Safe Speed Forums

See the attached link:Stalled learner lands instructor a parking fine

Apart from anything else, automated parking fines by CCTV !
Surely, there should be some leeway to stop and see what the parking restrictions/charges are !

Has anyone come across this before?

Well a bus in Manchester got a ticket for stopping to pick up passengers. And a warden ticketed a wrecked bike which was in the road whilst the motorcyclist who had the accident was been attended to by the emergency services.

Nothing suprises me about parking tickets anymore.

ah, I see the spy cameras originally justified as "anti-terrorist measures" are doing their job again!

Already dealing extensively with the sickening menance of people who forget to pay the congestion charge for a few hours, they have found a new target that threatens the democracy we so cherish...

no longer shall this country be at the mercy of evil stalled learner drivers!

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction

I once watched a traffic warden issue a ticket to a doctor who was parked on a single yellow while attending an unconscious OAP at the roadside.
The ticket was later quashed, but only after it became public knowledge.

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?

typical council parking attendants,

Aye, abusing the law for their own personal gain - despicable.

when

imagine the money you lost out on, gutted eh.

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction

how

There a simialr problem with the present method of speed enforcement.

you know, as police use discretion, you and gasto's, errm.......don't

_________________
Oct 11 Birmingham Half Marathon. I am running for the British Heart Foundation.
http://www.justgiving.com/Rob-Taylor

i

I admire you C.O. for venturing into the lions den and posting - and your input has been informative and helpful - not a bit like some who post here!
I notice you mention you allow some leeway on the normal thresholds, and that may earn you a little respect for those whose only crime is to stray over the limit, but are still "safe".

However in the matter of fixed AND mobile cameras, there must be a question mark over the use of the term SAFETY CAMERAs.
If somebody speeds past the camera, and is not stopped from committing that offence, then they remain free to continue on at speed. The more leeway you allow, the more serious the offence becomes.
While a mobile operative can phone for an intercept, the chances of it happening are slim!
Here in Cumbria, we suffered a serious outbreak of legionaires disease, caused by the faulty air conditioning system in a public building. The council involved, and the council employee ultimately responsible for seeing it was properly maintained, faced charges of corporate manslaughter. This was based on the fact that they failed to act on knowledge that poorly maintained systems were likely to give rise to the problem which eventually killed several people.
My point is that every motorist who is photographed speeding, for which an NIP is issued, and who is at liberty to continue, may cause an accident resulting in a fatality. The authority responsible would be in the same position of knowing that a known risk was allowed to continue.

Does any partnership you know of have any policy on this? Have you ever been advised that the motorists you monitor for prosecution may be dangerous?
Of course not - which is why so many responsible motorists believe the cameras are more interested in issuing penalties than in improving road safety.
EVERYBODY knows it is against the law to break the posted speed limit, so the argument that the risk of getting caught by a camera will cause them to slow is flawed - they have ALWAYS been at risk of being caught, even by policemen. What the cameras have made possible is the mass detection of the offence, AND the financial benefit of mass prosecution.

Road safefty?? No, I dont think so - my children are more at risk of being run down by motorists not paying due care and attention, than they ever were, because police numbers are reducing. Not just because of cameras, although they are used to fool the general public into thinking the Government still cares about road safety!
Since you are a part of the system, then some question your committment to road safety - which in my mind is wrong, because I believe YOU do care, even if I believe the way you chose is misguided.

I believe this was just a poke at the irony of your local police run wardens doing a good job, only to have it spoiled by the "get rich quick" crowd!
Aside from the possible impact on your job prospects, do you think a policeman with a camera would have a greater impact on safety than merely placing more and more cameras?

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

if

I take it that you understand that rule is completely barking?

Ultimately it means that all your enforcement is carried out on roads where it is 'safe to speed'.

See: http://www.safespeed.org.uk/rules.html

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

so

and hopefully now, by this post, you can see that "speeding" and "safety" are completely divorced from each other.

At last!!

speed /

So you admit that penalising people for exceeding the limit is nothing to do with safety in this instance then?

and if you don't like that quote, here's one from a scammer site

Apples and oranges mate. I don't think an often arbitrary limit can be fairly compared with the physical capacity of a fuel tank.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein