Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gas_Up_Lets_Go
I'd much prefer to have traffic officers on the roads though.
|
I'd agree with that. Yes, once they have established the precedent of two photos matching the same bike, it will probably be taken by the court as routine, although I still think that a good lawyer ought to be able to introduce enough 'reasonable doubt'.
I don't ride stupid fast, and I haven't much patience for those that do. But I do exceed the speed limit on a regular basis. I stick to 20 and 30 limits religiously because I can see a good reason for them. Others I treat on their merits, and try to ride to the conditions rather then an arbitrary number on a stick. I don't buy the argument about a child running out, though. I am hyper-observant for that kind of thing, but usually when a camera van gets you, you are still a long way away from it, and concentrating on the hazards in front of you, not a strangely-parked white van half a mile away.
I have no issue with sensible speed limits, enforced with common sense and discretion, but you might be able to guess that I have little time for the 'safety partnership' vans, which seem to me to be a revenue generator and nothing else. If they worked, how come the KSI rate (which has been declining since the 60s) stopped declining around 1990, when speed became seemingly the only thing the authorities cared about?
Here's an example from my own experience. Mid-morning, in the car (I was on a business trip) on the M4 Eastbound near Membury Services, about 10 years ago. Long set of road works with a 50 limit, which I and everyone around me obeyed. Road works end, road is clear, but I didn't see any derestriction signs. I started to speed up slightly but cautiously, but most of the cars around me got back to 70 pretty quickly. Something told me not to follow them. And sure enough,
well over a mile further down the road, and over the brow of a hill, were the NSL signs and just before them a camera van on the hard shoulder. They must have caught literally thousands that day, although not me. I considered the positioning of the speed signage and camera a deliberate attempt to confuse motorists and to 'catch' as many as possible, almost like a game. That brings the whole deal into disrepute.
Lots of studies (some by the police themselves) have shown that 'exceeding the posted speed limit' (as distinct from 'excessive speed') is a factor in a tiny minority of accidents. But when all you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail. If they seriously wanted to reduce casualties, they would scrap all speed cameras except at specific, hazardous locations, and put coppers back in patrol cars to monitor, educate and if necessary prosecute those who are posing a danger to others. But that doesn't raise revenue, of course.
Sorry for the rant. I am still glad you didn't get a nasty fine and points for something which (from your description) was clearly a reasonable and safe bit of riding. I'll shut up now.