Over the course of this week in and around the Watford/Harefield/Rickmansworth areas I've personally seen 3 police speed traps. People at work who live locally have seen others. This includes places where I haven't seen Police with radar guns for many many years, (such as where the limit goes from 50 to 30 either side of Harefield). It seems that the motorist is currently being targeted in this area so please be on your guard. I do wonder why the motorist is currently deemed more important to target than knife carrying youths?
It's easier and less dangerous. They can sit in the car with the radio on with a flask of coffee and a sandwich and have a good chat with a mate, while pointing a camera out of the window.
Have you ever tried catching a knife carrying youth with a speed gun? To be more serious, it depends on the type of 'speed trap'. If it's a van then the people who operate them wouldn't be after people with knives anyway. They will mostly be civilian staff and the budget for their work comes as part of road safety. Whether the methodology makes sense is a fair argument but it doesn't mean if they did something else it would reduce other crime. Meanwhile the cops/PCSOs with speed guns normally rock up after being nagged to death by local whingers about motorists driving past their house at an awful speed. After a few days of giving warnings and tickets to mostly people who live in the immediate vicinity the message is sent and they'll toddle off again.
Have you tried getting £60 out of them when you do? Obviously it was a tongue in cheek "forum only" remark, but when you hear every week that Police are severely undermanned then putting speed traps in honeypot locations just sends out the wrong message IMO. I have no doubt you're spot on about sending a message then disappearing again.
It's a cash grab, with police funding being cut, they can turn to the motorist ATM to generate some income.
I personally don't agree with speed traps in general. They tend to penalise law abiding individuals making minor infringements. Just 36 mph in a 30 mph zone will be enough for 3 points and a £100 fine. Do this 4 times in 3 years, then you get a ban from driving. This could mean you lose your job in extreme cases. It can criminalise an innocent person just for being a little unlucky. Anyone that drives just 1 mile over the speed limit is breaking the law, therefore is a criminal by definition. There is not one driver in the world that's never gone at least 1 mile an hour over the speed limit in their driving lifetime history. There should be more tolerance. A law abiding individual will adjust his speed when he sees a police car and that is enough to deter the vast majority of drivers. Just a police presence is a big deterrent. Speed traps should only apply to drivers that blatantly flout the rules of the road. We've all seen these drivers. The ones that drive bumper to bumper behind you. The ones that overtake at crazy speeds on narrow roads, and anyone in a white van should also be pulled as a default
Count yourself lucky people. As with a lot of things here in Norway we have some of the most draconian rules in the world for speeding. The speeding limits are the lowest.. and the fines are the highest. I started a new job 6 months ago and it's an hour and a half away from home. So ive done a fair bit of driving and ive been caught out speeding twice in that time. For doing 61kph in 50kph zone i got fined the equivalent of £355 and for doing 87kph in an 80kph zone i got fined £196. I'm seriously thinking about taking the jail option and saving meself over 500 quid. Especially as the prisons over here are like Butlins. No.. better than Butlins!
Slightly OT but along the same lines, have you seen the recent publicity about police hiring coaches and and sitting on the top deck filming people on their mobile phones? One report I read said how they’d caught 47 people in an afternoon. Now I know that using your mobile while driving is incredibly stupid and dangerous and in no way am I condoning it in any way shape or form, but in the report I read the majority of people they had caught were sitting in stationary traffic. They happened to pull alongside them and film them looking at their phone on the passenger seat or in their laps. Again, I know the law and I know that using your phone while stationary is an offence punishable with a fine and 6 points on you licence, and again I’m not condoning even using your phone while stationary. That said something doesn’t sit quite right with me about it. Let’s face it, if you’re sitting in traffic you can’t kill anybody by glancing at your phone, but it seems the Police always want to go out of their way to find ways of catching and punishing people for petty and minor offences and will dedicate resources to it because it’s easy, but the reality is the consequences of somebody glancing at their phone while stopped in traffic, illegal or not, are non existent. It seems bizarre that you can be burgled, call 999 and be told they don’t have the resources to send anybody out yet they’re happy to hire a coach for the afternoon to crack down on something like that.
The fines in Australia, specifically NSW are absolutely outrageous. They can run into the thousands for being a relatively small margin over the speed limit. I only know this from being on holiday and getting a notice of pending prosecution from a car hire company, and it gave a list of the difference offences and possible fines. As it turns out I ran a red light (only marginally) which was a $480 fine.
I agree to an extent. When I was in the police I avoided catching traffic offenders like the plague. Then I did 18 months in the drugs squad and when I left, my boss told me that he had never known anyone do a long stint in the drug squad without arresting and charging someone for possession of cannabis. But, someone has to enforce the law, even if it wasn't me. In the situation you talk about, I suspect the value in hiring the bus for an afternoon was greatly exceeded by the publicity and awareness it produced.
Been one in Denham Green two days this week just after the 60 goes down to 30 though pretty much everyone is slowed right down for the queue for the lights so pretty pointless really.
Just checked the current comparative fines and Norway is still give or take double what it is in OZ (NSW) If you are over 41km/h in Norway they dont even tell you how much youre gonna pay "heavy fine" 55km/h over and you go straight to jail.. no questions asked.. even if it's your first speeding offence. New South Wales 10 km/h and under $119 (£65) Exceed speed over 10 km/h $275 (£150) Exceed speed over 20 km/h $472 (£260) Exceed speed over 30 km/h $903 (£498) Exceed speed over 45 km/h $2,435 (£1, 342) Norway 1-5 km/h- 800kr (£75) 6-10 km/h- 2,100kr (£196) 11-15 km/h- 3,400kr (£355) 16-20 km/h- 4,700kr (£440) 21-25 km/h- 6,400kr (£600) 26-30 km/h- 8 500kr (£797) 31-35 km/h- 10 200kr (£956) 36-40 km/h- 10 650kr (£999) + 41 km/h and more- "heavy fine" and licence + 55km/h- Jail.. minimum 18 days.
According to Wikipedia, Norway is the safest in the world, I think, with the UK second, based on deaths per population and deaths per vehicle. Considering the fact that the Norwegian road system is particularly modern, and ours is particular ancient, I think we come out well
I don't have a problem with them as the speed limits are there for a reason. So many people have an entitlement view towards driving, where they get upset that they have to control their lump of metal (that is capable of moving at very high speeds) in accordance with a well defined set of rules for the safety of themselves and others around them. When I see some tool speeding through town (usually trying to draw attention to themselves and prove something), I genuinely want then to crash and die. Also, the police are so woefully underfunded, that I don't mind them increasing their budget this way. Of course it probably doesn't actually go on extra police resources.
Totally agree RP, but why are they always located to catch the likely innocent motorist who's dropping their speed slightly late from 50 to 30 rather than in the middle of a 30mph zone where the real dangerous drivers will show up? It's just a money making exercise IMO.
Aiding Diamonds attempt to turn this section into Petrolheads forum, there was a speed trap van on the Chesham Road in Bovingdon this evening. Parked up just before The Mount turn off travelling towards Bovvy. Must be a big retirement coming up that they’re raising funds for!
I'm not saying this to be confrontational or smug but there were 27,130 people killed or seriously injured on the roads in the UK in the year to June 2017. The problem dwarfs knife crime in its life-changing impact for families up and down the country every day. Speeding will have been a significant factor in many of these collisions. (It used to be the #1 cause and responsible for approx 25% of the deaths - I don't have the facts for 2017 tbh but assuming similar). The roads are far far safer in the UK than in the majority of the world and I support the use of speed cameras as part of that. Have the sightings decreased speed, albeit even temporarily - if so great.
Maybe a correlation between the habitual phone user who uses their phone while doing 60 on a bend and the person who immediately pulls it out at the lights? I dont totally agree with the law tbh, but it only has to prevent one fatality to be worth it.
In my part of the world roads seemed plagued by large stretches of A road with 50 mph or sometimes 40 mph limits for miles and miles for roadworks that are simply not roadworks they never seem to lift the restrictions. 40 is ridiculous and average speed cameras are frustrating
In the first 15 minutes of the Speed Awareness course I had to attend (36mph in the 30mph "ZONE" between the Met Police Social Club and the Costco entrance) bombarded us with loads of these stats. Obviously works as over 80% of the attendees were on the 2nd or 3rd course (who was a Hari Krishna monk/whatever).
I'm not sure which way you are angling that reply. Here's a stat you wont have heard on the course....I personally know three people killed on the roads (2 due to speed, the other not) and a fourth is even worse, my cousin has had countless operations over 20 years to enable her to walk again. She had young kids at the time who she couldn't even hold/cuddle for a number of years. Speeding destroys lives. I appreciate this is making me sound like a zealot but these experiences have led me to embrace a zero tolerance on speeding. Until folk get the message, like 99% have on drink driving, we wont be able to cut the numbers killed by a significant amount. whether by cutting speeding or distraction, e.g., phones, or both.
I was a bit "miffed" at where and when (and how much) I was done (for). I went into the course ready to treat it with a great deal of disdain. The first thing that fuelled this was when the two presenters asked how many people had been on a speed awareness course before with a show of hands - well over 3/4 of the audience. The facts that we were bombarded with in the first quarter of an hour were terrifying - they should have stopped anyone using the excuse "...but I was only going..." or ever driving with a "heavy foot". I was disgusted that so many of my fellow class - mates actually used it as a badge of honour that they had attended more than one of these courses. HTH.
This would seem to support your experience. https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/speeding-m6-toll-driver-late-8573969
That's particularly true as there are the square root of bugger all people in Norway. They should be able to avoid hitting each other. In the UK I'm definitely on the patient and polite side of the motoring coin. That translates as a 'maniac' in Scandinavia. They have little need to launch themselves into brief gaps in oncoming traffic as we do. So yes the UK has very good driving standards, but still some appalling arseholes who the Police have every right to target.
One of the few problems I had when I worked in Norway was that every time I paused the cars stopped to let me cross the road....even if I didn't want to. They do seem to be less hassled and impatient to get wherever they are going to. I'm not sure if it is the less busy roads or just they have a more balanced approach to driving and life in general.
Got it. Thanks. I thought the speed awareness course was only ever offered once, or once in five years, something like that. I totally agree - how on earth did people not get the message the first time as the facts are startling.
Can't argue with a word you say and I think we all know speeding kills. What irks me is that I'd like to see a stat that shows how many people were hurt or killed in the zones where 50mph limits become 30mph, usually a completely dead area with no houses, pavements and well lit. The Police aren't trying to make the roads safer, they're simply raising money, hence having traps where people simply don't go but drivers are always caught out.
The problem the Old Bill have is that I believe* speed cameras, either fixed or mobile, are only legally allowed to be sited where a certain percentage of drivers are travelling greater than 10% above the speed limit. That's what those double black cables a couple of feet apart are on roads - a potential site for cameras. They are also only allowed to be sited where there is clear view for xxx metres. This combination is why I believe you see them most frequently where you have. But their effect is more far reaching, I wager every driver moderates their speed for the day, or days, or weeks after a blitz in their area. As for their motives - the money is collected by, but doesn't swell the coffers of, the Police. It goes to the Treasury. I dont think you're alone in thinking the opposite tbf. * I dont have the facts to hand but I believe this is right. Happy to be corrected if not.
Yes, I was in the far North of Sweden crossing a mostly deserted road and heard a screech of tyres. A car (the only one on the road, travelling slowly) about 50m away has come to a sudden halt. I looked for a while to try to see the creature it must have stopped for and eventually realised it was me. Extraordinary as I would have long been over the other side by the time it got to me.
