Useful speed prevention or annoying busy-bodies?

Hades · 8 May 2018 at 11:45

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-43841859

My area has had volunteer speed monitors for a few years (only in the summer - surprise surprise). Every few weeks volunteers will stand on a road with hi-vis jackets pointing a speed gun at traffic. They note down any 'offenders' and the police then send you a warning. It seems that if you get enough warnings then the police pay you a visit and your number plate may go on a 'database'.

My understanding is that without the speed being recorded by a calibrated device, used by a trained professional, then such evidence is invalid. Given that the evidence can not be admitted to court (I assume - but correct me if I am wrong) then what right do the police have to send a 'warning letter' or pay you a visit? You are innocent until proven guilty and this is inadmissable evidence.

I rarely speed and certainly don't do so intentionally nowadays. I can see that these projects may help reduce speeding. But for reasons I can't really explain they really annoy me. The first time I went back to film them to show my wife and they really didn't like that (tough - I carried on as they are in a public place filming others).

Am I being irrational? I think I am being irrational over it, as surely it is a good thing. But I find the practice morally questionable even though I know I shouldn't.

Sui · 8 May 2018 at 11:59

Meh, I don't mind them when they appear, as far as I can tell most seem to be retired.

If it helps people not going excessively quickly in 30mph zones then I don't see the harm in it, if they gather enough information the council might actually realise there is an issue with speeding on some roads.

I assume the guns would be a calibrated device which is provided by the police force?

mccarf · 8 May 2018 at 12:00

Seems like a waste of resources to me. Rather than have one guy in a van they now have two community support officers wages to pay and all they're doing is writing down registrations. Surely considering they go through (what I assume) expensive training this is a complete waste of their time. I find it silly that there's been such a huge focus on speeding, when other bad driving practices seem to be getting completely ignored.

paradigm · 8 May 2018 at 12:14

Sui said:
If it helps people not going excessively quickly in 30mph zones then I don't see the harm in it

I would agree, but the only place they tend to sit locally, is at the end of a 30 that's about to change to NSL, literally stood just after the last property, where all the empty fields begin. Oh noes they might catch someone who got on the throttle 20 yards early, won't someone please think of the sheep. :rolleyes:

Put these outside of schools, nursing homes, shopping centres, sure, no issues from me, infact I'd applaud their efforts to safety and awareness. Put them 5 yards before an NSL sign, and no, they are just busy-bodies looking for some kind of power trip or high horse.

MikeTheNative · 8 May 2018 at 12:30

mccarf said:
Seems like a waste of resources to me. Rather than have one guy in a van they now have two community support officers wages to pay and all they're doing is writing down registrations. Surely considering they go through (what I assume) expensive training this is a complete waste of their time. I find it silly that there's been such a huge focus on speeding, when other bad driving practices seem to be getting completely ignored.

I don't think they are getting paid to do it.

LizardKing · 8 May 2018 at 12:36

I'm all for them in the right places, ie not just before/after limit changes. its a low cost preventative initiative.

I tend to see them around little villages that sit in-between 2 nsl roads and if i lived there constantly seeing people disregard the safety of myself/neighbours et al then i'd probably do the same. If it makes people be more aware of there actions then i cant see any issue. Afterall if the police come a knocking then its going to be deserving even if they dont have anything other than a stern word.

Nasher · 8 May 2018 at 13:09

Expect speed cameras to pop up in the areas they visit. Normally they are getting the average speed of the area to make a case to have them installed (I guess it needs to look profitable...) :/

If you really want to wind them up, drop a gear and then boot it just after they take the reading. Watch them turn round looking un-pleased

andicole0 · 8 May 2018 at 13:22

They don't need speed cameras if they have the right level of volunteer. They have the right to report you to the police and if a Police officer is present as well prosecutions can be made directly. Speed assessment with one paid policeman is cheap.
I generally smile at them with a little wave so they don't know if I'm being nice or sarcastic!
Andi.

Nasher · 8 May 2018 at 13:26

They can't do anything if they catch you speeding, only the police can and it has to be them using the equipment. Otherwise it will never stick if your appeal.

andicole0 · 8 May 2018 at 13:29

Nasher said:
They can't do anything if they catch you speeding, only the police can and it has to be them using the equipment. Otherwise it will never stick if your appeal.

Precisely, without a policeman you can only be reported but they do have police officers with them at times and then a prosecution can be made.
Interestingly ones near us stand right next to an electronic speed sign that tells you how fast your going as well.
Andi.

MooMoo444 · 8 May 2018 at 13:31

I appreciate them making the roads safer. When I see one I often put my phone down for a sec to give them a wave.

paradigm · 8 May 2018 at 13:51

Nasher said:
Expect speed cameras to pop up in the areas they visit. Normally they are getting the average speed of the area to make a case to have them installed (I guess it needs to look profitable...) :/

Back to my example above, the area in which these old dears frequent already has 3 cameras within 500 yards of each other. Making them (the speed warriors) all the more pointless.

Kenai · 8 May 2018 at 14:01

Because I'm sad, I enjoy dropping into 2nd as I drive past, so they get all excited having heard 4000rpm approaching only to be disappointed that I'm not speeding

Burnsy2023 · 8 May 2018 at 14:58

Nasher said:
They can't do anything if they catch you speeding, only the police can and it has to be them using the equipment. Otherwise it will never stick if your appeal.

If the volunteers have had the appropriate training for enforcement, then there's nothing precluding them gathering evidence for tickets. The equipment they already use tends to be the same as police officers use so are calibrated.

I think the only thing stopping them being used evidentially is the training being approved and extra training for statements and evidential process. That and that the police don't want them issuing tickets for political reasons as has been highlighted here.

My point is that it doesn't need to be a constable to be used for prosecutions.

Hotwired · 8 May 2018 at 15:05

The comedy of these forums.

One thread talking about people talking the **** and speeding down their road.

Another about people trying to discourage speeding and much mockery at their efforts.

Bottom line is there are some people who love abusing speed limits when they know they won't be punished.

andicole0 · 8 May 2018 at 16:46

paradigm said:
Back to my example above, the area in which these old dears frequent already has 3 cameras within 500 yards of each other. Making them (the speed warriors) all the more pointless.

They may not of course be working or just trigger a flash and no photo.
Andi.

Nasher · 8 May 2018 at 17:00

Burnsy2023 said:
If the volunteers have had the appropriate training for enforcement, then there's nothing precluding them gathering evidence for tickets. The equipment they already use tends to be the same as police officers use so are calibrated.

I think the only thing stopping them being used evidentially is the training being approved and extra training for statements and evidential process. That and that the police don't want them issuing tickets for political reasons as has been highlighted here.

My point is that it doesn't need to be a constable to be used for prosecutions.

But there are the legalities of it. A word from a private citizen vs another isn't enough to convict someone. Even PCSO's can't do a lot about traffic offenses, other than just report it.

Burnsy2023 · 8 May 2018 at 17:32

Nasher said:
But there are the legalities of it. A word from a private citizen vs another isn't enough to convict someone. Even PCSO's can't do a lot about traffic offenses, other than just report it.

The legalities are purely what I have stated previously. As for PCSOs, there are still some traffic PCSOs who can deal with traffic offences. Another example is the camera vans which are usually operated by Police staff, not police officers.

Hades · 8 May 2018 at 17:50

Burnsy2023 said:
If the volunteers have had the appropriate training for enforcement, then there's nothing precluding them gathering evidence for tickets. The equipment they already use tends to be the same as police officers use so are calibrated.

I think the only thing stopping them being used evidentially is the training being approved and extra training for statements and evidential process. That and that the police don't want them issuing tickets for political reasons as has been highlighted here.

My point is that it doesn't need to be a constable to be used for prosecutions.

The problem is that it would be easy to put up a defence against a civilian speed gun. The civilian would have to prove they had the right training, that their training was up to date, that the equipment was calibrated correctly, that it was used correctly on the day, that the chain of evidence was secure and unbroken, that the civilian operator is unbiased, etc. When a person and a police officer disagree I imagine the judge would tend to put more weight on the evidence of the police officer. but when it's one civilians word against another then I don't see how a judge could put more weight on one of them. So the supporting evidence would have to be deciding factor and as I just outlined it would be fairly simple to mount a reasonable defence against it.

I can understand why an employed camera van operator would be able to provide reliable and trusted evidence. But there are just too many weaknesses in a prosecution from a volunteer holding a speed camera.

Burnsy2023 · 8 May 2018 at 18:15

Hades said:
The civilian would have to prove they had the right training, that their training was up to date, that the equipment was calibrated correctly, that it was used correctly on the day, that the chain of evidence was secure and unbroken, that the civilian operator is unbiased, etc.

Indeed, but none of that is insurmountable.

Hades said:
When a person and a police officer disagree I imagine the judge would tend to put more weight on the evidence of the police officer. but when it's one civilians word against another then I don't see how a judge could put more weight on one of them. So the supporting evidence would have to be deciding factor and as I just outlined it would be fairly simple to mount a reasonable defence against it.

It's not one person's word against another when you have them measured using approved equipment, trained to the required standard and evidenced properly. If done as trained, this is not a difficult task.

Hades said:
But there are just too many weaknesses in a prosecution from a volunteer holding a speed camera.

To be fair, prosecutions from volunteers holding speed guns happen all the time very successfully from Special Constables.