It's not really in the best place. It's catching people speeding past the bus stop, the hospital and the school. If you want to stop people speeding past the high risk areas you would have the camera's before these risks.
What's the percentage above the limit can a vehicle be traveling without getting a fine? I was told a while ago from a camera operator that it was 2-3% to account for the under reading of speedometers.
@@neiliosr8 It's 10% + 3mph. Depends on the area and it's at the police discretion. Just one mph over is speeding. So 36 in a 30 will deff earn you a fine.
I completely agree with camera vans being parked outside schools etc. in built up areas. What annoys me is seeing a van parked up in an emergency layby on an open dual carriageway on a nice day. Yes the same applies that you shouldn't be speeding, but doing 80mph on a dual carriageway is safer than doing 40mph outside a school. Plus if there is a genuine emergency that layby is partially blocked by the van. Local to me this actually caused a serious accident not too long ago.
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 why do you needs stats? Here are the facts as I see it. You're doing 80mph on a quiet dual carriageway on a nice day, tyre pops or something and the only person you're likely to hurt is yourself but you'll probably walk away. Do 40mph outside a school, a kid runs out in front of you, you can't slow down in time so you either hit them and kill them or swerve and likely hit/kill more children/parents on the pavement. It shouldn't be about stats it should be the potential to save lives.
@@steventhomson7531 Stats are everything when it comes to deployment. Schools have local authority crossing patrols outside at dropping off/picking up times. It is on the approach roads where kids cross unsupervised where they get knocked down.
The two closest regularly used revenue vans to me are 1: hiding behind a sign on a long straight bypass with excellent sight lines 2: in a 30 limit where the council (part of the road safety partnership) have let the hedge grow over the speed limit sign.
There is a popular site around here where the speed camera van likes to park. On a 50Mph 4 lane road, under a low motorway bridge, on very sunny days so the van is in deep shaddow, and very close to a farm gate where a box van often parks.
Depends what they are doing for me, there's one near me that parks behind a bush next to a 30 sign at a apart of road that goes from NSL to 30, if they are catching people approaching them from behind coming out of the NSL part they are hidden, if they are catching people going in they are easy to see. Parking hidden at a speed change point and pointing a camera at it to see if a car hasn't slowed quick enough is a bit harsh and probably has no impact on road safety issues.
@@8G00SE8 The laser cannot be operated with anything in the way, especially foliage. Behind a bush? Vehicles approaching from behind have to pass the van, then travel at least 20m before the laser can be fired.
@Dr Weirdgloves if you want the extra context I got away with nothing because there was no signs indicating speed on the direction I entered the road was from a national speed lane. I had no indicator it was all of a sudden 30. but still they knew that so that's why they abused that spot. good thing I have a dashcam, Showed the court and bam not guilty
If they were designed for safety and as a speeding deterrent rather than for generating revenue then the police shouldn't threaten to charge / arrest people for letting people know where they are.
@@Chrisallengallery I don't think you understand my meaning. If i go onto Facebook and tell people there is a speed van out on X road just now, then there is the possibility i may be charged by the police.
@@hardcoretam I believe it comes under the offence of "wilfully obstructing a constable in the execution of their duty". I haven't heard of any prosecutions, and as Owen was saying, awareness of the location of a camera van does have the benefit of slowing people down. Personally I think that you shouldn't post camera van locations on social media etc, but that's just my opinion - I know many will disagree with me.
@@robsayer8028 A driver was prosecuted some years ago for the offence due to flashing his lights to warn motorists travelling in that direction. Again, if that prevents speeding and works to reduce their speed then it offers the same benefits as a camera van in terms of safety.
I live in Devon so this is directly relevant to me. I get the use of vans near schools in and at the edge of towns, but the South Wales police use camera vans on the M4 as cash generators and always have. And above all they DONT CATCH BAD DRIVERS !
You don't consider speeding to equate to bad driving? Mindless Northumberland driver spared jail after clocking speeds of 103mph in a 30mph zone 'This motor menace was captured on camera clocking a staggering 103mph in a 30mph zone during the morning rush hour. Mindless Stephen Dunn was behind the wheel of his Honda Civic when he reached the shocking speed along the A193 near Bebside and Bedlington, in Northumberland. A court heard that there is a 30mph limit in the area because of junctions, garages, shops and residential properties only being 1m or 2m from the roadside. But that didn't stop Dunn from putting his foot down and hitting 103mph before he spotted a manned mobile speed camera, prompting him to slam his brakes on so hard he skidded after his wheels locked and smoke could be seen coming from his tyres, prosecutors said.'
As he said they are operated by staff not sworn officers. Staff don’t hold the ability to judge a persons driving much like anyone else on the road. We also need to remember speed is relevant to the conditions, at times 5 could be too fast but there does need to be a limit as it helps set a somewhat level playing field for all.
@@benwilson9150 What a crazy statement: 'Ben Wilson 8 months ago As he said they are operated by staff not sworn officers. Staff don’t hold the ability to judge a persons....'. Putting a black tunic on and being given a warrant card, doesn't give you magical powers.
A burglar and someone going iver the speed limit is two totally different category! A burglar is someone who is intentionally causing harm / distress to someone else's property. Going 5mph over the limit isn't the bloody same is it, deny it being a cash cow all you like, ut that's exactly what it is when it's put in totally unnecessary locations
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 did you read my comment? i said totally unnecessary locations, like bridges over motorways, dual carriage ways. outside a school is justified. hiding behind a bush on a 60mph road is not
@@qwerty1weir NSL (60mph) roads are generally the most dangerous. Many roads around me are 60mph and there is not even space to pass a cyclist, and you can often not see more than a hundred meters. The 60 limit on most roads is not set as a defined limit for that road, but more where a road previously had no limit at all and the default 60mph was imposed by law and there is no reason or funding to set a lower limit. The 70 mph dual carriageway that passes my home, just after a speed camera is a junction that sees regular serious collisions. and once drivers have passed the camera, get over the crest for a nice downhill stretch speeds are regularly in excess of 70mph. A pull out from standing at the junction into 70mph traffic is bad enough, and you seriously think there should be no enforcement? I find a lot of drivers who mostly do the 30-50mph roads in urban areas with the odd motorway hop to visit relatives have no real clue of the risks of those other roads with higher limits.
The way you're presenting it and the theory are great and I'm all for them when used correctly. The problem is from my experience they are only used correctly very rarely. The vast majority I see are in places as far after a blind bend/brow/whatever as possible - usually as out of sight as possible and blatantly trying to catch people out. The statistics back this up (around here at least) because they are almost never around accident black spots and when they were turned off a few years back nothing changed safety wise - same crashes, same injury rate - but less people got caught out. The irritating thing is then watching cars speed on roads near the shops, schools and so on where there hasn't been a camera van in years. If they are so good at their job then kindly explain how anyone is caught by them? If you genuinely want the traffic to slow down it should not only be as visable as possible but there should be a warning that its there so anyone who may have been straying over the limit has a chance to correct that. If the reason for being there is allegedly safety then it could easily be argued that anyone giving warning is not hindering but rather helping. By definition every single person caught by one of these means it has failed in its sole (declared) purpose. By the way I got caught speeding when I had not long passed my test about 30 years ago. I took my points and never did it again (clean license since) but no one is perfect and its a constant worry that you might inadvertantly go over by a few mph - even when its perfectly safe - and get a fine, points, increased incurance and all the rest. Now if one turned up outside our school with a big sign a hundred yards each way saying "if you speed you're getting nicked" it might be helpful. Sitting in the layby surrounded by signs, trucks and about half a mile after a rise where the road goes from a national to a 40 (it never used to change there and there never used to be a camera van there, either) might well catch more people but since the accident rate on that road is zero in the last 10 years its hard to see why they keep turning up.
You are woefully misinformed, speed enforcement 2022 is about being pro-active pre-collision not reactive post crash. Why do you want people to die before enforcement attends locations with a recognised speeding problem? Sole purpose? No, they also do mobile phone violations, no seatbelt, illegal plates, not in proper control, not complying with mandatory traffic signage. Warning someone who has decided to ignore their legal responsibilities so they can avoid appropriate sanctions? How does society benefit? Why outside a school? Can you provide any data to support enforcement outside such establishments? School crossing patrols provided by the local authority deal with such issues. It is on the roads where children cross unsupervised where the issues are, not OUTSIDE a school. You then openly acknowledge that the accident rate on roads they attend is zero!!! Mr Dunn should have been warned so he could have avoided prosecution? Think it through. Mindless Northumberland driver spared jail after clocking speeds of 103mph in a 30mph zone 'This motor menace was captured on camera clocking a staggering 103mph in a 30mph zone during the morning rush hour. Mindless Stephen Dunn was behind the wheel of his Honda Civic when he reached the shocking speed along the A193 near Bebside and Bedlington, in Northumberland. A court heard that there is a 30mph limit in the area because of junctions, garages, shops and residential properties only being 1m or 2m from the roadside. But that didn't stop Dunn from putting his foot down and hitting 103mph before he spotted a manned mobile speed camera, prompting him to slam his brakes on so hard he skidded after his wheels locked and smoke could be seen coming from his tyres, prosecutors said.'
So they are normally used where people are speeding. Its black and white, do you do more than the limit? If yes you're speeding. Campaign to change the limit not remove enforcement.
@@PCDelorian Is there someone sitting watching every shop just incase someone robs it? Do we have a justice system which is based on the burden of proof? People shouldn't need to campaign for fair enforcement. The fact so many people see these as a money machine should say it all.
@@siraff4461 No enforcement is fair, you want to change the law. The burden of proof in a speeding case is beyond reasonable doubt just like every other crime, being caught by a speed camera is akin to a shop having CCTV and yes almost every shop has that and someone looking out for it, what do you think security is for in a shop. Further you don't have an exclusive right to the highway police can park there if your stupid enough to break the law in front of them you've only yourself to blame.
What I don’t understand is that you completely contradicted yourself Owen. You said if you’ve seen the van, you’re too late. So why does the visibility of the van make any difference?
I know what you mean but the point is that the cameras are calibrated up to 1000m. In all likelihood they would be used at much less a range than this due to road layout, volume of traffic, obstacles etc. Its just making a point as to the range of the equipment. Owen
@@GCMYT You missed the previous commenters point. It can't be deterrent if you're caught before you've even had chance to react, usually they're parked pretty sneakily?
@@ProMilkshake I don't know about ones you have come across, but I have been driving for 5 years and every one of these mobile speed camera vans are so obvious and easy to spot. I have never seen one trying to be "sneaky".
@@ProMilkshake You shouldn't need to react if you are not speeding. Just drive past the van with a smile 🙂 on your face knowing you have been a good egg.
Generally behind him. I totally get this. I drive a van daily and my speed limit on a standard A road is 50mph. I have been caught doing 59mph on one of these roads before unknowingly (VW Transporter) and get now I stick to my speed limits yet get a lot of annoyed people behind me
@@Ben-zc9gl Driving can be a very confrontational and volatile activity, but if you are sticking to the recognised rules of the road and someone gets upset as a result, that is something they have to deal with.
@@Ben-zc9gl Agree - people think that the white circle with a black stripe is 60mph. Nah!! It is the National Speed Limit, which for any commercial vehicle over 2000kg (vans and pickups) is 50mph on single carriageways and 60mph on dual carriageways
But if the presence of a speed van being there is effective because the aim is to slow motorists down then surely the police only have a bee in their bonnet about people flashing to warn other motorists because it means the van can’t catch them. Which again brings back the argument it is for money in part
They have tried I don’t think a care has gone to court but some people have been cautioned for attempting to pervert the course of justice, they can’t decide that or obstruction of officer in the course of their duty. As said what’s the end game slow down or fine revenue collection!
It's complete corruption in LAW. Revenue gatherers for The City Of London Corporation LTD. This is legal NOT law. Either way in accepting you've consented to their contract. Do NOT communicate with them. Fines, councils and the Police are 'Private Organisations/corporations.
They are by definition cash cows, if they were there to truly make the road safer, they would be there 24/7 365, but they inevitably just catch someone on their way to work or on the school run one day a year, and for the other 364 days a year people could do 100mph through there and no action would be taken.
Not at all, that costs a lot of money and they can't be placed in as many locations, the fact these vans are often in the same place discourages speeding even when they're not there, especially if they hide, which might be why they do, so that you slow down permanently rather than when you see them.
@@PCDelorian I beg to differ, it would cost less to set up static cameras (one off payment) however mobile cameras you're looking at fuel, film, operator wages, time spent on training operator, money spent on operator, purchase of new vans when new equipment is introduced etc etc etc.....like I said to your chum I'd expect nothing less from someone who is trying to justify their job. Nice to see the tax payers money spent on keyboard warriors sat at a desk instead of actually conducting proper police work.
