Who was at the wheel" case to be heard. 566

Adrian

Another aspect to the misplaced emphasis on speed cameras is the effect it has on a poor-dangerous driver. I have an example. A large post office truck who was coming up behind my daily in the early hours while on my way to work. It was clear by the high approaching speed and the speed with which he continued following overtaking me, that he was not conforming to any known safety margin. I estimate he was probably achieving 70 in a 30 on a regular basis. The roads were dark and often wet. On one occasion he went past me and shortly afterwards he slowed right down for a camera and then tore off. The camera was having no effect on his driver behaviour, in fact it probably gave him a false sense of priority in so far as he may have got an unconscious message that this was the only dangerous piece of road on his journey. In my view the position where the camera was sited may have been the BEST place to speed if you were going to do so at this time of day. It is a village going past shops. All the shops were closed. The road is lit and there are no turnings. VIsibility was much higher than any of the dark winding roads around it where you may not see somebody walking, a person on a bicycle or some other hazard. The job that needs doing cannot be achieved by a camera. What is needed is an unmarked poilce car, or even a marked car parked discretely somewhere on route. Then he would be caught. The one absolute certainty for this driver is that the car he is coming up on, or a car behind him, will definately NOT be a police car. The police have deserted known conventional methods of traffic policing in favour of cash generating tests of speed in specific locations. His estimation of danger needs to be challeneged, apart from a fine, at the very least he needs a lecture, and I would also suggest the Post Office needs to be challenged to see why their driver should feel he's in a one man Grand Prix. Has he been told to "get over their and be back by....?".

Turk182