The Acceptable Face of Plod?
Discussion
On reading about a new crackdown here in Fife in the local paper, I went to the new Fife Police website as recommended. Surprised to see a reasonable attempt to justify the mobile units (we have no fixed camera sites in Fife - amazing. Don't you lot think about moving here!). Even mention of road evaluations and engineering work to help reduce accidents in areas "where excessive speed" is seen to be a cause. Makes a refreshing change from the ignorant "Speed Kills" campaign. They even tell us what they believe is excessive and how its worked out.
OK so they still want it to be self financing, problem areas will still use unmarked cars, civilian operators will be used and there will be a three fold increase in use, moving from 5 days to 7 days but if they catch the loonies so be it. They seem to be exhibiting a fairly responsible attitude IMHO.
There is talk of high visibility units and publicity through press, radio and the website which seems to be true. Check out:
www.fife.police.uk/Leftlinks/community.htm
Especially the link at the bottom of the page. I know most of the roads mentioned and would have to admit most make sense. What they are saying is these roads have an accident problem and we are checking them out, as opposed to "where can we put some cameras to raise some extra cash".
I hope I am not being to naive here - what do people think?
OK so they still want it to be self financing, problem areas will still use unmarked cars, civilian operators will be used and there will be a three fold increase in use, moving from 5 days to 7 days but if they catch the loonies so be it. They seem to be exhibiting a fairly responsible attitude IMHO.
There is talk of high visibility units and publicity through press, radio and the website which seems to be true. Check out:
www.fife.police.uk/Leftlinks/community.htm
Especially the link at the bottom of the page. I know most of the roads mentioned and would have to admit most make sense. What they are saying is these roads have an accident problem and we are checking them out, as opposed to "where can we put some cameras to raise some extra cash".
I hope I am not being to naive here - what do people think?
The only problem I see with civilian speed enforcement units is that they must justify their existence. Their wages need to be found from somewhere, and I'm pretty sure it may be ticket revenue. A Police Officer hasn't got this pressure. Therefore, you can probably expect zero tolerance. God only knows what would happen if a bonus scheme were offered!!!
Its not the fine thats a problem for speeding (well, not that much) its the 3 points...... Why can't we have discretion towards those as well - take the hit in the wallet for being over the limit, but give plod (there are some sensible ones) the capability to decide on whether it warrants points on your license. 80 in a 70, IMHO, doesn't deserve points (depending on circumstances of course)
I'm all for re-engineering of the "dangerous" roads, and if the experiment in Fife works, how can we get it expanded to other counties?
I'm all for re-engineering of the "dangerous" roads, and if the experiment in Fife works, how can we get it expanded to other counties?
To me the 3points should only be permissible for dangerous or reckless driving (excessive speeds could count) but apart from that then just the fine.
However, the points = higher insurance and of course IPT has risen, so more revenue to HMG..
We are soon going to work till we are 70/75 thx to that ***** in No.11 and his f****ng bright ideas, and whilst we are working ourselves to death, he is taxing us to death too...
However, the points = higher insurance and of course IPT has risen, so more revenue to HMG..
We are soon going to work till we are 70/75 thx to that ***** in No.11 and his f****ng bright ideas, and whilst we are working ourselves to death, he is taxing us to death too...
IMO £60 is way to much. Some people don't get that for committing criminal offences.
A better system would be to give a person three chances then send them on a driver improvement course..
For example, log how many times you're caught speeding. If, in the space of 18 months you're caught three or more times despite being sent warnings through the post or being stopped, you're then required to attend a driver improvement course paid for out of your own pocket. Failure to comply results in a 6 month ban.
That way persistant speeders will be targeted leaving the sensible but unlucky driver to carry on his business.
A better system would be to give a person three chances then send them on a driver improvement course..
For example, log how many times you're caught speeding. If, in the space of 18 months you're caught three or more times despite being sent warnings through the post or being stopped, you're then required to attend a driver improvement course paid for out of your own pocket. Failure to comply results in a 6 month ban.
That way persistant speeders will be targeted leaving the sensible but unlucky driver to carry on his business.
quote:
IMO £60 is way to much. Some people don't get that for committing criminal offences.
A better system would be to give a person three chances then send them on a driver improvement course..
For example, log how many times you're caught speeding. If, in the space of 18 months you're caught three or more times despite being sent warnings through the post or being stopped, you're then required to attend a driver improvement course paid for out of your own pocket. Failure to comply results in a 6 month ban.
That way persistant speeders will be targeted leaving the sensible but unlucky driver to carry on his business.
Well, SOME of it sounds sensible. But then the usual muddy thinking emerges:
So, they are saying that:
lots_of_crashes AND high_speeds => speed_causes_crashes
! Brilliant! What if there were an unusually high number of YELLOW cars on the road? Would they arrest yellow car drivers?!?
(Don't forget that the TRL studies show EXCESSIVE speed to be bottom of the list of causes.)
What if it's not the fast cars that are crashing?
(Of course, they may be being more intelligent than this. But their declared use of statistics suggests otherwise...)
quote:
A list is prepared of the sties where most crashes occur and passed back to the Police.
Covert speed surveys are carried out to establish if excessive speed is a likely contributing factor.
So, they are saying that:
lots_of_crashes AND high_speeds => speed_causes_crashes
! Brilliant! What if there were an unusually high number of YELLOW cars on the road? Would they arrest yellow car drivers?!?
(Don't forget that the TRL studies show EXCESSIVE speed to be bottom of the list of causes.)
What if it's not the fast cars that are crashing?
(Of course, they may be being more intelligent than this. But their declared use of statistics suggests otherwise...)
Terrible idea!
Why should i have to suffer just because i'm a persistent speeder? I'm a bad speeder and you lot are the good sort?