@@whocares4340 cost less? A speed camera that operates 24/7 costs in the region of £30,000-£60,000 fully installed. On top of that the operating costs are £1,000 - £3,000 a year, excluding the cost of electricity . The van would be around £60,000 to £70,000 but can cover hundred of locations in a year. On top of this are the costs for either fixed or mobile, such as processing and attending court for the muppets that want their day in court just because they got court. Where I live over the last 3 years each year there were 60-70 deaths (always more than homicides) and about 66% involve excess speed. So how is this not real policing, unless you just like driving everywhere above the speed limit? So tell me how are they cheaper? If you can’t do the fine, don’t do the crime.
The point of "if you can't see it maybe it's an observation issue" I understand and agree with, but if the van can see up to 1000m away, that point surely isn't relevant? Also a video about community speedwatches and operation crackdown would be good to see!
Yes, of course drivers should be able to see these vans but by the time you are able to see them it is too late. Obviously speeders deserve to be caught but just how much leeway is allowed when speedometers can show an inaccurate reading?
@@mda5003 Speedos do show inaccurate readings but they only ever show a slightly higher reading than your true speed. Otherwise car manufacturers could be liable for you getting a speeding ticket.
I was done buy a speed van once. It was a vauxhall astra van, he had the boot open while sat in the back, tucked away, on a county road that had a 30mph section, catching people slowing down as they past the 30mph sign coming over the hill... they are cash cows.. I don't see them near mine at 1am while people are screaming up and down doing 90mph in a 30 limit.. they catch people doing 34, 35 mph... that isn't speeding really..
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 it would be easy to tell. The direction the van is facing and the camera sticking out would give it away. Have you never seen one ?
@@moonbaby6134 You just misunderstand. You say it was parked on a side road, but monitoring traffic crossing at right angles on a different road. The traffic must either be approaching or retreating, no speed measurement can be taken at right angles. Name the roads please.
Cash cow for certain! I drive a regular route every day and see them about - in the most ridiculous places whereby they bag a lot of people. 99% in rural areas!
@@jamiet2262 oh yeah dude people going 5 mph more is a cause for a 30 pound fine right? the police are actively hiding these and painting them with dark colors for a reason. its not for speeding. its for revenue.
Comparing speeders to burglars? Really? Also completely ignores the fact that in many cases speed limits are well below the actual safe speed to trave in good conditionsl, many roads that were previously NSL are now 50 or 40, speed limits are constantly being reduced. He mentions improvements in car safety and then thinks that the human being the same is some sort of rebuttal when it does nothing to disprove the fact that stopping distances are greatly reduced and crash survival rates are far higher. Overall a very poor video and I doubt it will improve the public"s opinion of speed enforcement in any way.
100% agree. The same crap here in Ireland. The Garda Siochana are blaming speeding for all accidents yet when speed vans (placed randomly on roads) checked speed 99.54% of motorists were obeying the speed limit. Let's face facts, phone use is the main cause of crashes nowadays. People have never driven slower in Ireland. Single carriage-way roads with long convoys of cars because everyone is terrified to overtake so they all wait behind the car going 10-15 km less than the speed limit. It's all part of the war against the motorist. I used to like driving but not anymore. The slower you have to drive the more boring the journey and the more likely you are to fall asleep at the wheel.
I have only ever received one speeding notice and went on a speed awareness course, I was "caught" on the A64, a dual carriageway, late on a Sunday evening, with a handful of cars on the road, the section of road I was on was perfectly straight and level for quite some distance, a "safety" van was on a bridge, 60% obscured by the concrete barrier up there, I was found to be doing 80mph in a 70mph zone, this is the sort of thing I disagree with, but I have no problem with them in built-up areas as this video highlights.
I know exactly the stretch you mean, North Yorkshire police has always used that spot despite that stretch of road NOT being an accident black spot AND being in the middle of nowhere i.e. not near a school/housing estate etc.
You wouldn’t flash a burglar because the police don’t arrest burglars they just give out a “I sorry your a victim of crime and a reference number for the insurance “
I love the air quotes from this officer, to me that imply they disregard the feed back and send the wrong signal to people watching. I am sure there is a great justification for this camera, but the one on he M4 at Bristol is not protecting children’s safety or actually anyones, it is just a tax gathering machine.
@@NoBody-gf8ie hmmmmn Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services may disagree with you there when they did their survey and found that sights were chosen because they were “good hunting grounds” and not for safety. I go back and say, you would agree motorways are the safest road in Europe, then why have speed cameras on them?
@@MrJudgementday99 So you'd prefer that having spent £70k on a purpose fitted vehicle, manned by a trained specialist operator, they deploy it to locations where there is no recognised level of non-compliance? Genius. 'Good hunting grounds' = high levels of speeding.
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 I would prefer them to be deployed at known accident spots, there are lots of places where you can drive at a decent speed without danger, cars have got significantly better since the speed limits were introduced. Where for whatever reason you have a known dander spot where accidents do happen then put these in. With your logic you would prefer them to raise revenue and not reduce accidents, great logic, but sadly it is the same as many police forces, and yes speed can contribute, but if an area hasn’t a history of being an accident area, then why other than revenue do they out them there.
@@MrJudgementday99 I see, you want people to die before action is taken. Drive without danger? We are in the grip of an national epidemic of drivers using their phone whilst in control. Yes, vehicles have more safety features, but human beings haven't been upgraded. Enforcement is about reducing physical trauma WHEN a crash takes place, so pro-active pre-collision, not reactive post-crash like you want.
This is good camera placement. Most of them are at the bottom of a hill or on a long straight road on a sunny day. They always seem to try and catch people leaving a 30 to a 60 or from a 60 to a 30.
In Germany they do this all the time. The sign is where the order applies from so you should be slowing in proper time and shouldn't be accelerating until you pass the sign. Like a yellow line it's illegal to park on one even if it only just starts there, it had started. It's black and white its not illegal to do 30 in a 60 it is illegal to do 31 in a 30 though.
I don’t think it’s wrong to warn drivers of speed cameras. The whole point is to get people to obey the speed limit and how that is achieved shouldn’t matter. I doubt the police would object if while driving you happened to see someone speeding and flashed your lights to slow them down when no speed camera was present so why should it matter if there is a speed camera.
You shouldn't flash your headlights at all unless you're doing it to make someone aware of your presence "Do not flash your headlights to convey any other message or intimidate other road users". Rule 110 of the highway code. Any driver who picks and chooses which rules they follow is a bad driver. So yes the police probably will object to it.
@@zulut1876 Got any more silly HC rules to quote? The HC guidance on flashing lights and horn use is in part to blame for the disgraceful driving standards in the UK because it is illegal to tell people they're being jerks.
Cash cows 100% especially with how a lot of them position themselves. You won’t make anyone think the police is nothing more than a business out for money when the only crimes you ever investigate = revenue, the rest you don’t give a shite about!
@@Xanderr1495 I don’t but there are ways to go about things, always the same “don’t speed” that’s assuming I do? That’s not the point is it, speed cameras by law have to be brightly coloured and easily visible….why does this rule not seem to apply to these sneaky cretins?? And I’m still not wrong that they put more effort into generating revenue than they do actual crime.
@@Xanderr1495 No problem not solved. Not speeding doesn’t make the police more interested in solving a burglary -> first hand experience losing £10K + a car of valuables.
@@Xanderr1495 Yes I am aware of this. Infact I’m not criticising the road police team or burglary team here. I’m criticising the funding / resource allocation to those specialised teams.
Safer cars actually make for worse drivers! It is a factor known as "risk compensation", the safer a person feels, the greater the risks they will take. Add in other factors such as how detached from the outside world cars can be with their soundproofing, supple ride, climate control, etc, and how risks are assessed changes a lot too. I am forever amused when locals clamour for speed enforcement, then practically every ticket is issued to those same locals.
I feel it’s the same when speed limits are too low, for example in wales many town bipasses have become 20mph, these are non residential wide straight roads in some cases, people lose concentration and focus because of how little effort it takes to drive along at 20
Agree - In the New Forest, there is a blanket 40mph limit due to the loose animals. All the locals want that limit to be in place. However, the majority of people caught speeding on the Forest are locals.
@@henryletton7489 Try sitting with an IAM Observer that is driving in a 20mph zone, and get them to do a commentary - You will quickly change your idea about it being "little effort"
I live in a tiny village with a playpark next to the road but obscured by a 2metre fence. It's 30mph (reduced to 20mph during covid). Vehicles don't slow from the 60mph outside the village. Police aren't interested because there isn't a high volume of traffic. "financially not viable to post officers for such a small number of offences".
But at a 1000 metres/ 1000 yards he has zapped you before you are aware he is a camera van and not a parked builders van. 1000yards is over 1/2 a mile away.
Cash cows 100%. Got caught by one going 2mph over the limit as I was slowing down, it was situated just at the end of a dual carriageway on a perfectly clear and straight stretch of road without any junctions where the limit changed from 70 to 60. The camera van was doing its absolute best to hide amongst the bushes and trees. I imagine they cashed in a bit on that day, probably whooping and punching the air as they got me, wonder if they get a bonus? There is just one van in my town, it waits at the bottom of a hill just at the very point the limit changes from 30 to 40 clearly hoping the combination of those two factors gets them some hits. No schools, no crossings & straight road again. I am not interested in this guy trying to excuse himself, I think he and his chums are lowlife scum.
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 Phew, thanks for that, good to know that the notification I received back in 2001 for driving at 62mph in a 60mph zone, the fine and the 3 points on my licence were all a horrible dream. (no offer of paying and attending a naughty speeder class either.).
With a school, hospital and semi obscured bus stop the safest method would be traffic calming measures like either speed humps or a raised road surface. Long term it would be a much better use of tax revenue than sporadically placing a camera van.
I've asked this question of my recent neighbourhood police team. We also get told speed vans are place in accident hotspots or speed hotspots. I see a van parked by my house where only 1 accident has happened in the 17 years I've lived here. My road however, theres a bend before entering it with a zebra crossing. I myself have nearly been knocked over when I was crossing. It was clear as I stepped on the crossing, then a car went straight through at speed. There's been 4 accidents at that crossing caused by people speeding round the bend and having to slam on brakes but running out of road and hitting the car in front. Each time police have attended the bump. So the police are aware. Explain how a speed van isn't parked on my road where there's more risk to pedestrians.
Driving 'is' a right. It's paid for by our taxes on fuel and the vehicle itself every year. The taxes our government takes from the UK motorist is enormous. Do you honestly think roads were built just out of kindness? No, they're there to facilitate the government making money, so please, let's not pretend otherwise.
Motorists do pay a lot of tax but to say that the government isn't operating at a loss when it comes to the roads is nonsense. I don't think you understand how much money it actually costs to maintain the roads.
A motorist pays less compared to the damage they cause than a pedestrian. You have a right to use a highway, not a right to use any particular conveyance on said highway.
I was done doing 33 in a 30mph zone, the camera was set up in a very rural area where there were no houses or people, and on a very long road that you would have thought was a 40mph zone, so in my opinion it was simply there as a cash cow, it is a parasitical system we live in IMO, those who don't produce have to fund themselves by those that do.
easy to slow vehicles down if your that worried about people speeding… speed humps and traffic calming… how is fining someone slowing them down exactly?
It's funny how he compared burglar to driver who drives over the speed limit. Burglar comes, steal your money and probably vandalise your property, meaning that he stole 500 but it'll cost you 1000, EXACTLY what police do, you pay fine + insurance goes up etc. While drivers who just drive a little over the speed limit (not talking doing 70 in 30) means they will get home faster, spend more time with their family, so your kids will less likely to grow up as a glue sniffer, also less stress as you're not stuck on the road for very long. So in this situation flashing lights to drivers is flashing to people to be careful of burglar, and the burglar is the police.
Recovered any stolen cars lately? Caught any burglars? Got uninsured drivers off the road permanently? Dangerous vehicles off the road? No that’s too much effort, much easier to catch someone doing a few mph above the limit.
Having been done speeding on a certain 20mph road which not even a year ago was 30mph. As with alot of roads in London khan has decreased speed limits in many areas of London needlessly. However my point is the untold amount of people including police marked and unmarked NOT blue lighting I've witnessed in the dozens speeding on this road. Rule for one not the rest. I've sent dadhcam footage in regards to this clearly stating my speed being 20 and the officers gapping me at a high rate which is a clear indication of speed. So how do people respect the police in these situations when they ignore it themselves?
Everytime I'm on the M6 heading north of penrith I always get overtake by two marked x5's or x3's with no blues on doing well over 70 mph. I really don't understand it as well
Maybe the rules have changed but it used to be that 20mph limits had to be self enforcing ie they could only be placed where the road layout limited the majority of traffic below 20mph and the police didn't enforce in those areas.
Must be different in wales then, they’re never outside schools hospitals or anywhere they’re needed. always hidden behind bushes or Round bends where it drops from say 50 to 40mph. If you believe they’re for speed enforcement you are crazy. It’s all about money that’s all they’ve ever been about!
@@NoBody-gf8ie I never said the police make money from it? The treasury/government does so it’s the interest for the government to get the police to enforce it ? And yes please do look it up I live In South Wales and they very rarely park near where your would expect them always bypasses national speed limit roads 👍
@@NoBody-gf8ie The only place the speed camera vans or speed gun cops are near me are areas where accidents never happen, there are no schools or pedestrians about. But they are common place for people speeding. If it's a deterrent rather than revenue generation why do the police threaten to charge you for letting people know where they are operating?
@@NoBody-gf8ie ok officer dibble you keep licking them boots, nobody Believes they’re there for speed. If every penny was spent on road safety rather than paying for the cheese and wine parties I’d believe you but it’s not! It’s funny the most dangerous thing on the roads these days are the roads themselves. Maybe the police should be out fining the councils for every pothole? 😂 Road safety my a55 😂😂
IF THE GOVERNMENT & POLICE WERE ALL ABOUT SAFETY THEN WHY IS IT WE DO NOT GET A REMINDER FOR OUR MOT BUT GET ONE FOR OUR ROAD TAX - OBVIOUSLY AS WE ALL KNOW ITS 100% ABOUT MONEY !
I also want to argue the point that many of these vans cause people to suddenly brake when they are going slightly over the speed limit. Because people are made to feel so anxious about a fine or even a ban! Especially as a new driver this can be very daunting if you are only 1-3 mph over the speed limit.
I've always appreciated how in the UK the cameras are highly visible and permanent ones have signs telling drivers about it, thus actually slowing people down at that point and its totally on the driver for being caught speeding where as here in Adelaide the police actively hide cameras and mobile cameras to actively catch people speeding to send them a fine rather than preventing speeding at the moment..... Its hard not to see that as just flat out revenue raising when they can make the cameras obvious and slow folk down with out having to fine them
The real problem with speed cameras is everyone figures out where they are. Then they speed, slow, go past the camera and then speed up again. They achieve very little.
So, Motorcyclists, if you see the van and you're too fast, weave across the road to make it harder for them to get a fix as you slow down. On a dual carriage way, if you can, hide beside a larger vehicle and keep it between you and the camera van. Also the farther out, the wider the laser beam is and then if more than one vehicle in the frame it is then harder to be certain the recorded speed is yours.
@@Undisputed_King The level of traffic and the location have long since reduced the road's status. I can absolutely see that more sedate speeds equate to such modern city locations.
If I ever do find myself going over the limit it’s normally due to being harassed by the vehicle behind. I drive a small EV I find people just do t want to be behind me. I had truck yesterday less than a metre away in a 30 zone I felt pressured into going faster.
But for some reason they find my boot really interesting. There has on occasions where I have dipped slightly over the posted limit on a duel carriageway and had a lorry get close enough that if I had to stop I couldn’t safely. All of this time the fast lane was available to them.
I’ve had a near miss twice because of people slamming their breaks when they see one of those vans, they’re a greater hazard then people on the motor way going 10 over
Here in the Highlands of Scotland camera vans are usually on straight safe-to-pass sections of the road where brief speeding is the safest way to pass as indeed all good drivers know. Easy money.
Think I was caught last night in Dundee! I agree with the vans, just not sitting in certain areas! As you say, exceeding the speed a bit to make a safe overtake, isn't exactly crime of the century!
Flashing a car is not obstruction, it’s only an offence if you can prove the car you flashed was speeding at the time you flashed them which would be very hard to prove
They are absolutely 100% cash cows, there were 4 cameras placed on top of the hayes bypass a312, a dual carriageway, and the van is hidden to the side away from the sight of the dual carriageway users. Surely speeding on a dual carriageway is less serious than speeding next to a school, so why didn’t they use those 4 cameras and place them next to 4 different schools to make them all safer rather than all on a dual carriageway???
I'm not someone who tends to speed so if I got caught out by a van then it'd be my responsibility, but when you do see the vans parked in snidy places, then I'd beg to differ that reason the van is there is to slow people down. On the A525 in gwynfryn North Wales the vans park behind a bunch of trees on the boundary between a 40 and 60, on a straight road for about 3/4s of a mile and 1 house opposite where it parks, who it's protecting I'm not sure. Then the village where I live which has had a few fatalities since the 3 years I've lived here, on weekends motorbikes and cars drive through at ridiculous speeds and there's no speed camera or van as a deterant.
There are a great locations where enforcement is needed, so it may be that there is no suitable location to park, or it isn't on the police's radar. Have you requested they attend?
Some years go, I seem to remember, a fixed camera on the M1 caught 1000’s of drivers speeding through roadworks.. generating 100s of 1000s of pounds in fines.. it was hailed as a success by the police..At the time the AA said what’s the point of this camera as it’s not making the road safer, if it’s caught all those drivers speeding through the roadworks.. far better to do something else to reduce the risk.. same as almost all the vans I see.. like the one parked in a lay-by on the Bournemouth ring road at 10pm In the dark, no pedestrians, nothing open, not many cars.. or the one at the end of a 30mph zone, catching drivers that have gone through the village, past the schools,shops etc..obviously nothing more than a cash machine.. disgraceful
What about having police wrote on the van and a civilian in it? Surely that’s impersonating a police officer? If they are there to save lives , stick them outside schools and built up areas not on a duel carriageway.
But they are not police they do not carry a warrant card. All speed camera vans should be called safety vans. As for the schools things it was an example as of it’s for safety, surely we want to protect and keep safe our children. Hiding behind bushes and trees is not safety. This is a money making exercise by the biggest organised gang in the world. Look how they handled covid abusing little old ladies in gardens while letting Boris and his mates party in number 10.
I would love a reply as intelligent discussions improve everyone's understanding, especially from the channel itself. Only 13% of total collisions were caused by speed in 2020. Even fatal collisions it only rises to 27% were speeding. So the vast majority of collisions and a very large majority of fatal collisions are not caused by speed. Even those stats say they were speeding not that it was the primary cause. Shot his own point really. "Most accidents we go too are from driver error" so not speed then. The fact that with better driver training emergency vehicles are allowed to drive much faster also points to speed not being the issue. The issue is people driving faster than their skill level allows for. Some of the driving you see on the roads is atrocious, but that isn't targeted. The vast majority of car crashes don't result in any punishment, unless they were speeding or doing something else that's extreme. It shouldn't matter even if your doing 10mph and bump into my rear bumper because you were too close, not paying attention or whatever, you should face punishment. Even if that punishment is a day doing extra driving training, and if by the end of that day your driving isn't up to standard you have to come back till it is. The vast majority of people speeding do not crash, just think about the amount of cars that do 80+ on the motorway everyday compared to the amount that crash on that same day. Its the wrong approach, I'm not saying it shouldn't be used at all, use it in 20 zones near schools. But it shouldn't be the main approach and focus. The fact that the main punishment is monetary and goes to treasury muddies the water further, all that money should go back into road issues, thats the problem people have, not because your using it for parties. It because the argument is its for road safety but as the officer said most of the money isn't used for road safety, I think he missed the point on that one. The speed awareness course again has no focus on driver training or improving driver skill, its just more of this is why you shouldn't speed. It should be about improving peoples driving skill level because that affects all issues on the road. As I said at the beginning why target the issue that only causes 13% of collisions so heavily and instead use that massive amount of resources and money targeting the cause of 87% of car accidents, most of which is poor driver skill. I hope you see this, I really wish we could have a live discussion about this as it is an issue close to my heart and I think it would be an educational discussion.
If you report a poor driver, they will be prosecuted or given the option of a learning course. So that answers your question. And speed is what increases danger. if you can get those 13% or 27% off the stats, that's already an improvement.
@@roadbiker8333 no they won't. It almost never leads to prosecution and the learning courses arnt learning courses, they are "don't do this" courses. Theres no time spent in a car or any driving theory taught, at all. Yes reducing that small percentage would be good, but surely its common sense that the larger percentage should be the main focus. Speed alone clearly isn't the main issue. Statistics don't lie. The fastest roads in the UK are motorways, they are also the safest. Despite carrying the most amount of vehicles the longest distances, with the longest average drive time bringing fatigue into the equation more, they also have a much larger number of potentially more dangerous vehicles on with the largest number of heavy goods vehicles, yet dispite all this they have fewer crashes and dispite the higher speed fewer fatal crashes. OK let's look at those unrestricted roads in Germany as they were brought up in the video. We you look at the figures nearly 75% of those incidents at high speed involve foreigners that are not used to driving at high speeds, drive beyond they're skill level and training, if you take those figures out and just leave those that have learnt to drive in Germany there are fewer crashes total and fewer fatal crashes. So again driver skill and driver training is the issue. Those that have the training, the locals, don't crash. Yeah those that don't have the training and skill do. At no point did I say it wasn't a contributing factor in some crashes, nor did I say it shouldn't be addressed. I said its being addressed in the wrong way and to the wrong level while the larger percentage of crash causes are largely ignored. There are fewer fatal crashes and fewer crashes total on 70mph Roads than on slower 40mph roads, dispite all the aggregating circumstances I mentioned above, speed clearly isn't the main cause.
@@Stimm002 yet it does. I report bad drivers as my habit. 40% of them were sent a prosecution letter 30% were given the option to attend course if the driver doesnt want to be prosecuted, 30% were no action. Speed is the issue. I like how you are claiming that on faster moving roads are safest. That’s because the roads are designed to be travelling at those speed. Try to think it this way. Which way is more dangerous? 70mph on a residential road? Or 30mph on a residential road? Same with dual carriageways, a road design to handle traffic at 40mph, what do you think is more dangerous? 70mph or 40mph??? Not to mention, yes it’s depending on drivers skills, but the skill level requirements increases with speed. A driver will require a much better control of the car at 70mph comparing to 20mph. And i can guarantee you that drivers who are already scared at 30mph would not appear on a motorway, so that alone already creating selection bias making the motorway seems safer. And no. Speed is ALWAYS a contributing factor in all crashes and fatalities. It’s funny how you think that it’s not. Let’s say they spun and lost control at 50mph crashed into a tree killing themselves. they wouldnt have done so at 20mph. And they wont even be killed even if they lost control.
@@roadbiker8333 funny how your arguments are circumstantial. My statistics are readily available, your stats on prosecution you have no way of proving and even of you could are 1 case, the national average, which again you can look up on bad drivers reported vs those who go through prosecution or a course, which again dosnt solve the issue as there's no driving taught on the courses, the numbers don't bear out your personal stats. Infact it very much the opposite. I'm not sure why your arguing that I said speed is never a factor. I never said that, infact I said it IS a contributing factor, but not the main one. Also if you won't drive faster than 30 because your not confident in your ability you shouldn't be driving at all. You wouldn't pass the modern test. Again your point about skill level rising with speed argues my own point again, that driver skill level is too low. Who is arguing for 70mph on a residential road? I stated again and again that there are speed limits that make sense, infact nearly all do but using 80% of resources to target the issue after the fact without addressing the underlying issues of driver skill isn't fixing the problem. I don't see how that is controversial. Your arguing against points I never made. My whole point was low driver skill is the bigger issue and would be a much better approach to address as well as speed. I don't really understand why your arguing with me, if your arguing that rubbish drivers don't appear on the motorway so motorways look safer i don't really know where to go from there, you can't pick and choose small numbers of drivers over the country and the larger statistics. As for the last point, which again I don't see how its controversial, they shouldn't lose control at, 20mph or 50mph. There skill and experience should tell them what speed themselves and thier car can handle safely in the conditions and road type they are driving. Again I never said speed is not involved at anypoint, I said driver skill and training are a bigger contribution.
@@Stimm002 I know multiple cyclists who readily report bad drivers. And we have come up to similar stats. Driver awareness course. Sure, you want to believe that no driving were taught in those courses. Have you even been in one? That says a lot then. "My whole point was low driver skill" Exactly, when coupled with high speed, then that's what causes the accidents. It doesn't matter if you have low driver skill if you are driving at 10mph. you would kill no one. That's why police are clamping down the speed because that's what kills people. Also, you can't tackle driver's skills when they haven't done anything wrong. Meaning There's nothing to catch them with and to force them to attend any courses if they haven't broken the law. The whole thing around river's awareness course is that a driver broken a law due to their incompetence and the police uses the points and fines as a leverage to force the drivers to attend drivers course. And you can't even make a blanket rule to force all drivers to attend courses because that's just won't work. No country in the world does it. "As for the last point, which again I don't see how its controversial, they shouldn't lose control at, 20mph or 50mph. " LOL They shouldn't and they won't is a different matter. Even professional racing drivers lose control! Would you say that they are low skilled? Even the best drivers In the world could lose control. It would be very naive of you to think that it won't happen if they are skilled. The difference is, if they do lose control at 50mph, the chances are that they are going to make big damages, meanwhile if they lose control at 20mph, it could be just a fender bender. And actually, you claim that it's only 13% of crashes is caused by speeding. That may be true on paper because they can't claim that people travelling under the speed limit as "speeding". But excessive speed for the condition will be the contributing factor for almost all crashes. Just imagine if they are travelling at 1mph compared to whatever speed they are travelling at, would they have crashed if they were doing 1mph? Exactly. Speed is ALWAYS the factor there. That's why the government is trying to lower the speed limit across the board.
The amount of people in the comments trying to justify speeding is shocking. Speed limits aren’t in place for no reason and nobody is above the law unless there is a massive emergency you need to attend to.
To me, Its all part of driving. You have insurance, road tax, MOT & driving licence - because if you don't you're looking at some form of retribution or punishment, such as a fine, points Gaol/whatever if you don't have them. So why speed? You know what will happen if you're caught!
Cash cows 100%, there’s one near me that always sits at the bottom of a hill around a blind bend on a dual carriageway, it’s such a hill that if you actually let off the accelerator and let the car coast by itself you’ll reach 75-80mph, so you literally have to brake to avoid speeding which in my opinion, braking on a dual carriageway so you don’t exceed by a few mph is far more dangerous than not braking at all.
Improve road saftety by getting poor and dangerous drivers of our roads. Complain to the judges and courts about letting people of for driving offences to easily. But there again its easier just to fine them, again it's about cash. You can sit and spout all you like, but they should be renamed as cash converters.
If it's just about cash, then why bother with points and driver awareness courses? Surely if the government want to get as much cash as possible, then they would probably do the following... 1) Make the camera vans blend into the background (maybe a camouflage design). 2) Not bother with points or disqualification for speeding (12 points or +30mph over the speed limit) - you can't fine a driver if they're not on the road. 3) Not have a plethora of speed camera signs in places where there are static or mobile speed cameras.
@@robsayer8028 he even said they made money off speed awareness courses and points the higher your insurance the more tax you pay on that insurance 😂 it’s all money for the goverment they ain’t stupid😂
@@Philljag if that's really what you believe then you'll have to find a political party that will do away with speeding offences. I really don't fancy your chances though... (by the way, the road safety partnership gets money from the speed awareness courses, not the government).
@@robsayer8028 The amount of money police forces in England and Wales receive from drivers attending speed awareness courses has jumped by almost a third. Figures obtained by the Press Association show that the contribution a constabulary gets for each person it sends on a course leapt from £35 to £45 last month. With around 1.2 million drivers attending speed awareness courses annually, police forces will now collect £54m each year.
@@Philljag again, it's not just the police that get the money (after expenses such as hiring the place where the course takes place) from speed awareness courses. It goes to the Road Safety Partnership which includes the police, the local councils, National Highways, the NHS and the fire and rescue service (to name but a few). Look it up for your area. This money (I'll take your figure of £54m per year as accurate) is the amount for the whole of the UK, and is used to improve road safety.
I agree totally about the use of speed cameras, and the benefits they bring. The only thing that wrangles me is that on the odd occasion - and we've all done it - that you momentarily lose concentration on you speed, and say find yourself at 35 in a 30 - and it's really easy to do - the camera van will clock you at 10% +2 (gov't guidelines) - and you'll get 3 points and a £100 fine - with absolutely no leeway given, as may have been the case in the old days when a police car stopped you. Personally I would give 1st offenders a warning letter if they exceeded the limit by a small amount - and only then progress to the usual points and fine if a second offence occurred or if the speed was exceeded by a substantial amount.
@@20252c You misunderstand, I never stated anything about concentration lapses. The 10% + 2 is published in the ACPO guidelines that has yet to be overwritten by the NPCC.
They do hide behind bushes. I got done for overtaking vehicles and the van was behind a Bush in a well known area. As I was overtaking I should have fought it but I felt it was more hassle than its worth as if I won they would be out to get me
Does the windows have to be open for the camera to be operating? Or can they operate through the closed tinted windows ? Just found you on UA-cam, just subscribed 🤙🏼
The windows need to the open, the equipment is only approved for use through ‘open air’ (ie no obstruction). The detector uses lasers to measure distance over a set time (and calculate speed) and so the glass/plastic will affect the functioning of these lasers 👍
@@geko7844 Those cameras can still catch you speeding while the mobile speed van is driving. I’d presume the tinted window would be closed while moving, right?
@@zouzou_u no, they can’t. The device requires an operator to be sitting at it, which they can’t do whilst it’s moving and the windows are closed when it’s moving. In addition, the device works by measuring a change in distance over a set time and calculating an average speed over that distance. If the device is moving at the same speed as the target, then it will record a speed of 0 as there has been no change in distance. They are not designed to work on the move. Traffic vehicles have devices which can measure speed ‘on the move’ but these vans cannot.
Plod lying right there, up in the North East where I live they do hide the vans on blind bends, hill summits and laybys. And just for clarity I have never had a speeding fine in 39 years of driving cars, HGV's and riding motorbikes.
So you mean in places with poor visibility where you can’t see what’s coming or possibly broken down? And Devon and Cornwall isn’t in the North East. Each force has their own policies
@@GCMYT well done George you have passed basic geography, you're right Devon and Cornwall is nowhere near the North East! But up here they do hide the vans as I said in my original comment.
Cash cow sell it how you want. There may be some places where there set up after concerns from locals but I have seen these deliberately parked on blind corners etc. This is dangerous because people's reaction is to hit the brakes regardless of what they're speed is.
A fixed speed camera will permanently deter speeding at that location. A mobile van will not, as no one knows it’s there. You’ve just shown that as soon as a vehicle rounds the corner, you’ve got them; wouldn’t it be more fair to do a secondary check, now the van is in sight, as likely the vehicle has slowed. Therefore its argument as a speed deterrent is invalid and it’s pure purpose is as a “trap” to generate revenue. Driver education goes a lot further to controlling speeding, where as instant catch-and-fine from a faceless operator in a van only portrays the police in a negative light. If for cost reasons it’s not viable to place a fixed camera, why not place a couple of temporary signs (while in operation) a few hundred meters either side saying “mobile speed enforcement deployed ahead”. Watch how safely everyone drives then, and if they don’t, they deserve to be caught or educated. What you say at the end I agree with, drivers did sign up to the rules, but as you well know 95% of the driving public are a thick as pig shite (where driving without due care is more of a problem than speed) and need constant herding like sheep with brain damage. Just a thought, but won’t be taken on board I understand.
@@SirHackaL0t. If a percentage of drivers lack the required confidence to drive without the reaction of stepping on the brakes, that is their problem and nothing whatsoever to do with anything parked by the side of the carriageway. Your comment identifies the very common human trait of attempting to pass the blame.
Great video thanks. I've never been a fan of single speed cameras, especially on multi lane roads. The number of times I've had people overtaking me then swerve right infront of me and brake when they see one in unreal. I think the average speed concept is much more reasonable. I think the only thing that gets my back up with these mobile vans is when we are told that they only put one where there are a high number of accidents. That's not true. If they said they only put them where there are a high proportion of speeders I would completely agree. As for the range I was once caught speeding by a handheld at 917 meters so they are quite impressive.
So those efforts you can use to catch criminals rather than focus on this. Schools need to teach childrens about road and when and when not to cross roads.
Can a Camera Van park illegally & still catch motorists speeding? I've seen them parked in bus stops which surely is illegal & any evidence gathered cannot be used 🤔
They do not park illegally, they have exemptions provided by the local authority written in to the relevant Traffic Regulation Order: EXEMPTIONS FROM PROHIBITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS EXEMPTIONS FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES 51. 1) Nothing in this Order shall apply to any vehicle on an occasion when it is being used for fire brigade, ambulance or police purposes, if the observance of that provision would be likely to hinder the use of that vehicle for the purpose for which it is being used on that occasion. So all perfectly legal.
most of them give you a bit of leeway usually 10%+2 but they measure GPS speed most cars Speedo’s aren’t 100% accurate and you’re typically going slower than you think
@@nickolasreeks4743 right so for instance most modern cars (not all cars) your Speedo might for instant read 34mph but you’re only actually travelling 30mph. Not sure why manufacturers do this. So if you’re doing 34 on your Speedo and you see a van you’ll obviously not be doing 34 miles an hour exactly and it’s usually a few mph less. Then you get 10%+2 leeway usually so you can be doing much over 30 on your cars Speedo before you’re clocked speeding
so its designed for safety ..... then why is it mobile ??, no seriously ... why is it mobile, if there is an accident blackspot then the council should install a hard wired speed camera and not wastes £60,000 - £90,000 on a van, those vans are cash cows, nothing more, nothing less
Because each speed camera is around £70,000 and can only be in one place. If a van does indeed cost between £60,000 to £90,000 and can be used in several "blackspots" each day, then to me that is not a waste of money.
When you have cars in areas which are speed enforced, especially by average speed cameras, the drivers are concentrating on their speedo rather than eyes on the road. I'm in Wales and the 30mph speed limit is being lowered to 20mph. Locally to me they have just installed 6 miles of average speed cameras along a 20mph road. This was paid for by council and confirmed in the press release that all money goes to the police. I have already tried to drive 20mph on these roads and it is quite difficult, I was watching my speedo and going through the gears a lot more. I do have cruise control and have to set it at 17mph because the car can creep over sometimes. But to travel 6 miles at 20 mph will take best part of 20 minutes.
@@PCDelorian In this case, I feel a 20mph speed limit being enforced with average speed cameras over 6 miles is insanity. I use this road daily for 3 miles as there is no other option and it is torture. There are cars parked on this road, so you have to give way and come to a stop regularly. Yesterday I reset my cars computer and it recorded over 3.4 miles my average speed was 14.3mph, 14 minutes and that was only half the length of the road!
Hopefully it gives people more of an insight :) I won’t judge on peoples opinions, but I know what you mean! I actually lost my license for speeding so I know the pain
I’ve never been done for speeding, I have a clean licence amazingly but because I dislike them means I’ve been caught? Bootlickers should move to North Korea!
Iv'e been driving for 39 years now cars, bikes and HGV's I once got a parking ticket at 18 years old and thats it never for speeding I've given it a thumbs down I'm a total hater of camera vans hiding on bends, hills and laybys and they do PERIOD.
Parking 40 feet from a national speed limit sign taking photos of people leaving a 30mph into a 60mph is what I would call entrapment or obtaining money on a technicality. Now if it was coming into a 30 from a 60 then that's acceptable and more of a danger .
Cash Cows. There’s been a 40mph limit on a street in my town for many many years. Had plenty of signs up ahead of it. But now… they’ve reduced the speed limit to 30mph, took all the signs down and just put one up either side of the camera about only 20 metres away. I only saw it recently and slammed my breaks on. So I was always doing the correct speed but now I may be a criminal for SPEEDING. Why didn’t they put large interim signs up informing the public of the speed change coming and when it was in force. SCAM
Whilst I understand most of it but I don't understand how alerting other drivers is illegal. What good is a £100 fine if a child still gets knocked down? Also why are they mostly on dual carriageways and not in 30 zones? I don't know of any in my area that are positioned in 30s or near schools. Especially purposely placed on way to race tracks, car shows etc. always on the dual carriageway nearby but not in the 30mph zones
I just realised this is Devon+Cornwall. Never had an issue with their placements down there. Infact they have always seemed much more legitimate to me. If you guys find the time take a field trip to the midlands and if you see the vans you'll soon see why people here aren't too impressed. Infact I'll go one better - over the next month or so I'll keep my eyes out and pin the locations of them then send you co-ordinates and you can have a look on maps to see what you think of them.
Ohh they are definitely for cash. Every time I see one its in a tricky stretch of road in the middle of nowhere that's normally down hill,I haven't even seen one outside of a school or hospital before. And when I was with my brother in Dorset we both said to each other this is speed camera territory, so we both fixated on the speed to be absolute bang on and surprise surprise we still got a ticket ,so they obviously knew the car wasn't local and decided to corrupt the numbers knowing for well we couldn't prove them wrong (the dash camera doesn't record speed unfortunately)
2 days ago, i seen police staff on top of a dual carriageway and he was driving a black Astra and he was pointing a camera up the carriageway. This has nothing to do with getting the public to slow down, it is there purely to make money. The placement of the camera was not at an incident blackspot. It's just disgusting and morally wrong
This video places the van in a place where it is for safety purposes. Speed camera vans are often found on dual carriage ways which does tell a different story of making it a cash cow. Kids don’t get run over on dual carriage ways.
