CPS - Cost is not a consideration

markharding557

I think average speed cameras are a safer option because there is no need to sharply slow down when you see them,you slow down normally in order to keep your average speed down.

Really2

markharding557 wrote: »

I think average speed cameras are a safer option because there is no need to sharply slow down when you see them,you slow down normally in order to keep your average speed down.

I would agree but they have been set at 50mph on the M6 now for over a year and I have not got a scooby what they working on or where the work men are. (I am sure everyone knows the delights of J10 to J6)

The other problem is I had to accelerate sharply once in a average speed check area to avoid being crushed against a railing by a lorry.
I was worried I would get done so when passed the danger I had to half my speed, which was then a Danger to other road users and made me look like a nutter.

torontoboy45

Really2 wrote: »

What I dont get is,

even mobile speed sites have to get permission (something like planing) just to operate.

That is why they are on sat navs etc, so what is the difference of a sat nav warning you.

It is well documented that speed cameras can cause accidents when people slam on their breaks when they see them.

So how is flashing stopping a policeman going about their business. speed cameras are meant to be there to slow drivers down.
No one knew (other drivers) why the man was flashing so was he not helping the police by slowing down traffic?

If no one heeded the warning they would have been done? I can't see the wrong in the situation he flashed to warn of a speed camera.
Unless the police are now saying speed cameras are their to catch speeders not to slow them down the guy did no wrong.

I recall an incident whereby a resident erected signs warning of a 'safety camera' situated 300yds further down the road and out of sight. magistrates rushed to hit the resident with a large(ish) fine.

I'd argue that the guy was assisting the police, not obstructing them; besides, obstructing them from what? revenue-gathering?

the cps knew exactly what they were doing by taking this action; there's a lot of money at stake, remember.

Graham_Devon

Did anyone hear Brake going on and on about how utterly irresponsible this driver was?

Oh, it was joyous!!

"We have a responsibility as a nation to slow down". "The local communities are respsonsible for their own action, speed kills, we need more awareness to get people to slow down". "Speed Kills - It's as simple as that. Drivers should not be speeding under any circumstances".

Amongst other whinges.

The irony that someone is therefore prosecuted for warning other drivers to do what...SLOW DOWN...and brake are therefore celebrating and hoping it shows other drivers NOT to warn others to slow down was too much for me to handle....and too much for the commentator to handle too.

It's a funny old world. Message from police, brake etc....slow down.

Message from police, brake etc to the public warning others to slow down.....shut up, pay us our fines, you blithering fool. You are going against police duties and stopping a crime in action.

I won't bother reporting a mugging about to take place next time then....would'nt want to stand in the way of the criminal behaviour taking place.

Davesnave

The last time someone flashed me in this situation, I thought it was a person I knew, and flashed back.

The fact is, round here, we're flashing all the time. There's hedge cutting, escaped sheep and similar hazards, plus general courtesy when people make room on the narrow lanes.

Must admit I nearly had an 'accident' when I spotted the copper with his speed gun, but it wasn't of the motoring variety! Needn't have worried though; he was looking t'other way.

Really2

Davesnave wrote: »

The fact is, round here, we're flashing all the time.

Too much info Dave.

Heyman_2

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

Shame they couldn't prosecute an assault seen on national TV that ended in a death.

Just to be clear here, you are talking about an unprovoked assault caught on camera by a masked Police Officer on a Newspaper Seller which in all likelihood contributed to his eventual death.

The CPS/IPCC took over a YEAR to investigate (despite the irrefutable proof of TV FOOTAGE!!!), kicked the whole thing into the long grass and made absolutely sure they couldn't prosecute on any grounds due to the amount of time taken. Oh, and they used a dodgy coroner to muddy the waters as well, which was the eventual excuse for them taking a YEAR, yes 12 MONTHS to investigate.

Facts.

Harry_Flashman

I think the Police lose a lot of support over foolishness like this

Graham_Devon

This isn't the first time remember.

A man put out a sign near a boot sale entrance, stating "slow down".

There was also a mobile speed van some way after the boot sale entrance.

He was also successfully prosecuted under the same rules for his efforts in trying to reduce the speed of vehicles. Which, apparently, is what it's all about....trying to reduce speed.

Harry_Flashman

Doesn't that work as a defence in court? The trying to reduce speeding bit I mean?