Home PageFacebookRSS News Feed
PocketGPS
Web
SatNav,GPS,Navigation
MacFixer, the iPhone, iPod, and iPad specialists
Pocket GPS World - SatNavs | GPS | Speed Cameras: Forums

Pocket GPS World :: View topic - Resident operated speed cameras
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in for private messagesLog in for private messages   Log inLog in 

Resident operated speed cameras
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Pocket GPS World Forum Index -> Non-Technical Speed Camera Discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
gareth71
Regular Visitor


Joined: Oct 07, 2004
Posts: 146

PostPosted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 2:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tanda wrote:
I remember reading a "Readers Letter" in a motorcycle magazine, years ago ...
{snip}

Just an urban myth, as I understand it - one that is regularly dusted off for an airing around these parts, but with the Scottish highlands being replaced by Snowdonia, the handheld becoming a GATSO, and the aircraft being based at RAF Valley.

Regarding members of the public being able to submit info to the rozzers regarding speeding drivers which is then used as the basis for a prosecution - a precedent was set here in North Wales a couple of years ago. A newspaper reporter used a hand-held speed gun to capture the daughter of chief constable Brunstrom travelling at about 20mph over the limit. He submitted the information to the police and the CPS, who threw it out straight away as the device was not being operated by a police officer (despite the reporter having been trained up, if I remember correctly, by the manufacturer of the device).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lupos0_1
Lifetime Member


Joined: Sep 08, 2005
Posts: 765
Location: Berkshire

PostPosted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 2:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That makes sense.

Even the police have strict controls about the calibration of the machines they use. Joe Bloggs is not going to do that every day????
_________________
-------------------------------------------------------
Nokia N95
McGuider V7
Latest Maps
(Internal GPS)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Crad
Occasional Visitor


Joined: Apr 09, 2006
Posts: 21
Location: Midlands

PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 11:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

lupos0_1 wrote:

I can't see how this person is going to cause an accident Question
I can just imagine,
Guy turns up to court, says that Joe Public caused him to crash as he had to slam on the brakes.
Judge: Eh, don't speed then Wink


I wasn’t assuming the driver of a heavily braking vehicle would be suing, possibly the poor guy following him who slams into the back of his car, having braked hard for no apparent reason. But far more likely would be an accident caused by the poor locating, improper deployment or poor operation of the equipment e.g. causing a blind spot, forcing a driver to take an inappropriate line.

I passed through a public operated speed site in Romsley. It consisted of a man stood chatting to a local resident while the rear of his estate car poked out into the road. The back window of the car was fitted with a radar sensor and large bright red LED display unit. The display informed me that I was recklessly blasting down the 30mph road at an incredible 17mph. It was made worse by the fact that the operator was stood dangerously close to the road facing away from oncoming traffic and the danger he had created. I have seen police speed traps equally dangerously positioned, but they do, at least, have public liability insurance.

There are several problems with this;

a) Endangerment of public safety by blocking the right of way.
b) Driver distraction by the illuminated sign (telling them that they’re driving safely).
c) The system is effectively unsupervised.
d) There is no public liability insurance.

Here is a possible scenario: a car is driven along that road at 40mph with a car coming around the bend in the other direction they can’t brake in time, hit the estate car injuring the driver, operator and the local resident. Another possibility, the driver is distracted by the speed sign, forces his way through and hits the oncoming vehicle with a 60mph head-on.

Now I accept that neither of these scenarios is likely, but they are possible and given enough time…

lupos0_1 wrote:

True, but then you can't educate people that don't want to be. Those people, I would presume do not have the camera database either as then they would have known about the camera site Laughing


I didn’t think the public operated camera sites were on the data base.

I think you’ll find that many drivers brake reflexively – many of these may never intentionally exceed the speed limit. It’s simply a “be-on-the-safe-side” gut reaction i.e. if a driver is well below the speed limit there is no chance of being fined.

There is a camera site near to my home located on a 60mph speed-limited road. In rush-hour the nominal traffic speed along this road is 50-55mph but drops to as low as 35mph through the camera site. Now these are drivers who regularly use this road and know the location of the camera, start surprising them and…
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tomo
Lifetime Member


Joined: May 17, 2004
Posts: 212
Location: Fife Scotland

PostPosted: Tue Sep 12, 2006 6:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

lupos0_1 wrote:
Crad wrote:
There is another side to this insidious activity is that the voluntary members of this activity are not employed by anybody and as such are uninsured. Sooner or later one of them will cause an accident and be liable to a law suit; this should curtail the act.


I can't see how this person is going to cause an accident Question

I canjust imagine,

Guy turns up to court, says that Joe Public caused him to crash as he had to slam on the brakes.

Judge: Eh, don't speed then Wink


A few years back a friend was minding her own business driving along a road at or around the speed limit (not above it). Out jumped a police officer with no hi vis or hat with a radar device. He held it with 2 hands like one would hold a hand-gun.

Apart from needing an instant change of pants she crashed the car into a lamp-post as she genuinly thought that someone was about to shoot at her.

Now, imagine one of these do-gooders doing somthing similar. Someone will remind me that they have been "trained". That means nothing.

I used to work for the Special Constabulary. I was "trained" in many areas of law and police procedure etc. I did this for 8 or 9 years and I hope I could say that I was a competent officer. One of the things we (in our force) were not allowed to do was use "blues and twos" if using a marked vehicle (which was rare itself). Some of my Special colleugues did though, tried to stop motorists, use them to attend jobs etc. As these officers were purely volunteers there was absolutly nothing that the force could do other than to dispense of their services. As we were all volunteers and had regular jobs elsewhere, been "sacked" wasnt a threat as this "job" didnt pay our mortgages. The only thing that the force could do is prosecute the specials if required but would be very hard to do just for minor "rule breaking".

My point is though, these volunteers have absolutly nothing to lose if they dont follow their "training" and use the equipment in a way it wasnt designed for. If they dont operate it correctly whether it be through negligince, ignorance or plain stupidity, other than dispense of their services there is nothing that the police/council can do to "repremand" them.

Steve
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kdbcom
Occasional Visitor


Joined: Jul 08, 2005
Posts: 21

PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 2:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A friend of mine locally (In Surrey) has just received a warning from the police that he has been "clocked" (not their words) doing 47 in a 40 limit, he remembers seeing 2 civilians wearing hi-vis vests at the point & time stated. The road in question B2028 is between Marsh Green & Lingfield.

It appears that they are doing a yellow/red card type system and he has been told that his details (regarding the car) have been put on the database and that if he is caught speeding again within 12 months he will be prosecuted.

The letter was sent out from police HQ in Guilford
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darren
Frequent Visitor


Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40
Posts: 23848
Location: Hampshire, UK

PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 2:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Utter twaddle from Surrey Police and they should be brought to account for such tactics if true.

Most forces send warning letters, although AIUI in general this is only to drivers who have come to light on more than one occasion BUT and this is key here, they have absolutely no power to prosecute you on the say so of these jumped up, self-appointed idiots. No question about it and to suggest otherwise is a blatant lie.

I see they make the same claim in a PDF on the scheme here. I'm going to email them and ask what action they suggest taking on the basis of evidence from an un-sworn member of the public!

It's yet more policing on the cheap, try and scare Mr Motorist. But we have to make a stand if they are going to blatantly lie now.
_________________
Darren Griffin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
MaFt
Pocket GPS Staff
Pocket GPS Staff


Joined: Aug 31, 2005
Posts: 15125
Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire

PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 3:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

you should write back and tell the police that the people who 'measured' your speed were throwing stones at cars as they passed. ask them who's 'evidence' they are going to believe and tell them that you expect those involved to also receive a warning letter Laughing

MaFt
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Darren
Frequent Visitor


Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40
Posts: 23848
Location: Hampshire, UK

PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 3:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Re-reading the blurb it states:

Quote:
Speedwatch trains people to use speed detection equipment. Members then note the registration numbers and speed of speeding vehicles. These are reported to the Surrey Heath Casualty Reduction Officer (CRO) who, in turn, writes a warning letter to the registered keeper advising that the vehicle has been recorded as exceeding the speed limit. The letter also explains that should this happen again further action will be taken.
If a vehicle is caught speeding a second time a final letter is hand delivered to its owner and a warning given in person
.

So it may well be that the 'further action' is a hand delivered warning. They have no legal standing to anything more.
_________________
Darren Griffin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
kdbcom
Occasional Visitor


Joined: Jul 08, 2005
Posts: 21

PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 8:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darren

If you get a reply to your email to Surrey Police can you post it on the forum

thanks
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dlpruk
Regular Visitor


Joined: Dec 24, 2006
Posts: 88
Location: Nottinghamshire

PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 8:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As a trained civilian speed-check operator, may I ask why I and many like me should be the objects of derision when we report idiots driving HGVs round a blind bend in a narrow village street at 50mph - instead of 30mph - when our local police force can't be bothered to do the job?

The limit here is shortly to be cut to 20mph, partly as a result of the residents' campaign I supported, so methinks the fault lies elsewhere.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darren
Frequent Visitor


Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40
Posts: 23848
Location: Hampshire, UK

PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 9:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dlpruk wrote:
As a trained civilian speed-check operator, may I ask why I and many like me should be the objects of derision when we report idiots driving HGVs round a blind bend in a narrow village street at 50mph - instead of 30mph - when our local police force can't be bothered to do the job?

The limit here is shortly to be cut to 20mph, partly as a result of the residents' campaign I supported, so methinks the fault lies elsewhere.

Because Community Speedwatch volunteers are seen as self appointed vigilantes and once we condone that where do we draw the line? Perhaps all traffic offences should be handled by Highways Traffic Officers? We already have private traffic wardens and clampers and look at the mire that is now descending into.

I'm sure many are well intentioned but that does not change the simple fact that this is not the job of Joe Public nor should it ever be.

Instead of doing the Police Forces job for them which will make them ever less inclined to bother, we should be lobbying our local councillors and MP's to resolve it. If people have the time to spend checking motorists speeds then they surely have the time to put pen to paper and write to their local paper, MP etc etc.

If there is an issue with excess speeds through villages then local highways departments have long had the capability to carry out a survey using existing equipment. Equipment that runs 24hrs a day 7 days a week and will give a much more accurate picture of traffic and traffic speeds.
_________________
Darren Griffin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
dlpruk
Regular Visitor


Joined: Dec 24, 2006
Posts: 88
Location: Nottinghamshire

PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 9:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darren wrote:


I'm sure many are well intentioned but that does not change the simple fact that this is not the job of Joe Public nor should it ever be.

Instead of doing the Police Forces job for them which will make them ever less inclined to bother, we should be lobbying our local councillors and MP's to resolve it. If people have the time to spend checking motorists speeds then they surely have the time to put pen to paper and write to their local paper, MP etc etc.

If there is an issue with excess speeds through villages then local highways departments have long had the capability to carry out a survey using existing equipment. Equipment that runs 24hrs a day 7 days a week and will give a much more accurate picture of traffic and traffic speeds.


I agree 100%.

But if you lived in a village where the ONLY safe way to get to the post box or pub is to get your car out to drive 100 yards because we have no footway, what would you do?

When the county police force is based miles away and had a Chief who was so fixated with gun crime that he withdrew traffic patrols from our patch.

When the CC Highways Department denied the existence of a speeding problem until we proved our point - when they did indeed install automatic speed and taffic-flow recorders and have now designed a new footway and 20mph limit scheme based on those results.

Call me what you like but it was ONLY resident action - backed by our MP, the local newspapers and radio stations and the BBC - that MAY make it possible to walk from one end of our village to the other - assuming the scheme clears the formal consultation process that is now in hand.

And the CC has enough of our money left to pay for it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darren
Frequent Visitor


Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40
Posts: 23848
Location: Hampshire, UK

PostPosted: Wed May 06, 2009 7:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just as a point of clarification here, was this case you have experience of a Community Speedwatch group or simply villagers who got together and bought their own speed measuring equipment?
_________________
Darren Griffin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
dlpruk
Regular Visitor


Joined: Dec 24, 2006
Posts: 88
Location: Nottinghamshire

PostPosted: Wed May 06, 2009 10:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

We started three years ago as just a group of villagers who wanted to improve safety for a young family who simply couldn't walk to our local bus stop and recreation ground because of speeding traffic.

But all the 'experts' at the CC refused to do anything because fortunately there have been no serious accidents recorded here - it's so dangerous that nobody ever walks - and they had no evidence.

The camera partnership tax collectors refused to do anything because they said they needed some serious injuries or deaths to prove to them that it was dangerous.

The Police refused to do anything because our tiny rural village wasn't even on the horizon for them - but we did manage to get the community police PC, who's based 8 miles away, to visit for the first time and it was she who suggested that evidence from a Community Speedwatch team would count as statistical evidence. She also trained those of us who volunteered and provided the gun (not a camera BTW) and high-vis jackets on free loan.

It was an interesting experience doing it - provided one had a thick enough skin not to be worried by some of the abuse we had from low life. It also confirmed some prejudices, notably that the worst drivers are those in hired or unmarked vans (present company excepted, of course!) and that the best are members of serious motorsport clubs who pass through to and from rally stages nearby.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Skippy
Pocket GPS Verifier
Pocket GPS Verifier


Joined: 24/06/2003 00:22:12
Posts: 2946
Location: Escaped to the Antipodies! 36.83°S 174.75°E

PostPosted: Sun May 24, 2009 2:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darren wrote:
they have absolutely no power to prosecute you on the say so of these jumped up, self-appointed idiots. No question about it and to suggest otherwise is a blatant lie.


The thing to watch for is that the Police turn up and say "You were clocked speeding at 35 MPH in a 30 zone by some jumped up vigilates" then you answer, "Yes, I remember that and I WAS going a bit over the limit". Pow, you have just confessed to a crime and you can be booked.

I don't know if it happens much here but I've been booked for a serious motoring offence in exactly this manner (it was a long time ago in a country far far away when I was young and naive). The Police even admitted that it was "the informants word against mine" and that if I had denied it then no action would have been taken. DOH! Mad

Moral of the story:

1. *ADMIT NOTHING*.
2. ANYTHING you say CAN and WILL be used against you.
_________________
Gone fishing!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message







Posted: Today    Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Pocket GPS World Forum Index -> Non-Technical Speed Camera Discussions All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Make a Donation



CamerAlert Database

Click here for the PocketGPSWorld.com Speed Camera Database

Download Speed Camera Database
22.034 (27 Mar 24)



WORLDWIDE SPEED CAMERA SPOTTERS WANTED!

Click here to submit camera positions to the PocketGPSWorld.com Speed Camera Database


12mth Subscriber memberships awarded every week for verified new camera reports!

Submit Speed Camera Locations Now


CamerAlert Apps



iOS QR Code






Android QR Code







© Terms & Privacy


GPS Shopping