Laser Gun a303 Wiltshire Advice Pls.
Discussion
Hi everyone,
Would appriciate thoughts on this - especially MadCop.
Driving down the A303 today, saw a laser gun as I came round a corner.
I am VERY sure I was doing 77MPH ish. Definatly was NOT exceeding 80.
What are the odds of getting done for this and if they do try me fot "77 MPH" or the likes is it worth fighting in court?
I heard that they only really try to get people really giving it some and there were people ZOOOMING past me up to the point I saw him so there were plenty of other "victims" that were more obvious.
Any thoughts??
SoulPatch
Would appriciate thoughts on this - especially MadCop.
Driving down the A303 today, saw a laser gun as I came round a corner.
I am VERY sure I was doing 77MPH ish. Definatly was NOT exceeding 80.
What are the odds of getting done for this and if they do try me fot "77 MPH" or the likes is it worth fighting in court?
I heard that they only really try to get people really giving it some and there were people ZOOOMING past me up to the point I saw him so there were plenty of other "victims" that were more obvious.
Any thoughts??
SoulPatch
So you might have still been in Somerset? (The county boundary is more or less at Mere, just before you leave the long of dual carriageway from Sparkford)
The reason I was interested is that Wiltshire Plod appear to have lost interest in speed traps lately - I've only seen one in about six months, and I thought they might be up to their old tricks again.
Come to think of it, you were quoting a 70 limit so I suspect that you would have still been on the dual carriageway and still probably in Somerset - perhaps some of our colleagues down there could arrange for a few cattle to get out and give the local nick something more productive to do!
If I was doing 77 in a 70 (which, of course, I would never,ever, dream of doing
) I would hope to get away with it (70 plus 10% plus 2 =79)
I heard no more last August when I was clocked by a SPECS on the M20 in roadworks at about 58 - late for a blo
dy ferry again!!
The reason I was interested is that Wiltshire Plod appear to have lost interest in speed traps lately - I've only seen one in about six months, and I thought they might be up to their old tricks again.
Come to think of it, you were quoting a 70 limit so I suspect that you would have still been on the dual carriageway and still probably in Somerset - perhaps some of our colleagues down there could arrange for a few cattle to get out and give the local nick something more productive to do!
If I was doing 77 in a 70 (which, of course, I would never,ever, dream of doing
) I would hope to get away with it (70 plus 10% plus 2 =79) I heard no more last August when I was clocked by a SPECS on the M20 in roadworks at about 58 - late for a blo
dy ferry again!!Questions.
1. Were you stopped a the time? ( I assume not as you would have siad so but need to know)
2. Was the section of road on single or dual carriageway?
3. Did you see any other vehicles stopped and drivers being spoken to?
4. Was the operator holding just a hand held device or was there a box standing next to him/her with wires leading away from it.
5. What sort of police vehicles were parked near to the area for the operating officers. Marked or unmarked, vans or cars?
1. Were you stopped a the time? ( I assume not as you would have siad so but need to know)
2. Was the section of road on single or dual carriageway?
3. Did you see any other vehicles stopped and drivers being spoken to?
4. Was the operator holding just a hand held device or was there a box standing next to him/her with wires leading away from it.
5. What sort of police vehicles were parked near to the area for the operating officers. Marked or unmarked, vans or cars?
Madcop - as follows.
1. Were you stopped a the time? ( I assume not as you would have siad so but need to know)
-No.
2. Was the section of road on single or dual carriageway?
-It was an NSL Dual Carriageway.
3. Did you see any other vehicles stopped and drivers being spoken to?
- There was no-one being stopped. Just a single officer leaning on the passenger open door of the patrol car pointing what looked like an LTi20/20 Laser gun.
4. Was the operator holding just a hand held device or was there a box standing next to him/her with wires leading away from it.
-If there was a box it was probably inside the car on the passenger seat but I dont think so.
5. What sort of police vehicles were parked near to the area for the operating officers. Marked or unmarked, vans or cars?
-It was the only one I saw and there were no patrol vehicles. The car in question was a fully marked police car.
Thanks for replying Madcop, hope to hear soon!
SoulPatch
1. Were you stopped a the time? ( I assume not as you would have siad so but need to know)
-No.
2. Was the section of road on single or dual carriageway?
-It was an NSL Dual Carriageway.
3. Did you see any other vehicles stopped and drivers being spoken to?
- There was no-one being stopped. Just a single officer leaning on the passenger open door of the patrol car pointing what looked like an LTi20/20 Laser gun.
4. Was the operator holding just a hand held device or was there a box standing next to him/her with wires leading away from it.
-If there was a box it was probably inside the car on the passenger seat but I dont think so.
5. What sort of police vehicles were parked near to the area for the operating officers. Marked or unmarked, vans or cars?
-It was the only one I saw and there were no patrol vehicles. The car in question was a fully marked police car.
Thanks for replying Madcop, hope to hear soon!
SoulPatch
It is possible that the officer had a video link attached in the car but as far as I am aware, those patrol officers that go out on spot speed checks, do not take the video kit with them.
They normally work in pairs, one pulling offenders and issuing tickets while the other one then works the lazer.
Sometimes a single officer will operate with a catch team further on down the road, especially if it is a fast road.
Without having seen the set up, I am not really able to give a definitive answer.
It is possible that the video link was running, but from my knowledge, unlikely. The video link is expensive specialist equipment, normally used by the safety partnership unmarked vans that are parked up in notorious areas.
77 mph in an NSL limit on a dual carriageway is unlikely to get you a sect 172 notice to name the driver (unless there was some other aggravating circumstances which you have not told me about).
They normally work in pairs, one pulling offenders and issuing tickets while the other one then works the lazer.
Sometimes a single officer will operate with a catch team further on down the road, especially if it is a fast road.
Without having seen the set up, I am not really able to give a definitive answer.
It is possible that the video link was running, but from my knowledge, unlikely. The video link is expensive specialist equipment, normally used by the safety partnership unmarked vans that are parked up in notorious areas.
77 mph in an NSL limit on a dual carriageway is unlikely to get you a sect 172 notice to name the driver (unless there was some other aggravating circumstances which you have not told me about).
A neighbour of mine is a Wilts. traffic cop, he tells me the revenue van is currently targetting the A4 near where I live, it has a 60/50 limit and the gun is set to 71mph according to him.
If they're giving 11mph leeway in a 60, 77 in a 70 shouldn't warrant their attentions.
This is of course not specific to the A303 and it's only what I was told, but it might offer some hope.
If they're giving 11mph leeway in a 60, 77 in a 70 shouldn't warrant their attentions.
This is of course not specific to the A303 and it's only what I was told, but it might offer some hope.
Compliance with ACPO guidelines such as the 10% + 2 MPH 'rule' and the 'must be visible' phrase are just that... guidance. Several forces do not comply with this guidance and under the direction of the ACPO (Association of Chief Police Officers) Traffic Committee Chair - Dick Brunstrom, these guidelines may well be scrapped. Opening the way for prosections for exceeding the speed limits at just over the limit.
My advice is - if you haven't alrady got one - buy a laser/radar detector and watch your speed !
My advice is - if you haven't alrady got one - buy a laser/radar detector and watch your speed !
**IJP** said: Compliance with ACPO guidelines such as the 10% + 2 MPH 'rule' and the 'must be visible' phrase are just that... guidance. Several forces do not comply with this guidance ...
I know the difference between "rules" and "guidance," but this comes back to one of my
points that I rabbit on about from time to time. Speed limits are only truly enforceable by consensus - that is why I am concerned that the more stupid and unrealistic limits begin to appear, the less likely will Joe Public be to adhere to them. The result, if we're not careful, will be a bigger disrespect and disregard for motoring law and common sense than we've got at the moment.
Coming back to your post, it would be a very unwise force indeed that set about a "zero tolerance" policy on speed limts - for one thing, speedometers are not 100% accurate (to within 3% accuracy was the tolerance umpteen years ago - I've no idea if it still is), and for another thing, once they start issuing tickets to the local worthies and dignitaries (and Councillors and off-duty plod ...??) for doing 44 in a 40, the "powers that be" will start having words in 'earoles in high places!!
PS. :tangent mode: Stop laughing at the TV sitcom "Yes Minister" and start believing it as a reflection of real life in the "corridors of power""
Mark Benson said: A neighbour of mine is a Wilts. traffic cop, he tells me the revenue van is currently targetting the A4 near where I live ...
That's interesting. The only one I've seen in the last six months or so was on the A4 in Chippenham (in a 30) - I think it was the week before last.
Anything more than coincidence here??
Wiltshire Police use 'Remote Safety Cameras' (their name), which are mobile laser units operated from the back of a van.
I'm just fighting a case of blatant revenue-ism when I got caught coming over the brow of a hill just north of Avebury, at a range of 135m. Note that ACPO guidance says the officers are to use the equipment to "..corroborate prior personal observation". Difficult in this case , as I was behind the hill!
I'm just fighting a case of blatant revenue-ism when I got caught coming over the brow of a hill just north of Avebury, at a range of 135m. Note that ACPO guidance says the officers are to use the equipment to "..corroborate prior personal observation". Difficult in this case , as I was behind the hill!
Hi Dave,
I live near to Winterbourne Stoke as well. Interestingly, I have just received a reply to my generic query to Wilthire Fuzz 'Safety Camera Unit', when I asked them for a information concerning their guidelines for siting speed cameras in Wiltshire. Amongst the waffly old flannel I received back (now promping a follow-up letter from me), was mention of the camera at WS. I hadn't mentioned this at all in the letter, so they obviously have had a few complaints about it already and are a bit touchy.
Apparently, it is the oldest of the Wilts cameras, and, as they were at pains to point out, was sited under the jurisdiction of Wilts County Council, and not the Constabulary.
I will probably be questioning the legality of this camera as my next move, as I picked-up 3-points from it last year. As you say, Dave, the siting is ludicrous, with less than 100m of straight road before a curve, either coming into or out of the location. While I realise that the famous (mythical, even!) ACPO guidelines actually have no basis in law, they are usually based on something that does. Home Office type approval for the GATSO (apparently) states that it is to be on a 400m straight and level stretch (can anyone confirm or deny this for me - thanks), and these are legally binding.
We'll just have to see what happens! Let me know if you've got any more pearlers from here. Cheers.
Paul
I live near to Winterbourne Stoke as well. Interestingly, I have just received a reply to my generic query to Wilthire Fuzz 'Safety Camera Unit', when I asked them for a information concerning their guidelines for siting speed cameras in Wiltshire. Amongst the waffly old flannel I received back (now promping a follow-up letter from me), was mention of the camera at WS. I hadn't mentioned this at all in the letter, so they obviously have had a few complaints about it already and are a bit touchy.
Apparently, it is the oldest of the Wilts cameras, and, as they were at pains to point out, was sited under the jurisdiction of Wilts County Council, and not the Constabulary.
I will probably be questioning the legality of this camera as my next move, as I picked-up 3-points from it last year. As you say, Dave, the siting is ludicrous, with less than 100m of straight road before a curve, either coming into or out of the location. While I realise that the famous (mythical, even!) ACPO guidelines actually have no basis in law, they are usually based on something that does. Home Office type approval for the GATSO (apparently) states that it is to be on a 400m straight and level stretch (can anyone confirm or deny this for me - thanks), and these are legally binding.
We'll just have to see what happens! Let me know if you've got any more pearlers from here. Cheers.
Paul
pmcrory said: Hi Dave,
I will probably be questioning the legality of this camera as my next move, as I picked-up 3-points from it last year. As you say, Dave, the siting is ludicrous, with less than 100m of straight road before a curve, either coming into or out of the location. While I realise that the famous (mythical, even!) ACPO guidelines actually have no basis in law, they are usually based on something that does. Home Office type approval for the GATSO (apparently) states that it is to be on a 400m straight and level stretch (can anyone confirm or deny this for me - thanks), and these are legally binding.
We'll just have to see what happens! Let me know if you've got any more pearlers from here. Cheers.
Paul
I am fairly certain that there are no rules or regulations about the siting of these cameras on the flat or within a 400m straight. I can think of lots of local examples that do not fit these criteria and this would therefore suggest that the siting of the camera in the instance you describe couldn't be challenged legally. There are probably guidelines issued that suggest a camera is sited in a particular way, but they are like the ACPO guidelines...just that.
PMCrory> Yeah, its not really very visible and its right at the bottom of a hill. I think there is justification for a camera in the vicinity tho (garage one side, houses the other, 40 limit) but as you say, the siting is poor.
Just out of interest, whereabouts do you live? I live about 2 miles from the A303 at Deptford (so about 5 miles from Winterbourne Stoke) in a small village....
(small world, etc etc)
Just out of interest, whereabouts do you live? I live about 2 miles from the A303 at Deptford (so about 5 miles from Winterbourne Stoke) in a small village....
(small world, etc etc)
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff