Home Office guidelines
Discussion
Has anyone any details on the apparent Home Office guidelines concerning "safety cameras"?
On the A583 between Preston and Blackpool there are now at least 8 cameras and lots of new ones.
I can't see the justification for this amount of cameras unless someone was dying everyday on this road.
I am thinking of putting a formal complaint in to Lancashire Constabulary, anybody want to join me?
On the A583 between Preston and Blackpool there are now at least 8 cameras and lots of new ones.
I can't see the justification for this amount of cameras unless someone was dying everyday on this road.
I am thinking of putting a formal complaint in to Lancashire Constabulary, anybody want to join me?
Interesting letter about Lancs constabulary/council from a former Police driving instructor.
Apparantly he has a driver Awareness School
www.DriverAwareness.com
Sir,
I am a former Police Driving Instructor and now the head of a 'Driver
Awareness' company which specialises in driver thinking (education)
rather than physical skills. I employ other former Police driving
instructors and motorway patrol officers.
I wish to place it on record please my absolute disgust at the current
policy adopted by both the Lancashire Constabulary and Lancashire County
Council in relation to road safety matters, especially the zero
tolerance in their enforcement of speed limits.
No one is keener than me to rid our roads of reckless, careless and
dangerous drivers but the current policy is of 'spin', sound bites and
blatant hypocrisy. This causes a tremendous amount of stress and worry
to many decent people and it's time for some real thought to be directed
towards the very serious matter of road safety. Please let me inform you
of some home truths which the Police and L.C.C. don't want you to know.
1. For the past seventy years or so, the Police have taught their own
drivers to drive up to 33 m.p.h. in open, clear, 30 m.p.h. areas. This,
in a vehicle with a calibrated and accurate speedometer notwithstanding
that, in law, a speedometer is allowed to have an error margin of 10%
either way. i.e. 3 m.p.h. at 30 m.p.h. No excuses, but how, in all
honesty can the Police prosecute motorists for driving up to 36 m.p.h.
in a 30 area? Caution them yes. Educate them, yes, but prosecution is
pure hypocrisy. In fact, if a student taking a Police driving test only
drove at 29 m.p.h. in such open, clear, 30 m.p.h. areas then they were
usually marked down for lack of progress and timidity.
2. The Police and L.C.C. also keep coming up with the sound byte, 'Speed
kills' when the truth is, "Yes, but only when used in the wrong place
and/or by the wrong person." It's a driver education problem. What is
the definition of speed please? Is it not true that sometimes even 10
m.p.h. can be too fast? How fast does a vehicle have to be travelling if
a child falls off a footpath build-out under the wheels of a bus? 2
m.p.h. by a vehicle can kill the child. Let me assure the public that
despite the political spin, most accidents are caused by bad judgement,
inattention, ignorance, arrogance, criminality, driving under the
influence of drink/drugs and bad eyesight - to name but a few. And speed
cameras do not catch yobbish and reckless drivers, criminal drivers,
uninsured drivers, disqualified drivers, vehicles without test
certificates and road fund licenses, foreign drivers and drivers who are
difficult to deal with because they don't have a fixed address.
In a few months time, unless the current policy of persecuting motorists
is abandoned, the only drivers left on the road will be those mentioned
above. The honest, hard working, regular individual who happens to live
at a permanent address, will find him/herself banned!
3. I read in the Lancashire Evening Telegraph on Monday, 15.04.02, an
article about 'Speed kills' and a quote from Linda Sanderson,
Communications Manager at the Lancashire Partnership (Police and L.C.C.)
for Road Safety. In it, she says "a driver is twice as likely to kill
someone when driving at 35m.p.h. compared to 30 m.p.h." Then she says,
"Hit by a car at 30 m.p.h., about five out of ten pedestrians will be
killed." Hit by a car at 40 m.p.h., nine out of ten pedestrians will be
killed." You don't need to be an Einstein to work out that those figures
just don't add up. The Police and L.C.C. obviously don't know what they
are talking about! Once again, it's called 'political spin'.
4. The Police teach all their drivers to drive in a much road space as
possible and then allow councils to narrow the roads.
5. The Police know that a pedal cyclist needs a 'wobble distance' in
order to overtake them safely and this 'wobble distance' should be a
minimum of six feet or two metres. Why then do the Police allow the
councils to construct cycle lanes which are often incomplete and only
approximately one metre wide?
I could write a book (in fact, I have) on Police and Council
inconsistencies and their turning of a blind eye to experience, but the
sad truth is that the modern day Police service, certainly in relation
to road safety matters, have, for a large part, abandoned their
knowledge acquired during 70 years of driving experience and have become
political slaves to often bigoted and unintellectual councillors and
politicians.
The problem lies in that politicians hold all the purse strings and
therefore, if the Police need more money for their budget, they have to
do as they are told rather than making their educated views known.
There are an average of nearly ten deaths and over a hundred serious
injuries on our roads every single day and that is a dreadful statistic.
There have been thirty one tragic deaths on the railways recently so
what did the authorities do about it? They closed the railways down and
are spending £billions trying to put the matters right. That tragic
figure of thirty one, represents only three days on our roads. What are
the authorities doing about it? Practically nothing except calling
drivers idiots, erecting thousands of speed cameras and perhaps offering
'Speed Awareness Courses' to people after they have committed driving
offences instead of before.
This country is in a very sad state in relation to road safety and I
will say this time and time again: The only answer is not to test,
harass, or persecute people, but to give them knowledge so that, at
least, they know what they are doing. This policy can then be followed
by a firm law and order because drivers will be acting out of knowledge
instead of ignorance.
Beware of simplistic statements, political spin and ill-thought out road
safety measures.
A phrase worth remembering is, 'It's not what you do. It's knowing what
you do'.
Signed. Adrian Shurmer.
Apparantly he has a driver Awareness School
www.DriverAwareness.com
Sir,
I am a former Police Driving Instructor and now the head of a 'Driver
Awareness' company which specialises in driver thinking (education)
rather than physical skills. I employ other former Police driving
instructors and motorway patrol officers.
I wish to place it on record please my absolute disgust at the current
policy adopted by both the Lancashire Constabulary and Lancashire County
Council in relation to road safety matters, especially the zero
tolerance in their enforcement of speed limits.
No one is keener than me to rid our roads of reckless, careless and
dangerous drivers but the current policy is of 'spin', sound bites and
blatant hypocrisy. This causes a tremendous amount of stress and worry
to many decent people and it's time for some real thought to be directed
towards the very serious matter of road safety. Please let me inform you
of some home truths which the Police and L.C.C. don't want you to know.
1. For the past seventy years or so, the Police have taught their own
drivers to drive up to 33 m.p.h. in open, clear, 30 m.p.h. areas. This,
in a vehicle with a calibrated and accurate speedometer notwithstanding
that, in law, a speedometer is allowed to have an error margin of 10%
either way. i.e. 3 m.p.h. at 30 m.p.h. No excuses, but how, in all
honesty can the Police prosecute motorists for driving up to 36 m.p.h.
in a 30 area? Caution them yes. Educate them, yes, but prosecution is
pure hypocrisy. In fact, if a student taking a Police driving test only
drove at 29 m.p.h. in such open, clear, 30 m.p.h. areas then they were
usually marked down for lack of progress and timidity.
2. The Police and L.C.C. also keep coming up with the sound byte, 'Speed
kills' when the truth is, "Yes, but only when used in the wrong place
and/or by the wrong person." It's a driver education problem. What is
the definition of speed please? Is it not true that sometimes even 10
m.p.h. can be too fast? How fast does a vehicle have to be travelling if
a child falls off a footpath build-out under the wheels of a bus? 2
m.p.h. by a vehicle can kill the child. Let me assure the public that
despite the political spin, most accidents are caused by bad judgement,
inattention, ignorance, arrogance, criminality, driving under the
influence of drink/drugs and bad eyesight - to name but a few. And speed
cameras do not catch yobbish and reckless drivers, criminal drivers,
uninsured drivers, disqualified drivers, vehicles without test
certificates and road fund licenses, foreign drivers and drivers who are
difficult to deal with because they don't have a fixed address.
In a few months time, unless the current policy of persecuting motorists
is abandoned, the only drivers left on the road will be those mentioned
above. The honest, hard working, regular individual who happens to live
at a permanent address, will find him/herself banned!
3. I read in the Lancashire Evening Telegraph on Monday, 15.04.02, an
article about 'Speed kills' and a quote from Linda Sanderson,
Communications Manager at the Lancashire Partnership (Police and L.C.C.)
for Road Safety. In it, she says "a driver is twice as likely to kill
someone when driving at 35m.p.h. compared to 30 m.p.h." Then she says,
"Hit by a car at 30 m.p.h., about five out of ten pedestrians will be
killed." Hit by a car at 40 m.p.h., nine out of ten pedestrians will be
killed." You don't need to be an Einstein to work out that those figures
just don't add up. The Police and L.C.C. obviously don't know what they
are talking about! Once again, it's called 'political spin'.
4. The Police teach all their drivers to drive in a much road space as
possible and then allow councils to narrow the roads.
5. The Police know that a pedal cyclist needs a 'wobble distance' in
order to overtake them safely and this 'wobble distance' should be a
minimum of six feet or two metres. Why then do the Police allow the
councils to construct cycle lanes which are often incomplete and only
approximately one metre wide?
I could write a book (in fact, I have) on Police and Council
inconsistencies and their turning of a blind eye to experience, but the
sad truth is that the modern day Police service, certainly in relation
to road safety matters, have, for a large part, abandoned their
knowledge acquired during 70 years of driving experience and have become
political slaves to often bigoted and unintellectual councillors and
politicians.
The problem lies in that politicians hold all the purse strings and
therefore, if the Police need more money for their budget, they have to
do as they are told rather than making their educated views known.
There are an average of nearly ten deaths and over a hundred serious
injuries on our roads every single day and that is a dreadful statistic.
There have been thirty one tragic deaths on the railways recently so
what did the authorities do about it? They closed the railways down and
are spending £billions trying to put the matters right. That tragic
figure of thirty one, represents only three days on our roads. What are
the authorities doing about it? Practically nothing except calling
drivers idiots, erecting thousands of speed cameras and perhaps offering
'Speed Awareness Courses' to people after they have committed driving
offences instead of before.
This country is in a very sad state in relation to road safety and I
will say this time and time again: The only answer is not to test,
harass, or persecute people, but to give them knowledge so that, at
least, they know what they are doing. This policy can then be followed
by a firm law and order because drivers will be acting out of knowledge
instead of ignorance.
Beware of simplistic statements, political spin and ill-thought out road
safety measures.
A phrase worth remembering is, 'It's not what you do. It's knowing what
you do'.
Signed. Adrian Shurmer.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff