|
Amen to that
|
But if the car HAD been marked, chances are, the offences would of been prevented.
Although, i will agree, it's good to know that there are still, a few, traffic cops around!!
VB
|
But if the car HAD been marked, chances are, the offences would of been prevented. Although, i will agree, it's good to know that there are still, a few, traffic cops around!! VB
Whilst people's driving habits improve for a few minutes when they see a marked car, its likely that just being pulled over by an unmarked car for a lecture is going to result in a lengyhy improvement.
--
I read often, only post occasionally
|
This is an excellent idea.
They should go for something totally unexpected, like a Mini Cooper S, a TT or an Alfa 147. All of these should be fast enough in the right guise to pull nutters. No one is going to expect these to be police cars and will tailgate them, cut them up and annoy them much more than say, a blue Volvo estate or White Vectra.
Saw a brand new MINI cut up a 40 tonne lorry on the motorway tonight (not me, I hasten to add). Now that's extreme bravery or extreme stupidity, or both.
I'd even suggest a tenner into the local police fund for every nutter they catch. Money better raised than a shed load of cameras.
--
Lee
MINI adventure in progress
|
They should go for something totally unexpected, like a Mini Cooper S, a TT or an Alfa 147.
Saw a Skoda Octavia in full livery near Richmond today. That was unexpected.
Hawkeye
-----------------------------
Stranger in a strange land
|
|
..and I saw a Lexus LS400 in London. Makes a change from the Omegas.
|
|
|
|
Skoda Octavia on the East Lancs last week, unmarked except 1 inch high letters on the boot saying "police driver training"
|
>>police driver training>>
Very common in fact. One of my mates is a traffic cop - when he was undergoing training some years ago on the M62 he was doing speeds varying from 50 to 120mph according to instructions.
For most of the time a Rover driver kept pace with him and, eventually, it was decided to pull him over.
Turned out he thought because someone else was doing these speeds it was OK for him to do so as well.
Given a firm telling off and sent on his way...:-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hmm, what's happened to all the complaints about stealthy enforcement?
|
|
is the tail of the police pulling cars according to snooker rules (ie red/blue etc) true ?
|
is the tail of the police pulling cars according to snooker rules (ie red/blue etc) true ?
Yes, but only when its quiet. They would pull over cars out of sequence if there was a good reason, even though it meant ending their break.
--
I read often, only post occasionally
|
|
In ten years as a Police Officer, then last six in traffic/fast response I have never played 'snooker'. There's fer too little time for such things.
|
|
|
|
Hmm, what's happened to all the complaints about stealthy enforcement?
Overtaken by awakening: the enforcement of many non-speeding offences has become so stealthy we couldn't see it any more!
|
Overall this is much more effective in improving road safety than using speed cameras to catch motorists doing 31mph in a 30mph zone.
It used to be done on a much wider scale until the advent of speed cameras and the reduction in traffic police numbers.
The stupidity of this measure was shown in my town a few days ago when someone was killed in a hit and run by a drunk driver.
The driver eventually hit a wall and was trying to get away until several people prevented him from doing so.
However, traffic police had to be brought in from nearly 20 miles away to deal with the incident and assist several local section cars' crews and this wasted valuable time.
Yet I live in a well populated area. As far as I can make out there are just three traffic cars to cover a vast stretch, including a considerable number of motorway miles.
|
|
|
|
>>>>>>>>Hmm, what's happened to all the complaints about stealthy enforcement?
My GB driving is limited to mere annual trips, so I may be raising my head above the parapet with such ingenuous remarks.
Wouldn't it be better to have visible police cars instead of unmarked ones? The only difference is the cost of the paint job.
Someone mentioned in another thread about the proliferation of black-and-whites on US highways and how that noticeably curbs bad behaviour. I know myself that everyone gets very well behaved when they see a clutch of those big old Crown Victorias with gold stars on the doors and chaps and chapesses wearing Smokey Bear hats and Ray-bans.
Seems to me counter-productive to let the guy commit the offence THEN pull him over. Is the objective to puff up the statistics/boost revenue or merely to remind us the Stasi are still out there?
Doesn't deterrence figure anywhere in the book of best practice?
|
to let the guy commit the offence THEN pull him over>>
Such people almost certainly wouldn't even be aware that there was a marked police vehicle in the vicinity.
It's not a case of letting someone commit an offence and then pulling him/her over, but catching them in the act.
The chances of this happening these days has been drastically reduced, hence the falling standards of good driving behaviour.
It also explains why so many drivers still use mobile phones or exceed speed limits in my area with impunity.
|
|
|
I think the answer to your question is up above, a marked car curbs behaviour for those that can see it, then as soon as you or it are out of sight, the Bonehead Rally can get back on track.
The difference here is that they seem to be targetting the kind of behaviour that triggers either an escalation of aggressive driving or panics less assertive drivers into making ill-considered moves. That seems a lot more worthwhile than picking up people doing a steady 80-85.
Question to the snooker people - where do silver cars sit on the colour chart - is that why they're so popular nowadays?
|
|
|
|
Hmm, what's happened to all the complaints about stealthy enforcement?
There is a distinction between the stealthy enforcement of, on the one hand, driving that is clearly unusual and evidently unsafe and, on the other, driving that is not evidently unsafe and is within the normal envelope of most drivers.
The unmarked car described above falls into the former category and is not objectionable.
A hidden speed camera enforcing an inexplicably low limit falls into the latter category and is objectionable.
Road safety and traffic enforcement are not black and white issues, NoWheels.
|
|
|
Hmm, what's happened to all the complaints about stealthy enforcement?
Nice one NW. :-)
I don't think I'll ever understand why anyone would object to enforcement of any law, whether by stealth or not.
|
[banging head against the brickwall]
because even though it is fashionable to hate cameras, they're not actually the problem - the law (frequently silly speed limit) being enforced is.
Whereas with idiots on motorways, nobody has an issue with the law which is being enforced and therefore the stealthiness, or otherwise, of the enforcement is not seen as offensive.
If it wasn't such a trendy thing to decry speed cameras, then people might actually take the time to work out what the problem actually is.
|
[banging head against the brickwall] because even though it is fashionable to hate cameras, they're not actually the problem - the law (frequently silly speed limit) being enforced is. Whereas with idiots on motorways, nobody has an issue with the law which is being enforced and therefore the stealthiness, or otherwise, of the enforcement is not seen as offensive. If it wasn't such a trendy thing to decry speed cameras, then people might actually take the time to work out what the problem actually is.
Sorry - still don't get it. The problem is enforcing a law? Is that because some drivers don't agree with some limits? I can't think of an example of a 'silly' speed limit anywhere I've driven. I think speed cameras are a good thing and can't see what the objection is. I read loads of arguments against them, but none seem logical to me.
|
|
What Mark means is that it's politically correct to think speed cameras are a bad thing. Try saying you like them in a crowded pub and wait for the tumbleweed to roll past. And that political correctness is stifling the real debate.
|
|
|
Try changing my line..
- the law (frequently silly speed limit) being enforced is.
to
- the law which is being enforced is.
Unless you are being deliberately confused.
|
I have to have ongoing training in my job, and regular re-assessment. Why do we not do the same thing with drivers?
If there is a rash of lathe-related injuries, the HSE looks at the wider problem, not just at slowing the lathe down.
We have a problem now with some drivers being 100 ft from the car in front. We can reduce the injury rate, either by reducing the speed or by increasing the training. I have a very strong belief which is the better thing to do.
Why do you think that it is now more dangerous to be a 20,000 mile a year driver than to be a coal miner? We should bring in mechanisms to improve driving standards on a regular basis.
|
|
|
Try changing my line.. - the law (frequently silly speed limit) being enforced is. to - the law which is being enforced is. Unless you are being deliberately confused.
Absolutely not Mark. This is genuine confusion I assure you.
|
Perhaps I can help. Here's an example.
It's 11pm. I'm driving round the variable-speed-limit section of the M25. There are cameras everywhere. The road is quiet and empty. The limit (set from a control centre) is 40 because that's how it was set during the earlier rush hour. It didn't get unset for some reaason, and now still reads 40, rather than the (/) that it should be.
40 is horribly slow for an empty and safe section of motorway, but if I go any faster I will be flashed.
Mark's point is that it isn't the fact that the cameras are there that are causing the problem. The law says 40 and the law is the law so I must adhere to it. But the law here is quite clearly wrong. They don't need to lose the cameras - they just need the numpty in the control centre to set the signs to NSL again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Agree agree agree....... if the authorities were serious about reducing casualties they wouldnt be afraid of a having a root and branch review of our limits. EG 80 mph on motorways (reduced in poor weather) 20 mph on roads near schools at the start/end of school day and even 40 mph limit on the same road at midnight. Also 15 or 20 mph limit on residential roads.
|
|
|
|
> I don't think I'll ever understand why anyone would object
> to enforcement of any law, whether by stealth or not.
I don't think I'll ever understand why anyone would accept enforcement of laws which were clearly unjust or immoral. Should people have objected to the enforcement of racial segregation laws in South Africa or America in the middle of the last century, or should they have accepted it because it was the law of the land at the time.
(Apologies in advance, I realise I've taken a big jump in comparing speeding with Apartheid, but it's been a long day at work.) :-)
Back to motorcars, it seems a popular unmarked (and indeed marked) Police car is now the Skoda Octavia vRS. They are cheap, fast, reliable and most people don't know what they are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
