Speed camera's seem to be the major talking point in most discussions regarding speed enforcement and motoring journals, so I thought you might be interested in an interview that was recently given by an old colleague of mine Malcolm Collis in Thames Valley for the internal Thames Valley Police newspaper "Thames View"
The interview was on the basis of answers being put to specific comments or questions commonly asked by members of the public.
Please bear in mind that I am not giving any opinion myself, simply stating what has been said by the person resonsible for specialist Roads policing.
Q. Why enforce the limits at night?
A. Becuase the collision rate is four times higher than during the day and nearly a fifth of fatalities in the TVP area happen between midnight and 6AM when there is only a fraction of traffic on the road!
Q. It is inappropriate speed that kills!
A. So who should be the one to decide what is and in not appropriate? Shall we leave it down to individuals? maybe not: Let the experts decide, the engineers in the councils working to safety guidelines!
Q. Speed doesn't cause accidents?
A. Agreed, but traffic research laboratory work tells us that a 1 MPH increase in speed is associated with a ten per cent increase in the risk of being involved in a fatality. About 95% of all crashes involve an element of driver error and invariably it will be more than one factor that creates a crash, speed often being one of them. The biggest problem with speed is down to physics - the higher the impact speed the more it hurts.
Q. I got a ticket for doing 33 MPH!
A. This is not the case. The Association of Chief Police officers has produced guidelines for speed enforcement which starts at 35 MPH and Thames Valley Police is marginally over that!
Q. I didn't know what the limit was?
A. Work is being done to promote what is called intelligent roads. These somehow give clues about the limit to those drivers who are trying to comply, but got caught out when, for example they have missed a limit change, because the signs are placed at cluttered features and the driver is concentrating on manoeuvering etc.
Q. Camer's should be placed where we can see them!
A. Highly visible camera's only modify driver behaviour around the camera. From a road safety point of view we want drivers to comply with the limit all the time and only hidden camera's will do that. As an analogy, would a store detective be better off with a yellow jacket so the thieves knew where they were?
Q. Inaccurate speedos!
A. Legislation referring to 10% accuracy went out years ago. Modern cars have speedos which are allowed a tolerance that can only read fast, not slow. So, if your speedo says 30 you will be doing 30 MPH or less but not faster.
Q. Enforcement vans in bus stops!
A. We have permission to stop everywhere we do and in the case of bus stops, we have agreement from the relevant bus company. What we are lacking in many authority areas is for them to action our request for "Police Only" type markings.
Q. Cameras are just cash cows for the Police!
A. If that were true, we'd have top of the range BMW's for traffic cars! In fact the treasury gets all of the money generated by the cameras. The Police, along with the other 12 partners only get back what they spend and they can only spend on Government approved things which are linked with speed cameras. The force would be delighted if it could spend it on driver education, road safety campaigns, road safety enrforcement, speed indication devices, enforcement equipment for TVP and a host of other initatives to do with road safety, but the rules specifically disqualify us from doing so!
Q. Everyone is against speed enforcement!
A. Wrong! 80% support camera enforcement. What gives the impression that the vast majority are against cameras is a vociferous minority who feel that they should be above the law and allowed to go at a speed that they deem appropriate, and the coverage this issue gets in the media.
There are more than two million people living in Thames Valley. TVP doesn't get 1 million letters complaining about our enforcement regime, in fact we only get a handfull each week, so where is the majority?
What we do get inundated with is complaints about lack of enforcement and speeding in communities.
The basic fact is, fatal accidents are bottoming out, serious accidents are dropping as are slight injuries but we still need to do more to reduce that awful toll.
Traffic enforcement is about road safety and saving lives and we are making a contribution to the casualty reduction!
So there you have it, not my view, but i hope you find it interesting!
The interview was on the basis of answers being put to specific comments or questions commonly asked by members of the public.
Please bear in mind that I am not giving any opinion myself, simply stating what has been said by the person resonsible for specialist Roads policing.
Q. Why enforce the limits at night?
A. Becuase the collision rate is four times higher than during the day and nearly a fifth of fatalities in the TVP area happen between midnight and 6AM when there is only a fraction of traffic on the road!
Q. It is inappropriate speed that kills!
A. So who should be the one to decide what is and in not appropriate? Shall we leave it down to individuals? maybe not: Let the experts decide, the engineers in the councils working to safety guidelines!
Q. Speed doesn't cause accidents?
A. Agreed, but traffic research laboratory work tells us that a 1 MPH increase in speed is associated with a ten per cent increase in the risk of being involved in a fatality. About 95% of all crashes involve an element of driver error and invariably it will be more than one factor that creates a crash, speed often being one of them. The biggest problem with speed is down to physics - the higher the impact speed the more it hurts.
Q. I got a ticket for doing 33 MPH!
A. This is not the case. The Association of Chief Police officers has produced guidelines for speed enforcement which starts at 35 MPH and Thames Valley Police is marginally over that!
Q. I didn't know what the limit was?
A. Work is being done to promote what is called intelligent roads. These somehow give clues about the limit to those drivers who are trying to comply, but got caught out when, for example they have missed a limit change, because the signs are placed at cluttered features and the driver is concentrating on manoeuvering etc.
Q. Camer's should be placed where we can see them!
A. Highly visible camera's only modify driver behaviour around the camera. From a road safety point of view we want drivers to comply with the limit all the time and only hidden camera's will do that. As an analogy, would a store detective be better off with a yellow jacket so the thieves knew where they were?
Q. Inaccurate speedos!
A. Legislation referring to 10% accuracy went out years ago. Modern cars have speedos which are allowed a tolerance that can only read fast, not slow. So, if your speedo says 30 you will be doing 30 MPH or less but not faster.
Q. Enforcement vans in bus stops!
A. We have permission to stop everywhere we do and in the case of bus stops, we have agreement from the relevant bus company. What we are lacking in many authority areas is for them to action our request for "Police Only" type markings.
Q. Cameras are just cash cows for the Police!
A. If that were true, we'd have top of the range BMW's for traffic cars! In fact the treasury gets all of the money generated by the cameras. The Police, along with the other 12 partners only get back what they spend and they can only spend on Government approved things which are linked with speed cameras. The force would be delighted if it could spend it on driver education, road safety campaigns, road safety enrforcement, speed indication devices, enforcement equipment for TVP and a host of other initatives to do with road safety, but the rules specifically disqualify us from doing so!
Q. Everyone is against speed enforcement!
A. Wrong! 80% support camera enforcement. What gives the impression that the vast majority are against cameras is a vociferous minority who feel that they should be above the law and allowed to go at a speed that they deem appropriate, and the coverage this issue gets in the media.
There are more than two million people living in Thames Valley. TVP doesn't get 1 million letters complaining about our enforcement regime, in fact we only get a handfull each week, so where is the majority?
What we do get inundated with is complaints about lack of enforcement and speeding in communities.
The basic fact is, fatal accidents are bottoming out, serious accidents are dropping as are slight injuries but we still need to do more to reduce that awful toll.
Traffic enforcement is about road safety and saving lives and we are making a contribution to the casualty reduction!
So there you have it, not my view, but i hope you find it interesting!