Oh yes, i was unlucky that time, and ooh, not watching my speedo there officer; i normally drive at 40 everywhere. Come on!
If we want things to change we have to aim high. Either there's a case or there isn't. This brainwave smacks of self-delusion.
Why should i have to suffer just because i'm a persistent speeder? I'm a bad speeder and you lot are the good sort?
Oh yes, i was unlucky that time, and ooh, not watching my speedo there officer; i normally drive at 40 everywhere. Come on!
If we want things to change we have to aim high. Either there's a case or there isn't. This brainwave smacks of self-delusion.
quote:
Terrible idea!
Why should i have to suffer just because i'm a persistent speeder? I'm a bad speeder and you lot are the good sort?
Oh yes, i was unlucky that time, and ooh, not watching my speedo there officer; i normally drive at 40 everywhere. Come on!
If we want things to change we have to aim high. Either there's a case or there isn't. This brainwave smacks of self-delusion.
I would say that the majority of cameras and speed traps are set up in restricted areas (i.e 30,50,50 mph limits) I know that this is not always the case but the majority.....Read the threads on here and most people stick to posted limits, but want to enjoy their driving when the get to NSL.
At the moment, if you respect these limits but accidently trip a camera you get points and a fine, full stop.
With the above system you get a second chance. However, Max Power and other people you see flying around restricted areas (probably responsible for the current hatred of speed anyway) will eventually top up 9 points and end up paying more than the combined cost of those nine points for a course, and hopefully come out of it better drivers.
The Goverment still takes a cut and gets their money, driving standards improve, Tony Blairs ratings go up...everybody wins the lottery and.....no..sorry, dreaming again
>> Edited by relaxitscool on Monday 8th April 11:35
Also, if you make the 3 strikes your out course really quite expensive then it would act as a deterrent in itself.
To me it is the points that matter (none yet touch wood). If caught doing 71 on a 60 (in decent circumstances of course) I would happily pay for my error in judgement but I do think points are harsh if NSL and there is no one else around.
Matt.
To me it is the points that matter (none yet touch wood). If caught doing 71 on a 60 (in decent circumstances of course) I would happily pay for my error in judgement but I do think points are harsh if NSL and there is no one else around.
Matt.
Point taken "relaxitscool"; i'm from the scottish borders, where cameras seem mostly to be on A-roads.
No excuse for flagrant, persistent speeding in 30 zones, where it's impossible to have any fun other than of the 'please look at me/my car' variety (not my cup of tea), and impossible to know who's about to run out in front of you.
No excuse for flagrant, persistent speeding in 30 zones, where it's impossible to have any fun other than of the 'please look at me/my car' variety (not my cup of tea), and impossible to know who's about to run out in front of you.
To quote Phoney Tony, "Education, education, education...." I can't see why this doesn't apply to motorists. I support much of what is said about sending drivers on a course to address driving/speeding issues. I know that forces have run similar schemes for drivers involved in RTAs. Successful completion of a course avoids a prosecution for Driving without due care. Drink drivers can shorten their bans if they attend an alcohol impaired drivers course. These lead to fewer motorists "re-offending" for want of a better expression, and thus leads to fewer accidents, injuries, deaths etc...
Whilst on the point, I've always felt that the Fixed Penalty Notice System could be overhauled. As it stands there are guildlines for issuing a ticket, which broadly work on the 10% plus 2 theory. Therefore, in a 30mph limit:
30 - 35 mph = Verbal Warning.
36 - 55 (approx) = FPN; i.e. 3 points/£60.
55+ mph: day trip to local Magistrates.
What I feel gets people's goat, is when they get caught, often by a Gatso for the typical 40 in a 30, when roads are quiet and get what is considered a fairly harsh 3 points/fine.
It would be quite easy to have two tiers. Say up to 15mph over gives 2 points and £50. 16 to 30 mph over gives say 4 points and £100. This way, those taking the urine in built up areas get punished, and the courts may be less clogged with expensive prosecutions/fine collecting etc...
Whilst on the point, I've always felt that the Fixed Penalty Notice System could be overhauled. As it stands there are guildlines for issuing a ticket, which broadly work on the 10% plus 2 theory. Therefore, in a 30mph limit:
30 - 35 mph = Verbal Warning.
36 - 55 (approx) = FPN; i.e. 3 points/£60.
55+ mph: day trip to local Magistrates.
What I feel gets people's goat, is when they get caught, often by a Gatso for the typical 40 in a 30, when roads are quiet and get what is considered a fairly harsh 3 points/fine.
It would be quite easy to have two tiers. Say up to 15mph over gives 2 points and £50. 16 to 30 mph over gives say 4 points and £100. This way, those taking the urine in built up areas get punished, and the courts may be less clogged with expensive prosecutions/fine collecting etc...
The more I think about the whole problem of the governments attitude towards speeding, the more angry I get, so now I dont think!
But, if speeding is such an anti-social behaviour, and causes so many accidents on the road, then why not dish out 3 points, end of story. No tagging on 30+ quid on top. Remove the revenue for it (maybe the 2 quid for the photo).
Personally I'd rather NOT get any points, and pay a heftier fine, but I wish they'd be honest and either do this for revenue, or safety, the 2 don't go hand in hand. That way at least the public may be more informed. Then again, a politician be truthful?
Paul
But, if speeding is such an anti-social behaviour, and causes so many accidents on the road, then why not dish out 3 points, end of story. No tagging on 30+ quid on top. Remove the revenue for it (maybe the 2 quid for the photo).
Personally I'd rather NOT get any points, and pay a heftier fine, but I wish they'd be honest and either do this for revenue, or safety, the 2 don't go hand in hand. That way at least the public may be more informed. Then again, a politician be truthful?
Paul
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff