Speed cameras are not for road safety

[goldoni]

A retired Police Sergeant recently wrote to the Telegraph and his letter is compelling reading.

here is his letter:

"I am a retired police sergeant and have extensive road safety and traffic accident investigation experience. I have followed the debate regarding speed cameras and would like to add my opinion. Speed cameras have nothing whatever to do with road safety. They are a blunt instrument with which to criminalise drivers who stray several mph above the speed limit - something that clearly isn't dangerous per se, unless changing or prevailing conditions render it so. Cameras are not able to determine this. Traffic police officers could, but they have mostly been diverted on to other uniform duties, mainly to persecute members of the public for other trivial matters in order to fulfil their "performance indicators", which are hated universally by police officers.

This is a cynical ploy by the Government to fool the electorate that detection rates are up, but you score as many points for solving a shoplifting case as a murder. If the Government was remotely interested in road safety, it would invest more of the excruciating levels of tax it extracts from the road system. Instead, we are forced to endure increasingly dangerous road surfaces, neglected signs and ridiculous levels of congestion that have deliberately been engineered into our transport system. The clear objective is to make motoring such a miserable experience that people will be forced to take public transport.

With speed cameras, the authorities have simply created another dangerous hazard. Where people are unfamiliar with an area, they now spend far too much time with their eyes off the road looking at their speedos, and this has undoubtedly led to an increase in accidents. Fortunately for the Government there is no way of identifying from accident statistics where this has happened, as drivers, while admitting privately what really took place, will not do so officially. Straying over the limit by a few miles per hour does not make a bad driver. Poor governmental policy does.

P.F., Scots Gap"

You can find the original at: Link

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by goldoni

With speed cameras, the authorities have simply created another dangerous hazard. Where people are unfamiliar with an area, they now spend far too much time with their eyes off the road looking at their speedos=

He appears to be saying two things there:

1) The average motorist cannot estimate their speed.
2) The average motorist is more concerned with getting somewhere fast and not paying a fine than he is with his/her own and other people's safety.

If 1 is true, then something is clearly wrong with the way we learn driving (even with no speed limits, you would still need to be able to estimate your speed if only for stopping distances).

If 2 is true, then something is wrong with society. Sadly, in a lot of cases, people are more concerned with not paying a fine and getting somewhere fast rather than safety.

[goldoni]

As a policeman he would have attended many RTI as they are known today in our PC world. He would have to take statements from bystanders “What speed was he doing when he appeared in your view� “he was doing well over 80 mph� in fact he was doing 35mph people can’t estimate speed and when we are in a car with that so called safety cage all around us we all are unable to judge speed. Then we get the “I’m a safe driver I have never had an accident in my life� no but if he / she had opened their eyes they have caused many near accidents.

The point is we are lead to believe by our government the speed cameras are in place for our safety. That is the biggest lie ever. They are in place to make money and for no other reason. Policemen in cars make the roads a safer place, but sadly the Government feels they are no longer needed in high viz cars.

We all think we are safe drivers, like we all feel we are when were in our cocoon zipping down the motorway until that road traffic incident happens.

I felt I was a good driver until I went on an advanced driver’s course. I made so many mistakes I felt like a learner again.

With regards to No 2 I think we are all guilty of that one, we don’t know it but we are.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by goldoni

As a policeman he would have attended many RTI as they are known today in our PC world.

That's assuming he is a police man, as opposed to someone who merely says he is a policeman. Are we to believe that a police man thinks it's ok to 'stray several mph above the speed limit - something that clearly isn't dangerous per se, unless changing or prevailing conditions render it so'? I'm tempted to take this letter with a pinch of salt.

[Paul M]

Why is difficult to believe that a Policeman would think straying over a speed limit is not dangerous in itself ?

Doing 75 mph on a clear motorway in good conditions is not really any more dangerous than doing 70 mph. Doing 70 mph in wet/icy conditions is a different story.

Doing 55mph down the A610 near me is no more dangerous than it was 12 months ago, the only difference is that someone reduced the limit from 70mph to 50mph.

[nffc]

Originally Posted by Paul M

Why is difficult to believe that a Policeman would think straying over a speed limit is not dangerous in itself ?

Doing 75 mph on a clear motorway in good conditions is not really any more dangerous than doing 70 mph. Doing 70 mph in wet/icy conditions is a different story.

Doing 55mph down the A610 near me is no more dangerous than it was 12 months ago, the only difference is that someone reduced the limit from 70mph to 50mph.

The 40 bit is lamer. And on the bit from Nuthall island to Cinderhill island which is still NSL everyone drives at 40.

[Mick]

Hmm - it didn't need an ex-Police officer to come and 'spill the beans' so to speak and explain that our dearly loved Government (as if), tells the biggest lies. Telling lies, is the absolute prerequisite to becoming an MP surely?

[goldoni]

I am aware of at least three traffic officers and in short if a person was say doing 85 and was driving with due care and attention they personally would do nothing, if they saw a driver doing 65 and weaving in and out of traffic they would stick them on. One other fact some stretches of motorway with speed cameras are set at 90mph if they were set any lower they would not be able to deal with the amount of speeding tickets.

I would like to see more traffic cars on our roads. People slow down when they see the brightly coloured cars. I just love it when you get a long line of traffic behind those new traffic management control cars you now see on our motorways.



They only have limited powers when at an accident or a breakdown.

[Derek]

RTC's (Road Traffic Collisions seeing accident implies someone might not be at fault for most forces these days, however most cops using radios still call them RTA's)

Anyway I personally think there is a place for them on the roads the same way there is a place for red light cameras and both marked and unmarked road policing vehicles/officers. If people think they are not there for enforcing a limit complain if the speed limit was strictly enforced on all roads (via average speed cameras or satellite tracking) as Stuart C says I think a lot of people are more concerned with escaping a fine and 3 points than safety.

[trevortt]

As far as i am concerned police are all scum, last night for instance i was driving back from the petrol station on a 30mph road and a police car came flying up must have been doing atleast 60mph.

At first i thought he must have been called for an incident so then i ask the question why did it stop at the traffic light?

This proves that police are also liable to the speed cameras too but they don't get charged with speeding as they can get let off as they are 'more important'

They are all SCUM.

[Derek]

Originally Posted by trevortt

As far as i am concerned police are all scum, last night for instance i was driving back from the petrol station on a 30mph road and a police car came flying up must have been doing atleast 60mph.

Look up the thread for examples of how accurate "He must have been doing at least ..." guesstimates are.

Originally Posted by trevortt

At first i thought he must have been called for an incident so then i ask the question why did it stop at the traffic light?

Did he stop completely or edge through? If he stopped completely he might have been stood down from the call. If he edged through he did exactly what is expected. You don't just scream through junctions and hope for the best.

Originally Posted by trevortt

This proves that police are also liable to the speed cameras too but they don't get charged with speeding as they can get let off as they are 'more important'

Yes they do get charged with speeding. And if they crash (even with blue lights, sirens etc. they can get charged with careless driving. Not many jobs ask you to put your own licence on the line and tell you to break the rules of the road.

Anyway I'm sure the Police love you too. And with an attitude like that I'm sure if you ever get pulled over they'll give you a warning and let you on your way. They definately won't go through absolutely everything on your car and end up doing you for not having any water in your washers or a loose battery.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by trevortt

As far as i am concerned police are all scum, last night for instance i was driving back from the petrol station on a 30mph road and a police car came flying up must have been doing atleast 60mph.

At first i thought he must have been called for an incident so then i ask the question why did it stop at the traffic light?

This proves that police are also liable to the speed cameras too but they don't get charged with speeding as they can get let off as they are 'more important'

They are all SCUM.

So I'm assuming if you get beaten up or burgled you won't be calling the 'scum' for help then?

[Escapee]

Originally Posted by Derek S

Yes they do get charged with speeding. And if they crash (even with blue lights, sirens etc. they can get charged with careless driving. Not many jobs ask you to put your own licence on the line and tell you to break the rules of the road.

Quite a few coppers got off with speeding around here a few years ago, the local police force were boasting about how much they made in x number of weeks with the mobile camera van.

A few weeks later there was much egg on their face when news was released that x amount of police cars were speeding whilst not on an emergancy call, the biggest kick in the teeth was in the majority of instances they didn't even know who was driving because they hadn't signed the log.

I personally think the chief constable should get the fines and points in that situation.

[Sirius]

Speed cameras are there for one reason and only one reason


They bring in a lot of MONEY

A simple question. If they did not bring in Money do you think there would be as many as there are ????????????

[trevortt]

Originally Posted by Russ B

So I'm assuming if you get beaten up or burgled you won't be calling the 'scum' for help then?

Definitely not, i might as well deal with the culprits myself as when the police do arrive the villains would have fled the scene the police would not do anything anyway, apart from a caution or a asbo maybe!

---------- Post added at 18:26 ---------- Previous post was at 18:24 ----------

Originally Posted by Derek S

Did he stop completely or edge through? If he stopped completely he might have been stood down from the call. If he edged through he did exactly what is expected. You don't just scream through junctions and hope for the best.

yes he completely stopped and then raced up the road again after those lighst had turned green and did the exact same further ahead.

I was doing 30Mph so he definately was doing far more than me actually come to think of it i could actually hear his engine racing, now that to me sounds like he is throttling his vehicle.