?
My firm and the claims we make for our products? We are getting bad press because one of the products did exactly what we claimed it would do - but lots of wimmin are getting sleepless nights and heading for divorce courts because of it! Perhaps you need some of this! May improve your take on life because you will at least be getting some!
As for my mental images when I read your posts - you would not be flattered with how I think you look!
So! You lot have time to have second job --- that is more than most get. You are very fortunate that your work pattern allows this. I work excessively long hours and so does my equally deranged hubby.
Others in essential professions as yours are not as fortunate. Nurses are too shattered to even think of supplementing their income after their work. Teachers? They have all that marking and lesson prep. They face same problems as you do in South East (and North is now catching up!).
Count my blessings that I settled in just about affordable North - Cumbria is like mini-Switzerland and I love it! May be fortunate now - but both hubby and self spent hours of hard study - on the poverty line most of the time (my parents threw a right wobbly when, in by that time almost family tradition, I blew my student allowance on a fast set of wheels (motorbike)
and refused to bale me out of debt! Was worth it - their faces when they met the ... new "boyfriend!" ) His were not impressed when he bought himself a "babemobile" (Stag)on a whopping bank loan during his clinical training days! Again his parents refused to help him out during rocky periods! Our fault - of course - and we had to learn the hard lessons! Our family have more criminal experiences than average? Above average family in number! (One of just 5 girlies in first blood relations of 28 and all petrolheads!
) We cannot help looking "quality" - cos we are Do I believe everything I read in the papers? I choose what I decide to believe
Especially if it winds you and my cousin BiBs up a bit Do I believe the government's spin? Does a Trabi outclass a Merc?
My firm and the claims we make for our products? We are getting bad press because one of the products did exactly what we claimed it would do - but lots of wimmin are getting sleepless nights and heading for divorce courts because of it!
Perhaps you need some of this! May improve your take on life because you will at least be getting some! As for my mental images when I read your posts - you would not be flattered with how I think you look!
WMHV70 said:
Wildcat, I'd love to get to where I'm needed quicker, so perhaps the following may give you something to think about...
A few years ago, as a Panda driver, I was dispatched to a complaint of criminal damage to a flagged driveway. I arrive, and the complainant points out to me some very small spots of what look like, to my untrained eye, very much like creosote...
Complainant is whingeing, because his next door neighbour has offered to creosote complainant's side of party fence, and in doing so, has spilt the odd bit here and there on complainant's flag stones...
Instead of going and having a word, complainant thought it was entirely reasonable to ring the BiB and complain about the damage...
(Just for the record, had a word with the friendly fence painting maniac, who said "Sorry", and cleaned the drive with a drop of white spirit or similar. Onbviously, to do this was beyond the wit of our (council tax paying) complainant).
Hmm! And young lady who works in Manchester tells me she was rear ended by some numpty. She had stopped at the traffic lights. Numpty failed to stop and hit her, writing off her car (Apparently not viable to repair as 6 year old motor
) It was lunchtime; she thought he may have been drinking and she called the police who asked her if anyone was injured. She said she had slight whiplash and was more than a little shocked. They said they could not attend unless someone was seriously injured. You could have got some dangerous "child killing" (to throw your own highly emotive, but not necessarily accurate, language back at you) numpty off the road here! It was 40mph limit and the young lady in question reckons he really wellied it up that road! My cousin in North Wales was victim of burglary to her garden shed. Like myself - hard worker with large property to maintain. She has mini-tractor" to mow her lawns (about 1.5 acres) and it was stolen last fall. She saw the scrotes break into her property and steal the tractor. She called the cops who had good chance of collaring him in possession of her mini-tractor. After a three day wait - they turned up. It has cost her £1000 to replace her equipment. They still have not recovered her property, nor have they managed to find her neighbour's car - even though they know it has been copped more than once by Arrive Deprived
So much for "camera helps track down criminals!" And you wonder why I and the others on here have a pop at you all! We know you have a hard job, and we know you have hard choices and decisions - because we face same in our own professions! None of us are that daft! But we have to resolve problems in private industry, are held to account and we see no reasson why public services should be exempt from this!
Now you tell me that you go to see some whinging nutter over some irrelevant issue which bit of common sense over a cuppa could have resolved? You are kidding! (Are you in
Lancs? - just wondering from another post of yours!) If so - you should really get your act together!WildCat said:
gone Liebchen!
So! You lot have time to have second job --- that is more than most get. You are very fortunate that your work pattern allows this. I work excessively long hours and so does my equally deranged hubby.
It may have slipped your notice but there are only 24 hours per day in which us Police officers and other public servants have to make available for extra work and business interests.
wildcat said:
Others in essential professions as yours are not as fortunate. Nurses are too shattered to even think of supplementing their income after their work.
You know how many hours we work per week then?
You assume too much wildcat
We have to make time to do these extras at the expense of sleep and sometimes family
I know quite a few nurses that have 2nd jobs too
And ambulance drivers
And of course our beloved fire fighters.
wildcat said:
Teachers? They have all that marking and lesson prep. They face same problems as you do in South East (and North is now catching up!).
I know, I know. All that pawing over text books/work books and essays, also having to prepare for the next lessons the day after!
The stress of a 6 week holiday once a year followed by 3 weeks at Easter and 3 weeks at Christmas is dreadful!
(By the way my mother was a teacher in a Girls Comprehensive for most of her career and my father a University lecturer so I don't need any reference to the evils of the eductaion system to illustrate your point
) wildcat said:
Count my blessings that I settled in just about affordable North - Cumbria is like mini-Switzerland and I love it!
I count my blessings you settled there as it is a long way from me
. Looks like you are destined to stay there which is even better news wildcat said:
May be fortunate now - but both hubby and self spent hours of hard study - on the poverty line most of the time (my parents threw a right wobbly when, in by that time almost family tradition, I blew my student allowance on a fast set of wheels (motorbike)
Ahhh the rashness of youth, I remember it well all those many many years ago. That was sensible though don't you think? blowing your allowance on such extravagance
wildcat said:
and refused to bale me out of debt! Was worth it - their faces when they met the ... new "boyfriend!"
Seems like a marriage made in heaven
wildcat said:
Our family have more criminal experiences than average? Above average family in number! (One of just 5 girlies in first blood relations of 28 and all petrolheads!
Your family obviously take your 'quality
' to the wrong places where it is envied and noticed. You really must dress down for those occasions you decide to experience the seedier side of life! wildcat said:
Do I believe everything I read in the papers? I choose what I decide to believe
Thats blatently obviious from your posts. Oh, and you are mistaken if you think I am being wound up by your posts, they are highly amusing though and give me great pleasure in reading. I chuckle away to myself as I try to understand your psyche
wildcat said:
Do I believe the government's spin? Does a Trabi outclass a Merc?
Depends who sells it to you and its condition. I've seen some pretty ropy mercs around in my time
wildact said:
My firm and the claims we make for our products? We are getting bad press because one of the products did exactly what we claimed it would do - but lots of wimmin are getting sleepless nights and heading for divorce courts because of it!
Getting some tablets??? So you are going to send me some then, oh goody, when can I expect them? I rather suspect you are suggesting that I do not get any sex! At my age, I would rather have a good days pigeon shooting. Much more relaxing, solitude and time to think without the mess and effort involved with procreation. I also get to
lots of birds too. Best day last year was 274 collected wildact said:
As for my mental images when I read your posts - you would not be flattered with how I think you look!
Beauty, I am told, is in the eye of the beholder! Therefore I will not disillusion your fantasy
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff