65 yr old thought he could fool the cameras / police and lives to regret it!
2 months in the jail for using a speed camera jammer
£1000 costs, 6 month driving ban
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-31604908
|
|
NB. "The court heard Stephenson had been issued with a caution for using a similar device in 2010"
|
|
Serves him right. Sentences like this (and the publicity) are essential to deter everyone from doing it.
|
Spartacus. Well done him. We should have a whip.
I feel sorry for the officers who have to do this carp. Spending your working day catching people for mostly trivial victimless arbitrary "offences" would depress the hell out of me, but good luck to anyone who wants to stick one up the system.
You may infer that I do not think that any purpose has been served by my being penalised for doing 38 and 47 mph to nobody's detriment.
Good morning:)
|
The guy deserves jail for being a brainless prick.
The actual offence I don't mind, fit one by all means to prevent the odd chance you may otherwise get unfairly nicked.
But to do it once and get caught, and then do it repeatedly afterwards (you know these things have fired off) - taunting the old bill in effect, means you need a damn good kicking for taking the pish and being arrogant. Or just plain stupid.
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 26 Feb 15 at 11:31
|
>> The guy deserves jail for being a brainless prick.
>>
>>
>> The actual offence I don't mind, fit one by all means to prevent the odd
>> chance you may otherwise get unfairly nicked.
Not one of those cases where Plod might be thought to be lurking for easy pickings on a safe road Zero. The A59 between Skipton and Harrogate has one of the worst accident records in the UK .
www.eurorap.org/media/2364/library_0904sundaytimes[1].pdf
The A629 has its blackspots too
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 26 Feb 15 at 11:46
|
Something that can happen to anyone in a moment of inattention. How dangerous the bit of road is has nothing to do with it.
I'm on the geezer's side because I despise speed cameras and agree with Manatee that operating one must be soul-destroying work for a proper copper. But using a speed camera detector that can be detected itself is a bit vainglorious and immature. So the short sharp shock may work.
|
>> I feel sorry for the officers who have to do this carp. Spending your working
>> day catching people for mostly trivial victimless arbitrary "offences" would depress the hell out of
>> me,
I know cops and ex-cops and I'd say they enjoy catching people speeding, in the same way some people enjoy shooting and killing things.
|
Don't see the problem catching people who put others at risk.
Many on here will disagree but maybe that is a reflection on their view of their own importance and their decision not to comply with the set of rules we have all agreed (via parliament) to live to.
|
>> that is a reflection on their view of their own importance
don't think it's about a view of one's own importance.
If I choose to exceed a speed limit in a quiet road situation I am not saying I am more important than anyone else, just I want to go quicker and it's not putting anyone else in danger by doing it.
If I get caught then
a. it's still the law and if I didn't see the camera / van / policeman then maybe it wasn't a good place to speed after all.
b. it's a fair cop I know the rules & chose to take a chance on being caught, no complaints.
c. bound to happen sooner or later
|
>>it's not putting anyone else in danger by doing it.
In your opinion.
>> bound to happen sooner or later
Is that kill someone ?
|
I don't think anyone could condone "speeding" but it does seem that mobile enforcement is often carried out in areas that are likely to produce the most number of hits, by dint of people seeing the limit as too low. You see a nice bit of road, they see a revenue opportunity.
I guess the opposite applies - in clearly hazardous areas, people are less likely to speed, so enforcement would not be cost-effective.
|
>> I guess the opposite applies - in clearly hazardous areas, people are less likely to
>> speed, so enforcement would not be cost-effective.
The traps that alerted police to this guy's activity were on the A59 between Skipton and Harrogate. On any metric using accident data it's an extremely hazardous road - one of the most dangerous in UK, see link I added upthread:
www.eurorap.org/media/2364/library_0904sundaytimes[1].pdf
The hazards though are not those of a built up area - schools, houses etc. The problem is a twisty road rising and falling between river valleys, criss/crossed with minor roads with the hagnet of both traversing and providing access to beautiful and popular countryside.
Too many drivers either fail to see the hazards at all or treat them as a challenge. See also the A65 round Kirby Lonsdale and the Cat and Fiddle road, though motorcycles are perhaps more of an issue there wheras it's cars on the A59.
|
>> >> I guess the opposite applies - in clearly hazardous areas, people are less likely
>> to
>> >> speed, so enforcement would not be cost-effective.
>>
>> The traps that alerted police to this guy's activity were on the A59 between Skipton
>> and Harrogate. On any metric using accident data it's an extremely hazardous road - one
>> of the most dangerous in UK, see link I added upthread:
>>
>> www.eurorap.org/media/2364/library_0904sundaytimes[1].pdf
>>
I didn't see anything in that suggests illegally speeding caused the accidents discussed.
|
>> I didn't see anything in that suggests illegally speeding caused the accidents discussed.
>>
Nothing at all. No connection with waiting right turners being rear ended?
Clutching at straws you are.
|
>> >> I didn't see anything in that suggests illegally speeding caused the accidents discussed.
>> >>
>>
>> Nothing at all. No connection with waiting right turners being rear ended?
>>
Does it say the rear-ending drivers were exceeding the speed limit?
Guy was killed near me recently - he was pulling out of a side road 35 metres around a bend and was t-boned by a van doing 50. At the inquest the Poilce said no blame could be attached to the van driver as he was driving within the speed limit.
|
>> Does it say the rear-ending drivers were exceeding the speed limit?
No but neither does it say they were not. They were certainly driving too fast for the road and it's a reasonable surmise that some at least were exceeding the limit.
While some of the accidents were pull outs and might count as SMIDSY it's the rear enders I'm exemplifying. Anybody who knows the A59 will tell you that excess speed is a problem.
But if you want to ignore the issue and put blame 'somewhere else' don't let facts get in the way.
|
>> >> Does it say the rear-ending drivers were exceeding the speed limit?
>>
>> No but neither does it say they were not.
.....
>>Anybody who knows the A59 will tell you that excess speed
>> is a problem.
>>
>> But if you want to ignore the issue and put blame 'somewhere else' don't let
>> facts get in the way.
>>
Your definition of "facts" might need revisiting.
I've no doubt excess / inappropriate speed may have contributed to many of those accidents, but the point you're missing is the speed may not have been illegal, so wouldn't be moderated by all the speed enforcement in the world.
It's widely recognised that speed enforcement mostly catches the wrong people - habitually fast drivers are generally smart enough to avoid being caught, and blunt speed enforcement does nothing to catch careless or dangerous drivers.
Last edited by: Bill Payer on Fri 27 Feb 15 at 10:05
|
|
The way I look at speeding is using the government stopping distances (not valid if you are on the phone) the difference between 30 and 40 mph is about 12 metres. That is the difference of stopping either six metres before or after hitting the child that runs into the road, or the car that pulls out of a side turning.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 27 Feb 15 at 10:15
|
>> The way I look at speeding is using the government stopping distances (not valid if
>> you are on the phone) the difference between 30 and 40 mph is about 12
>> metres. That is the difference of stopping either six metres before or after hitting the
>> child that runs into the road, or the car that pulls out of a side
>> turning.
Way too simplistic.
First of all the govt stopping distances are hopelessly out of date.
Secondly, an aware driver can make a far better go at something than an unaware driver.
So your speed limit complying driver with mind in neutral versus your modestly over the limit driver who has his/her wits about them.
Advanced driving techniques, for example, have driver's look at reflections in shop windows or car body work; look for feet underneath a car; they anticipate what might happen, so actually notice the school sign or the ice cream van or the playing field... rather than blindly driving along oblivious.
That is how emergency serviced driver's get to break speed limits, they are trained to be considerably more aware.
|
>> Way too simplistic.
>>
Which is fine for the simplistic drivers who have done no driver training since their basic driving test.
|
>> The way I look at speeding is using the government stopping distances (not valid if
>> you are on the phone) the difference between 30 and 40 mph is about 12
>> metres. That is the difference of stopping either six metres before or after hitting the
>> child that runs into the road, or the car that pulls out of a side
>> turning.
So you are the one that drives everywhere at 30mph in case a child runs out or a car comes out of a side turning? Because that in effect is what you are saying.
|
>> In your opinion.
>>
you have a different opinion, congratulations
>> Is that kill someone ?
>>
same as you & anyone else, highly unlikely, only if I get it very wrong, like you & most others I am aware that a car can be a lethal weapon, refer to response 1
Please only respond to this if you never have and never will exceed a posted speed limit.
|
Commerdriver, you strike me as the type of person who thinks the rules don't apply to them and only to other people. A slightly arrogant mindset and one that has no place on our busy roads.
It's that attitude of invincibility that leads driver's to think they're the best in the World...right up to the point they crash causing damage, injury, death, insurance claims, loss of NCD, inconvenience, hire car charges, higher insurance for the rest of us etc etc etc.
|
>> Commerdriver, you strike me as the type of person who thinks the rules don't apply
>> to them and only to other people. A slightly arrogant mindset and one that has
>> no place on our busy roads.
don't know where you got that from
of course the rules apply to me hence the comment that if I get caught, no complaints.
nor do I think it's arrogance to think that I know when it is safe to go a few miles an hour above the limit if I am in a hurry for some reason.
Like, I suspect, many others on this forum I occasionally break a speed limit
Please don't be pretentious enough to think you know anything at all about me from a few words online, it says more about you than it does about me, I would say.
|
>> Don't see the problem catching people who put others at risk.
>>
>> Many on here will disagree but maybe that is a reflection on their view of
>> their own importance and their decision not to comply with the set of rules we
>> have all agreed (via parliament) to live to.
A lot of us are forced to live by rules we did not agree to. Its all a matter of being anti social, if you are harming no-one - the rules can go whistle.
And don't try and tell me you have never broken the speed limit.
|
>> And don't try and tell me you have never broken the speed limit.
>>
Let's just say that I know how to provoke a response. :)
Near here there is a small roundabout where the speed limit drops from 40 to 30. It is followed by a curved dual carriageway, the speed camera van is often out of sight around the curve. On the left there Is a further education college, so lots of youngsters about. I am sure the camera van is a good earner but it slows the locals down and if you look far enough ahead you can see the brake lights come on if the van is around the curve.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 26 Feb 15 at 13:36
|
"Officers also found a device used to alert the driver to the presence of speed cameras in the car"
So what.
Plenty of these devices are on the market, as well as being a "feature" on some Sat Navs. It's not illegal (yet) to use one in this country.
|
|
There is a difference between a detector (legal) and a jammer (illegal).
|
>> There is a difference between a detector (legal) and a jammer (illegal).
I didn't say there wasn't.
|
>> Don't see the problem catching people who put others at risk.
Neither do I. So let's do that instead :)
>>
>> Many on here will disagree but maybe that is a reflection on their view of
>> their own importance and their decision not to comply with the set of rules we
>> have all agreed (via parliament) to live to.
You're right of course. And I do try to comply. Which makes it all the more irksome to see the fixed and mobile cameras in all the wrong places.
I live in a 30 limit, parked cars, houses, driveways. Most cars passing are speeding, the brakes go on 50m before the cross roads 200m away. The ones leaving the village are often under hard acceleration as they go past.
The police have had their attention drawn to this by the Parish Council and responded, but they put their 'trap' 500m out of the village centre, where there are no houses or parked cars, because, apparently, it would be unsafe to put it where the hazards are as drivers might be surprised and distracted and it would be unsafe for them and the operatives.
I understand their reasoning on that, but the reasoning from there to putting the trap where it isn't needed (and where the speed limit was actually 40 anyway until all the intermediate limits were removed locally) I don't understand - though it does catch a lot of people, including presumably some who have driven carefully through the populated bit.
|
>>
>> where there are no houses or parked cars, because, apparently, it would be unsafe to put it where the
>> hazards are as drivers might be surprised and distracted and it would be unsafe for
>> them and the operatives.
They must work to different rules to ours, the police around here set up in the centre of small rural villages and check people on the way into the 30 limit. Their car is in amongst the parked cars along the road or in a side street. They also set up like this in the 20 limits outside schools when the kids are about, they seem to be able to use a hand held device OK.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 26 Feb 15 at 16:50
|
>> they enjoy catching people speeding, in the same way some people enjoy shooting and killing things.
'Like shooting fish in a barrel' is the American expression I think.
|
Jaguar - Jailed for perverting justice - speed gun jammer! - Focusless