Germany have better drivers and higher speed limits. I do think we should raise our speed limits at least on motorways as its generally safe to do 80-90 in the right hand lane. I get that 30mph should be the default for towns and villages as standard as theres a high risk to pedestrians.
I agree with most people here. In Northern Ireland they are always in a "sly" spot. Not a high risk or accident black spot or a spot where speeding is particularly dangerous. Locally they frequent behind a hedge in a side road on a stretch of 60mph dual carriageway. Got ticketed for doing 80 in a 60. I never seen the van, the report said it was in Dixon's garden centre, which closed 10 years ago, but I know the little layby field entrance they were in and it is camoflauged and why I didn't see them. Another is the 60 down to 40 and 40 up to 60 at the end of the carriageway, getting both people either braking late or accelerating early. Scum bags. I also got a false ticket, but didn't appeal it as I was given false information by the Speed Awareness instructor. He told me that EU laws regarding dual carriageways now mean an NSL dual carriageway was only 60mph unless it had a steel or concrete divider. So I was done for 70 in a 60. I later found out that the UK completely rejected said laws as it would be far too expensive to implement. So any reservation makes the NSL 70mph IIRC. Here is the thing that makes the 99% cash cow. They place there vans where they will catch the most speeding people. NOT stop the most people speeding. The money from the vans goes to the local authority, the more they raise the more they get. There are no checks and balances, it's entirely corruptible. I can think of a dozen different places we could use a speed van or a patrol car to make VERY dangerous situations more under control, especially around school in/out times, but no, nowhere to be seen.
Superintendent Adam Thomson is North Yorkshire Police’s Neighbourhood Policing Commander for York and Selby said new smaller camera vans were now in use by the force, with cameras which covered the front, rear and sides. Supt Thomson said the aim of these vans was to reduce the number of deaths on the roads, and ensure motorists drive more safely. He said: "As well as catching people who blatantly flout motoring laws such driving at excess speed, the equipment is also able to identify drivers using hand-held mobile phones and other common offences like failing to wear seatbelts."
I've ridden >1,000cc motorbikes for six years without any speeding tickes or incidents. Why? Effective risk management and forward planning. In a 30 zone, there are many risks that mean we should keep our speed under good control. Speed Cameras also tell us that this is a high risk location, and are also are typically placed where there have been a high volume of accidents (like an A road with a T-junction for example). On the open road like a national speed limit area, we can move swiftly and make great progress.
Sir Policeman when a robber robs or knife user stabs someone from 1 or 2 meters away in front of CCTV they never bother to catch him because there’s no money to generate.
If everything that bloke said was true, I agree with it. Thing is, I live in Spain and here there is no mistake at all that it's all there for revenue collection. For instance, in my town there is a road that goes to the beach. It's a very wide road. The speed limit used to be 50kmh (30mph) and that tbh was quite slow all things considered. I went to the beach several times with this elderly person and he goes pathetically slow, but even he broke the speed limit. Okay, fast forward to now, they've lowered the speed limit in that same road to 30kmh (20mph) and it's that slow that I went at 50kmh with a police car behind me and he started flashing me to speed up, he also got within a few feet behind me. Absolutely nobody goes the speed limit. However, it's commonplace for the police to leave a tiny little camera (with no police car or anything visible anywhere) just next to a bush. My friend got caught doing 70kmh (perfectly reasonable speed for that sort of road) and got fined 300€ + I believe 2 points off his licence. Example 2: You thought oh that's you're town. Can't be like that in big cities... Think again. In Benidorm as you're coming off the motorway at the levante exit, there's a long-ish road down to get to the main bit of the city. It's a 4 lane road, that's extremely wide and also going downhill. Now that used to be 70 and even that was a tad slow. Bare in mind this road has no cycle lane, no pedestrians or anything. It's purely for cars. What do you reckon they've done with the speed limit? 60? 50? Nah. 30kmh on a downhill, 4 lane road that's only used for cars. That's 20mph. You'd hit bout 30mph on a pushbike without pedaling. So not only would it be wrong to fine people doing 35kmh in what should be a 70kmh (and was), but they go a step further and go to great lengths and hide the camera 🥲 So in conclusion, it is definitely purely cash collection on poor people that don't deserve it.
I've only ever been caught speeding once, and that was a guy with a radar gun. I was doing 75 in a 30 on a motorbike and I'd just passed my test. He said there's no way on earth he could let me go with a warning, but he did put it down as a minor (SP30). So all I got was 3 points and a fine. I should have lost my license. Lesson learned. I now have Class 2, Class 1, Car and bike license and I never speed. Your license is hard to get and easy to lose.
Quote at 2:50 in video "One thing you probably didn't realise was that the camera has a range of about a 1000 metres. So if you'd seen the camera van it's probably too late and it's already seen you" and @3:18 "just the presence of this van is doing enough to slow people down. So ultimately its doing its job" But hang on a minute they were all clocked by the van @ 1km. Before they saw the van. So none of them were speeding before seeing the van. In other words it was no deterrent, and contrary to their concerns while at that location no one was speeding. Earlier in the video he made a big thing about visibility. But his statement confirms the camera is in effect covert because it is not seen before being clocked. If it was the deterrent claimed. One would be clocked after seeing the van & if ignored speeding recorded. These are NOT for safety. I witnessed one of these vans on a dual carriage way which did not clearly sign the speed limit on the road. My sat nav informed me the speed limit was 60, and that was the only indication of the speed limit for that road. How many cars will have been fined for speeding, only to risk an even bigger fine informing the police the signs are inadequate? It is a national disgrace that cameras are positioned where the speed limit is unclear. After all they are there for safety? All fixed speed cameras should include a physical speed limit sign in the cameras field of view, which was also visible to the driver at the time the photo taken. (The latest cameras record a measured speed which is NOT VISIBLE to the driver and provide no means of independently verifying accuracy. Not only that but many signs are hidden by tree branches/vegetation obscuring drivers views of essential information.
That speed camera van is exactly where it should be outside the school not on a bypass
@@NoBody-gf8ie Mostly due to differences of speed. Motorways are still the safest roads.
Yet I never see them by schools , only ever on motorways and dual carriageways. Cash cows
It's not really in the best place. It's catching people speeding past the bus stop, the hospital and the school.
If you want to stop people speeding past the high risk areas you would have the camera's before these risks.
What's the percentage above the limit can a vehicle be traveling without getting a fine? I was told a while ago from a camera operator that it was 2-3% to account for the under reading of speedometers.
@@neiliosr8 It's 10% + 3mph. Depends on the area and it's at the police discretion. Just one mph over is speeding. So 36 in a 30 will deff earn you a fine.
I completely agree with camera vans being parked outside schools etc. in built up areas.
What annoys me is seeing a van parked up in an emergency layby on an open dual carriageway on a nice day.
Yes the same applies that you shouldn't be speeding, but doing 80mph on a dual carriageway is safer than doing 40mph outside a school. Plus if there is a genuine emergency that layby is partially blocked by the van. Local to me this actually caused a serious accident not too long ago.
Can you provide any stats that point to the need for vans outside schools?
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 why do you needs stats?
Here are the facts as I see it.
You're doing 80mph on a quiet dual carriageway on a nice day, tyre pops or something and the only person you're likely to hurt is yourself but you'll probably walk away.
Do 40mph outside a school, a kid runs out in front of you, you can't slow down in time so you either hit them and kill them or swerve and likely hit/kill more children/parents on the pavement.
It shouldn't be about stats it should be the potential to save lives.
@@steventhomson7531 Stats are everything when it comes to deployment. Schools have local authority crossing patrols outside at dropping off/picking up times. It is on the approach roads where kids cross unsupervised where they get knocked down.
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 so... you're mad you cant speed in school zones?
@@NitroNuggetTV Why can't you speed in school zones?
The two closest regularly used revenue vans to me are
1: hiding behind a sign on a long straight bypass with excellent sight lines
2: in a 30 limit where the council (part of the road safety partnership) have let the hedge grow over the speed limit sign.
It must be a vast sign to cover such a big vehicle. Notices cannot be issued if the gateway signage is obscured.
There is a popular site around here where the speed camera van likes to park. On a 50Mph 4 lane road, under a low motorway bridge, on very sunny days so the van is in deep shaddow, and very close to a farm gate where a box van often parks.
@@dave0smeg Isn't that the point, on sunny days to park in shade so the van interior is cool enough to work?
Near a farm gate? Is that illegal?
Depends what they are doing for me, there's one near me that parks behind a bush next to a 30 sign at a apart of road that goes from NSL to 30, if they are catching people approaching them from behind coming out of the NSL part they are hidden, if they are catching people going in they are easy to see. Parking hidden at a speed change point and pointing a camera at it to see if a car hasn't slowed quick enough is a bit harsh and probably has no impact on road safety issues.
@@8G00SE8 The laser cannot be operated with anything in the way, especially foliage. Behind a bush?
Vehicles approaching from behind have to pass the van, then travel at least 20m before the laser can be fired.
I got caught buy a guy with a hand held speed gun hiding behind a bush in the middle of nowhere 😳
Why were you hiding behind a bush?
@Dr Weirdgloves if you want the extra context I got away with nothing because there was no signs indicating speed on the direction I entered the road was from a national speed lane. I had no indicator it was all of a sudden 30. but still they knew that so that's why they abused that spot. good thing I have a dashcam, Showed the court and bam not guilty
If they were designed for safety and as a speeding deterrent rather than for generating revenue then the police shouldn't threaten to charge / arrest people for letting people know where they are.
If there is no penalty, people will just ignore them
@@Chrisallengallery I don't think you understand my meaning. If i go onto Facebook and tell people there is a speed van out on X road just now, then there is the possibility i may be charged by the police.
@@hardcoretam I did miss read your comment. I thought you were talking about not charging speeders.
@@hardcoretam I believe it comes under the offence of "wilfully obstructing a constable in the execution of their duty". I haven't heard of any prosecutions, and as Owen was saying, awareness of the location of a camera van does have the benefit of slowing people down. Personally I think that you shouldn't post camera van locations on social media etc, but that's just my opinion - I know many will disagree with me.
@@robsayer8028 A driver was prosecuted some years ago for the offence due to flashing his lights to warn motorists travelling in that direction. Again, if that prevents speeding and works to reduce their speed then it offers the same benefits as a camera van in terms of safety.
I live in Devon so this is directly relevant to me. I get the use of vans near schools in and at the edge of towns, but the South Wales police use camera vans on the M4 as cash generators and always have. And above all they DONT CATCH BAD DRIVERS !
You don't consider speeding to equate to bad driving?
Mindless Northumberland driver spared jail after clocking speeds of 103mph in a 30mph zone
'This motor menace was captured on camera clocking a staggering 103mph in a 30mph zone during the morning rush hour.
Mindless Stephen Dunn was behind the wheel of his Honda Civic when he reached the shocking speed along the A193 near Bebside and Bedlington, in Northumberland. A court heard that there is a 30mph limit in the area because of junctions, garages, shops and residential properties only being 1m or 2m from the roadside.
But that didn't stop Dunn from putting his foot down and hitting 103mph before he spotted a manned mobile speed camera, prompting him to slam his brakes on so hard he skidded after his wheels locked and smoke could be seen coming from his tyres, prosecutors said.'
As he said they are operated by staff not sworn officers. Staff don’t hold the ability to judge a persons driving much like anyone else on the road. We also need to remember speed is relevant to the conditions, at times 5 could be too fast but there does need to be a limit as it helps set a somewhat level playing field for all.
@@benwilson9150 Staff don’t hold the ability to judge a persons driving?
@@benwilson9150 What a crazy statement:
'Ben Wilson
8 months ago
As he said they are operated by staff not sworn officers. Staff don’t hold the ability to judge a persons....'.
Putting a black tunic on and being given a warrant card, doesn't give you magical powers.
When i was employed I drove 65k per year, One speeding ticket 2914 in Liverpool 34 in a 30 zone, and was never late for a meeting
A burglar and someone going iver the speed limit is two totally different category! A burglar is someone who is intentionally causing harm / distress to someone else's property. Going 5mph over the limit isn't the bloody same is it, deny it being a cash cow all you like, ut that's exactly what it is when it's put in totally unnecessary locations
At what speed would you commence enforcement in a 30 and why?
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 did you read my comment? i said totally unnecessary locations, like bridges over motorways, dual carriage ways. outside a school is justified. hiding behind a bush on a 60mph road is not
@@qwerty1weir NSL (60mph) roads are generally the most dangerous. Many roads around me are 60mph and there is not even space to pass a cyclist, and you can often not see more than a hundred meters.
The 60 limit on most roads is not set as a defined limit for that road, but more where a road previously had no limit at all and the default 60mph was imposed by law and there is no reason or funding to set a lower limit.
The 70 mph dual carriageway that passes my home, just after a speed camera is a junction that sees regular serious collisions. and once drivers have passed the camera, get over the crest for a nice downhill stretch speeds are regularly in excess of 70mph. A pull out from standing at the junction into 70mph traffic is bad enough, and you seriously think there should be no enforcement?
I find a lot of drivers who mostly do the 30-50mph roads in urban areas with the odd motorway hop to visit relatives have no real clue of the risks of those other roads with higher limits.
To a policeman we're all criminals. That's why they put as much effort into hurt feelings as they do into a robbery.
@@bikeman123 Whatever does any of that have to do with the above?
The way you're presenting it and the theory are great and I'm all for them when used correctly.
The problem is from my experience they are only used correctly very rarely.
The vast majority I see are in places as far after a blind bend/brow/whatever as possible - usually as out of sight as possible and blatantly trying to catch people out.
The statistics back this up (around here at least) because they are almost never around accident black spots and when they were turned off a few years back nothing changed safety wise - same crashes, same injury rate - but less people got caught out.
The irritating thing is then watching cars speed on roads near the shops, schools and so on where there hasn't been a camera van in years.
If they are so good at their job then kindly explain how anyone is caught by them? If you genuinely want the traffic to slow down it should not only be as visable as possible but there should be a warning that its there so anyone who may have been straying over the limit has a chance to correct that.
If the reason for being there is allegedly safety then it could easily be argued that anyone giving warning is not hindering but rather helping.
By definition every single person caught by one of these means it has failed in its sole (declared) purpose.
By the way I got caught speeding when I had not long passed my test about 30 years ago. I took my points and never did it again (clean license since) but no one is perfect and its a constant worry that you might inadvertantly go over by a few mph - even when its perfectly safe - and get a fine, points, increased incurance and all the rest.
Now if one turned up outside our school with a big sign a hundred yards each way saying "if you speed you're getting nicked" it might be helpful. Sitting in the layby surrounded by signs, trucks and about half a mile after a rise where the road goes from a national to a 40 (it never used to change there and there never used to be a camera van there, either) might well catch more people but since the accident rate on that road is zero in the last 10 years its hard to see why they keep turning up.
You are woefully misinformed, speed enforcement 2022 is about being pro-active pre-collision not reactive post crash. Why do you want people to die before enforcement attends locations with a recognised speeding problem?
Sole purpose? No, they also do mobile phone violations, no seatbelt, illegal plates, not in proper control, not complying with mandatory traffic signage.
Warning someone who has decided to ignore their legal responsibilities so they can avoid appropriate sanctions? How does society benefit?
Why outside a school? Can you provide any data to support enforcement outside such establishments? School crossing patrols provided by the local authority deal with such issues. It is on the roads where children cross unsupervised where the issues are, not OUTSIDE a school.
You then openly acknowledge that the accident rate on roads they attend is zero!!!
Mr Dunn should have been warned so he could have avoided prosecution? Think it through.
Mindless Northumberland driver spared jail after clocking speeds of 103mph in a 30mph zone
'This motor menace was captured on camera clocking a staggering 103mph in a 30mph zone during the morning rush hour.
Mindless Stephen Dunn was behind the wheel of his Honda Civic when he reached the shocking speed along the A193 near Bebside and Bedlington, in Northumberland. A court heard that there is a 30mph limit in the area because of junctions, garages, shops and residential properties only being 1m or 2m from the roadside.
But that didn't stop Dunn from putting his foot down and hitting 103mph before he spotted a manned mobile speed camera, prompting him to slam his brakes on so hard he skidded after his wheels locked and smoke could be seen coming from his tyres, prosecutors said.'
Nail on the HEAD.
So they are normally used where people are speeding. Its black and white, do you do more than the limit? If yes you're speeding. Campaign to change the limit not remove enforcement.
@@PCDelorian Is there someone sitting watching every shop just incase someone robs it?
Do we have a justice system which is based on the burden of proof?
People shouldn't need to campaign for fair enforcement. The fact so many people see these as a money machine should say it all.
@@siraff4461 No enforcement is fair, you want to change the law. The burden of proof in a speeding case is beyond reasonable doubt just like every other crime, being caught by a speed camera is akin to a shop having CCTV and yes almost every shop has that and someone looking out for it, what do you think security is for in a shop. Further you don't have an exclusive right to the highway police can park there if your stupid enough to break the law in front of them you've only yourself to blame.
What I don’t understand is that you completely contradicted yourself Owen. You said if you’ve seen the van, you’re too late. So why does the visibility of the van make any difference?
I know what you mean but the point is that the cameras are calibrated up to 1000m. In all likelihood they would be used at much less a range than this due to road layout, volume of traffic, obstacles etc. Its just making a point as to the range of the equipment. Owen
@@GCMYT You missed the previous commenters point. It can't be deterrent if you're caught before you've even had chance to react, usually they're parked pretty sneakily?
@@ProMilkshake I don't know about ones you have come across, but I have been driving for 5 years and every one of these mobile speed camera vans are so obvious and easy to spot. I have never seen one trying to be "sneaky".
@@SurgeDashcam 5years isn't a long time to ve driving 😂🤣😂🤣 bet you only drive about 100miles a week as well
@@ProMilkshake You shouldn't need to react if you are not speeding. Just drive past the van with a smile 🙂 on your face knowing you have been a good egg.
I see a lot of angry drivers when I stick to the speed limit
Where are the angry drivers?
Generally behind him. I totally get this. I drive a van daily and my speed limit on a standard A road is 50mph. I have been caught doing 59mph on one of these roads before unknowingly (VW Transporter) and get now I stick to my speed limits yet get a lot of annoyed people behind me
@@Ben-zc9gl Driving can be a very confrontational and volatile activity, but if you are sticking to the recognised rules of the road and someone gets upset as a result, that is something they have to deal with.
@@Ben-zc9gl Agree - people think that the white circle with a black stripe is 60mph. Nah!! It is the National Speed Limit, which for any commercial vehicle over 2000kg (vans and pickups) is 50mph on single carriageways and 60mph on dual carriageways
I'm not supised, people have places to be without following painfully slow drivers.
"Will you flash a burglar when police are comming" - No
But I will flash when a burglar is giving speeding tickets :D
But if the presence of a speed van being there is effective because the aim is to slow motorists down then surely the police only have a bee in their bonnet about people flashing to warn other motorists because it means the van can’t catch them. Which again brings back the argument it is for money in part
He just said don't do it because it's illegal. Never said anyone's ever gotten "done" for it.
They have tried I don’t think a care has gone to court but some people have been cautioned for attempting to pervert the course of justice, they can’t decide that or obstruction of officer in the course of their duty. As said what’s the end game slow down or fine revenue collection!
"I wasn't warning anyone officer, I was waving to the motorists and giving a thumbs down because I didn't like their poor choice of vehicle"
@@graememckay9972 My thoughts exactly 💯
It's complete corruption in LAW. Revenue gatherers for The City Of London Corporation LTD.
This is legal NOT law. Either way in accepting you've consented to their contract. Do NOT communicate with them.
Fines, councils and the Police are 'Private Organisations/corporations.
They are by definition cash cows, if they were there to truly make the road safer, they would be there 24/7 365, but they inevitably just catch someone on their way to work or on the school run one day a year, and for the other 364 days a year people could do 100mph through there and no action would be taken.
Not at all, that costs a lot of money and they can't be placed in as many locations, the fact these vans are often in the same place discourages speeding even when they're not there, especially if they hide, which might be why they do, so that you slow down permanently rather than when you see them.
@@PCDelorian I beg to differ, it would cost less to set up static cameras (one off payment) however mobile cameras you're looking at fuel, film, operator wages, time spent on training operator, money spent on operator, purchase of new vans when new equipment is introduced etc etc etc.....like I said to your chum I'd expect nothing less from someone who is trying to justify their job. Nice to see the tax payers money spent on keyboard warriors sat at a desk instead of actually conducting proper police work.
@@whocares4340 cost less? A speed camera that operates 24/7 costs in the region of £30,000-£60,000 fully installed. On top of that the operating costs are £1,000 - £3,000 a year, excluding the cost of electricity . The van would be around £60,000 to £70,000 but can cover hundred of locations in a year.
On top of this are the costs for either fixed or mobile, such as processing and attending court for the muppets that want their day in court just because they got court.
Where I live over the last 3 years each year there were 60-70 deaths (always more than homicides) and about 66% involve excess speed. So how is this not real policing, unless you just like driving everywhere above the speed limit?
So tell me how are they cheaper?
If you can’t do the fine, don’t do the crime.
The point of "if you can't see it maybe it's an observation issue" I understand and agree with, but if the van can see up to 1000m away, that point surely isn't relevant? Also a video about community speedwatches and operation crackdown would be good to see!
Yes, of course drivers should be able to see these vans but by the time you are able to see them it is too late. Obviously speeders deserve to be caught but just how much leeway is allowed when speedometers can show an inaccurate reading?
It's a complete contradiction in the video.
@@mda5003 Speedos do show inaccurate readings but they only ever show a slightly higher reading than your true speed. Otherwise car manufacturers could be liable for you getting a speeding ticket.
Technically 1000m but try and find a stretch of road that allows you to see 1000m without any obstructions/bends
I was done buy a speed van once. It was a vauxhall astra van, he had the boot open while sat in the back, tucked away, on a county road that had a 30mph section, catching people slowing down as they past the 30mph sign coming over the hill... they are cash cows.. I don't see them near mine at 1am while people are screaming up and down doing 90mph in a 30 limit.. they catch people doing 34, 35 mph... that isn't speeding really..
Definitely cash cows.
I saw one yesterday in Belsay in Northumberland. It was parked on a side road, monitoring the main road through the village.
How do you know?
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 because it says police and it has a camera sticking out ?!
@@moonbaby6134 How do you know it was monitoring the main road? Do you mean parked at right angles? Can you name the roads?
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 it would be easy to tell. The direction the van is facing and the camera sticking out would give it away. Have you never seen one ?
@@moonbaby6134 You just misunderstand. You say it was parked on a side road, but monitoring traffic crossing at right angles on a different road.
The traffic must either be approaching or retreating, no speed measurement can be taken at right angles.
Name the roads please.
Cash cow for certain! I drive a regular route every day and see them about - in the most ridiculous places whereby they bag a lot of people. 99% in rural areas!
Guess people are still speeding there then?
I will put money there was a fatal at or near those ridiculous places that are 99% in rural areas.
@@jamiet2262 oh yeah dude people going 5 mph more is a cause for a 30 pound fine right? the police are actively hiding these and painting them with dark colors for a reason. its not for speeding. its for revenue.
Cash cow for certain. As Owen stated, the revenue goes to the treasury, not back into road safety.
Cash Cows my vote from what I see
Sucks to suck. Do the speed limit.
@@bend7347 I do when it is necessary :)
Comparing speeders to burglars? Really? Also completely ignores the fact that in many cases speed limits are well below the actual safe speed to trave in good conditionsl, many roads that were previously NSL are now 50 or 40, speed limits are constantly being reduced.
He mentions improvements in car safety and then thinks that the human being the same is some sort of rebuttal when it does nothing to disprove the fact that stopping distances are greatly reduced and crash survival rates are far higher.
Overall a very poor video and I doubt it will improve the public"s opinion of speed enforcement in any way.
100% agree. The same crap here in Ireland. The Garda Siochana are blaming speeding for all accidents yet when speed vans (placed randomly on roads) checked speed 99.54% of motorists were obeying the speed limit. Let's face facts, phone use is the main cause of crashes nowadays. People have never driven slower in Ireland. Single carriage-way roads with long convoys of cars because everyone is terrified to overtake so they all wait behind the car going 10-15 km less than the speed limit. It's all part of the war against the motorist. I used to like driving but not anymore. The slower you have to drive the more boring the journey and the more likely you are to fall asleep at the wheel.
Is there any evidence that they improve road safety? I mean real evidence peer reviewed, I'd very much like to see it.
No but there is evidence they accumulate a lot of money
I have only ever received one speeding notice and went on a speed awareness course, I was "caught" on the A64, a dual carriageway, late on a Sunday evening, with a handful of cars on the road, the section of road I was on was perfectly straight and level for quite some distance, a "safety" van was on a bridge, 60% obscured by the concrete barrier up there, I was found to be doing 80mph in a 70mph zone, this is the sort of thing I disagree with, but I have no problem with them in built-up areas as this video highlights.
I know exactly the stretch you mean, North Yorkshire police has always used that spot despite that stretch of road NOT being an accident black spot AND being in the middle of nowhere i.e. not near a school/housing estate etc.
You wouldn’t flash a burglar because the police don’t arrest burglars they just give out a “I sorry your a victim of crime and a reference number for the insurance “
Last tip, USE WAZE. 😂
I love the air quotes from this officer, to me that imply they disregard the feed back and send the wrong signal to people watching. I am sure there is a great justification for this camera, but the one on he M4 at Bristol is not protecting children’s safety or actually anyones, it is just a tax gathering machine.
@@NoBody-gf8ie yes but motorways are the safest roads in Europe, so they are there for money collection
@@NoBody-gf8ie hmmmmn Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services may disagree with you there when they did their survey and found that sights were chosen because they were “good hunting grounds” and not for safety.
I go back and say, you would agree motorways are the safest road in Europe, then why have speed cameras on them?
@@MrJudgementday99 So you'd prefer that having spent £70k on a purpose fitted vehicle, manned by a trained specialist operator, they deploy it to locations where there is no recognised level of non-compliance?
Genius.
'Good hunting grounds' = high levels of speeding.
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 I would prefer them to be deployed at known accident spots, there are lots of places where you can drive at a decent speed without danger, cars have got significantly better since the speed limits were introduced. Where for whatever reason you have a known dander spot where accidents do happen then put these in. With your logic you would prefer them to raise revenue and not reduce accidents, great logic, but sadly it is the same as many police forces, and yes speed can contribute, but if an area hasn’t a history of being an accident area, then why other than revenue do they out them there.
@@MrJudgementday99 I see, you want people to die before action is taken.
Drive without danger? We are in the grip of an national epidemic of drivers using their phone whilst in control. Yes, vehicles have more safety features, but human beings haven't been upgraded.
Enforcement is about reducing physical trauma WHEN a crash takes place, so pro-active pre-collision, not reactive post-crash like you want.
This is good camera placement. Most of them are at the bottom of a hill or on a long straight road on a sunny day.
They always seem to try and catch people leaving a 30 to a 60 or from a 60 to a 30.
In Germany they do this all the time. The sign is where the order applies from so you should be slowing in proper time and shouldn't be accelerating until you pass the sign. Like a yellow line it's illegal to park on one even if it only just starts there, it had started. It's black and white its not illegal to do 30 in a 60 it is illegal to do 31 in a 30 though.
I don’t think it’s wrong to warn drivers of speed cameras. The whole point is to get people to obey the speed limit and how that is achieved shouldn’t matter. I doubt the police would object if while driving you happened to see someone speeding and flashed your lights to slow them down when no speed camera was present so why should it matter if there is a speed camera.
You shouldn't flash your headlights at all unless you're doing it to make someone aware of your presence "Do not flash your headlights to convey any other message or intimidate other road users". Rule 110 of the highway code. Any driver who picks and chooses which rules they follow is a bad driver. So yes the police probably will object to it.
@@zulut1876 😴
@@zulut1876 Got any more silly HC rules to quote? The HC guidance on flashing lights and horn use is in part to blame for the disgraceful driving standards in the UK because it is illegal to tell people they're being jerks.
@@zulut1876 bet the time flys by in your house
@@dynevor6327Telling people they're being jerks doesn't constitute road rage just cause you say it does.
Cash cows 100% especially with how a lot of them position themselves.
You won’t make anyone think the police is nothing more than a business out for money when the only crimes you ever investigate = revenue, the rest you don’t give a shite about!
Don’t speed then? Problem solved
@@Xanderr1495 I don’t but there are ways to go about things, always the same “don’t speed” that’s assuming I do? That’s not the point is it, speed cameras by law have to be brightly coloured and easily visible….why does this rule not seem to apply to these sneaky cretins??
And I’m still not wrong that they put more effort into generating revenue than they do actual crime.
@@Xanderr1495 No problem not solved. Not speeding doesn’t make the police more interested in solving a burglary -> first hand experience losing £10K + a car of valuables.
@@meekyam37You do realise that road policing is a specialised team that have nothing to do with other areas like burglary...
@@Xanderr1495 Yes I am aware of this. Infact I’m not criticising the road police team or burglary team here. I’m criticising the funding / resource allocation to those specialised teams.
Safer cars actually make for worse drivers! It is a factor known as "risk compensation", the safer a person feels, the greater the risks they will take. Add in other factors such as how detached from the outside world cars can be with their soundproofing, supple ride, climate control, etc, and how risks are assessed changes a lot too.
I am forever amused when locals clamour for speed enforcement, then practically every ticket is issued to those same locals.
I feel it’s the same when speed limits are too low, for example in wales many town bipasses have become 20mph, these are non residential wide straight roads in some cases, people lose concentration and focus because of how little effort it takes to drive along at 20
Agree - In the New Forest, there is a blanket 40mph limit due to the loose animals. All the locals want that limit to be in place. However, the majority of people caught speeding on the Forest are locals.
@@henryletton7489 Try sitting with an IAM Observer that is driving in a 20mph zone, and get them to do a commentary - You will quickly change your idea about it being "little effort"
In Australia, it's all about revenue. Never seen one in a school zone. Just on 80+kph roads.
Australia is the worst, taxed and fined out your arse. Every road is a toll. A camera. And the fines are massive
In Denmark they’re nothing but cash cows. Unmarked vans hiding behind bushes and putting the cameras out to the road.
I live in a tiny village with a playpark next to the road but obscured by a 2metre fence. It's 30mph (reduced to 20mph during covid). Vehicles don't slow from the 60mph outside the village. Police aren't interested because there isn't a high volume of traffic. "financially not viable to post officers for such a small number of offences".
@Adam Bainbridge probably not a lot not enough %in it for them
This is a great video and the traffic cop is open and honest as usual.
He’s right, camera vans are so flipping obvious you just can’t miss them.
But at a 1000 metres/ 1000 yards he has zapped you before you are aware he is a camera van and not a parked builders van. 1000yards is over 1/2 a mile away.
Cash cows 100%. Got caught by one going 2mph over the limit as I was slowing down, it was situated just at the end of a dual carriageway on a perfectly clear and straight stretch of road without any junctions where the limit changed from 70 to 60.
The camera van was doing its absolute best to hide amongst the bushes and trees. I imagine they cashed in a bit on that day, probably whooping and punching the air as they got me, wonder if they get a bonus?
There is just one van in my town, it waits at the bottom of a hill just at the very point the limit changes from 30 to 40 clearly hoping the combination of those two factors gets them some hits. No schools, no crossings & straight road again.
I am not interested in this guy trying to excuse himself, I think he and his chums are lowlife scum.
No UK constabulary issues notices for 2mph over.
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 Phew, thanks for that, good to know that the notification I received back in 2001 for driving at 62mph in a 60mph zone, the fine and the 3 points on my licence were all a horrible dream. (no offer of paying and attending a naughty speeder class either.).
@@MadMadGruff In twenty one years things change, however, there were no camera vans then.
You are prone to just making things up?
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 Thats rich coming from a police officer .
@@nigelhughes2947 I don't believe his name is Rich.
With a school, hospital and semi obscured bus stop the safest method would be traffic calming measures like either speed humps or a raised road surface.
Long term it would be a much better use of tax revenue than sporadically placing a camera van.
I've asked this question of my recent neighbourhood police team. We also get told speed vans are place in accident hotspots or speed hotspots. I see a van parked by my house where only 1 accident has happened in the 17 years I've lived here. My road however, theres a bend before entering it with a zebra crossing. I myself have nearly been knocked over when I was crossing. It was clear as I stepped on the crossing, then a car went straight through at speed. There's been 4 accidents at that crossing caused by people speeding round the bend and having to slam on brakes but running out of road and hitting the car in front. Each time police have attended the bump. So the police are aware. Explain how a speed van isn't parked on my road where there's more risk to pedestrians.
Driving 'is' a right. It's paid for by our taxes on fuel and the vehicle itself every year. The taxes our government takes from the UK motorist is enormous. Do you honestly think roads were built just out of kindness? No, they're there to facilitate the government making money, so please, let's not pretend otherwise.
Motorists do pay a lot of tax but to say that the government isn't operating at a loss when it comes to the roads is nonsense. I don't think you understand how much money it actually costs to maintain the roads.
It’s definitely not a right. I don’t have to get a license to give you my opinion on here, but I do if I wanna drive a car
@@David_Trowbridge I think you're confusing rights with competency.
@@SkitBit fair, everyone has a right to take lessons yes
A motorist pays less compared to the damage they cause than a pedestrian. You have a right to use a highway, not a right to use any particular conveyance on said highway.
I was done doing 33 in a 30mph zone, the camera was set up in a very rural area where there were no houses or people, and on a very long road that you would have thought was a 40mph zone, so in my opinion it was simply there as a cash cow, it is a parasitical system we live in IMO, those who don't produce have to fund themselves by those that do.
33 in a 30? Where and when?
Don't so 33 in a 30 and you won't have a problem
@@khip_ko you must be fun at parties
@@dynevor6327 nah definitely wouldn't want someone as weird as you at my parties. Have a good day
easy to slow vehicles down if your that worried about people speeding… speed humps and traffic calming… how is fining someone slowing them down exactly?
Good video! Always interesting to learn how these sort of things operate as a member of the general public.
Thankyou Joshua :)
It's funny how he compared burglar to driver who drives over the speed limit. Burglar comes, steal your money and probably vandalise your property, meaning that he stole 500 but it'll cost you 1000, EXACTLY what police do, you pay fine + insurance goes up etc. While drivers who just drive a little over the speed limit (not talking doing 70 in 30) means they will get home faster, spend more time with their family, so your kids will less likely to grow up as a glue sniffer, also less stress as you're not stuck on the road for very long. So in this situation flashing lights to drivers is flashing to people to be careful of burglar, and the burglar is the police.
Recovered any stolen cars lately? Caught any burglars? Got uninsured drivers off the road permanently? Dangerous vehicles off the road? No that’s too much effort, much easier to catch someone doing a few mph above the limit.
Traffic police don't deal with burglars.
Having been done speeding on a certain 20mph road which not even a year ago was 30mph. As with alot of roads in London khan has decreased speed limits in many areas of London needlessly. However my point is the untold amount of people including police marked and unmarked NOT blue lighting I've witnessed in the dozens speeding on this road. Rule for one not the rest. I've sent dadhcam footage in regards to this clearly stating my speed being 20 and the officers gapping me at a high rate which is a clear indication of speed. So how do people respect the police in these situations when they ignore it themselves?
Everytime I'm on the M6 heading north of penrith I always get overtake by two marked x5's or x3's with no blues on doing well over 70 mph. I really don't understand it as well
Even the police know that 20 limits are a joke, not that they would admit it publicly
One argument could easily be that police cars have no requirement to turn their lights on when responding to an incident.
@@BaldMancTwat Yes, they do if they are exceeding to speed limit and or going through red lights.
Maybe the rules have changed but it used to be that 20mph limits had to be self enforcing ie they could only be placed where the road layout limited the majority of traffic below 20mph and the police didn't enforce in those areas.
Must be different in wales then, they’re never outside schools hospitals or anywhere they’re needed. always hidden behind bushes or Round bends where it drops from say 50 to 40mph.
If you believe they’re for speed enforcement you are crazy. It’s all about money that’s all they’ve ever been about!
@@NoBody-gf8ie I never said the police make money from it? The treasury/government does so it’s the interest for the government to get the police to enforce it ?
And yes please do look it up I live In South Wales and they very rarely park near where your would expect them always bypasses national speed limit roads 👍
@@NoBody-gf8ie The only place the speed camera vans or speed gun cops are near me are areas where accidents never happen, there are no schools or pedestrians about. But they are common place for people speeding.
If it's a deterrent rather than revenue generation why do the police threaten to charge you for letting people know where they are operating?
@@NoBody-gf8ie ok officer dibble you keep licking them boots, nobody Believes they’re there for speed.
If every penny was spent on road safety rather than paying for the cheese and wine parties I’d believe you but it’s not!
It’s funny the most dangerous thing on the roads these days are the roads themselves.
Maybe the police should be out fining the councils for every pothole? 😂
Road safety my a55 😂😂
Yeah that's what they do near me, hide around a bend as the speed limit drops.
Ahh yes, the mobile camera vans in Lloc, Holywell rings a bell
IF THE GOVERNMENT & POLICE WERE ALL ABOUT SAFETY THEN WHY IS IT WE DO NOT GET A REMINDER FOR OUR MOT BUT GET ONE FOR OUR ROAD TAX - OBVIOUSLY AS WE ALL KNOW ITS 100% ABOUT MONEY !
I also want to argue the point that many of these vans cause people to suddenly brake when they are going slightly over the speed limit.
Because people are made to feel so anxious about a fine or even a ban! Especially as a new driver this can be very daunting if you are only 1-3 mph over the speed limit.
The vans don't cause anyone to do anything. If a driver chooses to panic it is 100% their choice.
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057tell that to the people behind the people who brake suddenly
@@jimst3r1 Are you saying you allow your driving behaviour to be dictated by others?
I've always appreciated how in the UK the cameras are highly visible and permanent ones have signs telling drivers about it, thus actually slowing people down at that point and its totally on the driver for being caught speeding where as here in Adelaide the police actively hide cameras and mobile cameras to actively catch people speeding to send them a fine rather than preventing speeding at the moment..... Its hard not to see that as just flat out revenue raising when they can make the cameras obvious and slow folk down with out having to fine them
The real problem with speed cameras is everyone figures out where they are. Then they speed, slow, go past the camera and then speed up again. They achieve very little.
So, Motorcyclists, if you see the van and you're too fast, weave across the road to make it harder for them to get a fix as you slow down. On a dual carriage way, if you can, hide beside a larger vehicle and keep it between you and the camera van. Also the farther out, the wider the laser beam is and then if more than one vehicle in the frame it is then harder to be certain the recorded speed is yours.
Motorbikes don't have front reg plates anyway, so will be fine
Larger vehicles can be unmarked police vehicles sometimes! Keep an eye on what you tell people!
@@josephmarsh8235 only to check if lorry drivers are on their phone and wearing their seatbelt...
Just cover your plate with your hand as you go by
@@ZJS0113 i think he said they can catch bikes with the speed and then when they go past the camera on top catches the number plate
They're ruining driving in London by reducing speed limits for no reason.
What reasons would justify speed reductions?
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 residential areas or areas with lots of people. Not the bloody A40 or main roads. Ridiculous
@@Undisputed_King You mean the high volume Westway?
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 yeah the former motorway
@@Undisputed_King The level of traffic and the location have long since reduced the road's status. I can absolutely see that more sedate speeds equate to such modern city locations.
If I ever do find myself going over the limit it’s normally due to being harassed by the vehicle behind. I drive a small EV I find people just do t want to be behind me. I had truck yesterday less than a metre away in a 30 zone I felt pressured into going faster.
best thing to do is just let them past, safest for everyone, yes it’s an inconvenience to you but makes it safer for you
But for some reason they find my boot really interesting. There has on occasions where I have dipped slightly over the posted limit on a duel carriageway and had a lorry get close enough that if I had to stop I couldn’t safely. All of this time the fast lane was available to them.
I’ve had a near miss twice because of people slamming their breaks when they see one of those vans, they’re a greater hazard then people on the motor way going 10 over
You are driving to close to the car in front of you
Here in the Highlands of Scotland camera vans are usually on straight safe-to-pass sections of the road where brief speeding is the safest way to pass as indeed all good drivers know. Easy money.
If the Scottish vans are usually in such places, then how do they ever catch anyone?
Think I was caught last night in Dundee! I agree with the vans, just not sitting in certain areas! As you say, exceeding the speed a bit to make a safe overtake, isn't exactly crime of the century!
Great video, however 80% of the time I see speed cameras they are hiding with their tripod with no van in sight.
By definition, the fact that you’ve seen them means they can’t be hiding very well 😂😂
@@Studidit well considering they can see for like 1000 metres and I don’t spot them till it’s way too late they hide pretty well.
Never see these in london. More likely to see an officer with a speed gun
I once saw a motorbike officer waiting round a bend in London on the A13 (I think, not from London) at about 7am, i thought "what a c*nt" 🤣
Flashing a car is not obstruction, it’s only an offence if you can prove the car you flashed was speeding at the time you flashed them which would be very hard to prove
I suspect you are one of those people who speed most of the time and don't have good enough eyesight to see the fully marked vehicle 🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂
They are absolutely 100% cash cows, there were 4 cameras placed on top of the hayes bypass a312, a dual carriageway, and the van is hidden to the side away from the sight of the dual carriageway users.
Surely speeding on a dual carriageway is less serious than speeding next to a school, so why didn’t they use those 4 cameras and place them next to 4 different schools to make them all safer rather than all on a dual carriageway???
I'm not someone who tends to speed so if I got caught out by a van then it'd be my responsibility, but when you do see the vans parked in snidy places, then I'd beg to differ that reason the van is there is to slow people down. On the A525 in gwynfryn North Wales the vans park behind a bunch of trees on the boundary between a 40 and 60, on a straight road for about 3/4s of a mile and 1 house opposite where it parks, who it's protecting I'm not sure.
Then the village where I live which has had a few fatalities since the 3 years I've lived here, on weekends motorbikes and cars drive through at ridiculous speeds and there's no speed camera or van as a deterant.
There are a great locations where enforcement is needed, so it may be that there is no suitable location to park, or it isn't on the police's radar. Have you requested they attend?
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 yes
Some years go, I seem to remember, a fixed camera on the M1 caught 1000’s of drivers speeding through roadworks.. generating 100s of 1000s of pounds in fines.. it was hailed as a success by the police..At the time the AA said what’s the point of this camera as it’s not making the road safer, if it’s caught all those drivers speeding through the roadworks.. far better to do something else to reduce the risk.. same as almost all the vans I see.. like the one parked in a lay-by on the Bournemouth ring road at 10pm In the dark, no pedestrians, nothing open, not many cars.. or the one at the end of a 30mph zone, catching drivers that have gone through the village, past the schools,shops etc..obviously nothing more than a cash machine.. disgraceful
What about having police wrote on the van and a civilian in it? Surely that’s impersonating a police officer? If they are there to save lives , stick them outside schools and built up areas not on a duel carriageway.
But they are not police they do not carry a warrant card. All speed camera vans should be called safety vans. As for the schools things it was an example as of it’s for safety, surely we want to protect and keep safe our children. Hiding behind bushes and trees is not safety. This is a money making exercise by the biggest organised gang in the world. Look how they handled covid abusing little old ladies in gardens while letting Boris and his mates party in number 10.
I would love a reply as intelligent discussions improve everyone's understanding, especially from the channel itself.
Only 13% of total collisions were caused by speed in 2020. Even fatal collisions it only rises to 27% were speeding. So the vast majority of collisions and a very large majority of fatal collisions are not caused by speed. Even those stats say they were speeding not that it was the primary cause.
Shot his own point really. "Most accidents we go too are from driver error" so not speed then.
The fact that with better driver training emergency vehicles are allowed to drive much faster also points to speed not being the issue.
The issue is people driving faster than their skill level allows for. Some of the driving you see on the roads is atrocious, but that isn't targeted. The vast majority of car crashes don't result in any punishment, unless they were speeding or doing something else that's extreme. It shouldn't matter even if your doing 10mph and bump into my rear bumper because you were too close, not paying attention or whatever, you should face punishment. Even if that punishment is a day doing extra driving training, and if by the end of that day your driving isn't up to standard you have to come back till it is.
The vast majority of people speeding do not crash, just think about the amount of cars that do 80+ on the motorway everyday compared to the amount that crash on that same day.
Its the wrong approach, I'm not saying it shouldn't be used at all, use it in 20 zones near schools. But it shouldn't be the main approach and focus. The fact that the main punishment is monetary and goes to treasury muddies the water further, all that money should go back into road issues, thats the problem people have, not because your using it for parties. It because the argument is its for road safety but as the officer said most of the money isn't used for road safety, I think he missed the point on that one. The speed awareness course again has no focus on driver training or improving driver skill, its just more of this is why you shouldn't speed.
It should be about improving peoples driving skill level because that affects all issues on the road. As I said at the beginning why target the issue that only causes 13% of collisions so heavily and instead use that massive amount of resources and money targeting the cause of 87% of car accidents, most of which is poor driver skill.
I hope you see this, I really wish we could have a live discussion about this as it is an issue close to my heart and I think it would be an educational discussion.
If you report a poor driver, they will be prosecuted or given the option of a learning course. So that answers your question.
And speed is what increases danger. if you can get those 13% or 27% off the stats, that's already an improvement.
@@roadbiker8333 no they won't. It almost never leads to prosecution and the learning courses arnt learning courses, they are "don't do this" courses. Theres no time spent in a car or any driving theory taught, at all.
Yes reducing that small percentage would be good, but surely its common sense that the larger percentage should be the main focus. Speed alone clearly isn't the main issue. Statistics don't lie. The fastest roads in the UK are motorways, they are also the safest. Despite carrying the most amount of vehicles the longest distances, with the longest average drive time bringing fatigue into the equation more, they also have a much larger number of potentially more dangerous vehicles on with the largest number of heavy goods vehicles, yet dispite all this they have fewer crashes and dispite the higher speed fewer fatal crashes.
OK let's look at those unrestricted roads in Germany as they were brought up in the video. We you look at the figures nearly 75% of those incidents at high speed involve foreigners that are not used to driving at high speeds, drive beyond they're skill level and training, if you take those figures out and just leave those that have learnt to drive in Germany there are fewer crashes total and fewer fatal crashes. So again driver skill and driver training is the issue. Those that have the training, the locals, don't crash. Yeah those that don't have the training and skill do.
At no point did I say it wasn't a contributing factor in some crashes, nor did I say it shouldn't be addressed. I said its being addressed in the wrong way and to the wrong level while the larger percentage of crash causes are largely ignored.
There are fewer fatal crashes and fewer crashes total on 70mph Roads than on slower 40mph roads, dispite all the aggregating circumstances I mentioned above, speed clearly isn't the main cause.
@@Stimm002 yet it does. I report bad drivers as my habit. 40% of them were sent a prosecution letter 30% were given the option to attend course if the driver doesnt want to be prosecuted, 30% were no action.
Speed is the issue. I like how you are claiming that on faster moving roads are safest. That’s because the roads are designed to be travelling at those speed. Try to think it this way. Which way is more dangerous? 70mph on a residential road? Or 30mph on a residential road? Same with dual carriageways, a road design to handle traffic at 40mph, what do you think is more dangerous? 70mph or 40mph??? Not to mention, yes it’s depending on drivers skills, but the skill level requirements increases with speed. A driver will require a much better control of the car at 70mph comparing to 20mph. And i can guarantee you that drivers who are already scared at 30mph would not appear on a motorway, so that alone already creating selection bias making the motorway seems safer.
And no. Speed is ALWAYS a contributing factor in all crashes and fatalities. It’s funny how you think that it’s not. Let’s say they spun and lost control at 50mph crashed into a tree killing themselves. they wouldnt have done so at 20mph. And they wont even be killed even if they lost control.
@@roadbiker8333 funny how your arguments are circumstantial. My statistics are readily available, your stats on prosecution you have no way of proving and even of you could are 1 case, the national average, which again you can look up on bad drivers reported vs those who go through prosecution or a course, which again dosnt solve the issue as there's no driving taught on the courses, the numbers don't bear out your personal stats. Infact it very much the opposite.
I'm not sure why your arguing that I said speed is never a factor. I never said that, infact I said it IS a contributing factor, but not the main one. Also if you won't drive faster than 30 because your not confident in your ability you shouldn't be driving at all. You wouldn't pass the modern test.
Again your point about skill level rising with speed argues my own point again, that driver skill level is too low. Who is arguing for 70mph on a residential road? I stated again and again that there are speed limits that make sense, infact nearly all do but using 80% of resources to target the issue after the fact without addressing the underlying issues of driver skill isn't fixing the problem. I don't see how that is controversial.
Your arguing against points I never made. My whole point was low driver skill is the bigger issue and would be a much better approach to address as well as speed. I don't really understand why your arguing with me, if your arguing that rubbish drivers don't appear on the motorway so motorways look safer i don't really know where to go from there, you can't pick and choose small numbers of drivers over the country and the larger statistics.
As for the last point, which again I don't see how its controversial, they shouldn't lose control at, 20mph or 50mph. There skill and experience should tell them what speed themselves and thier car can handle safely in the conditions and road type they are driving. Again I never said speed is not involved at anypoint, I said driver skill and training are a bigger contribution.
@@Stimm002 I know multiple cyclists who readily report bad drivers. And we have come up to similar stats.
Driver awareness course. Sure, you want to believe that no driving were taught in those courses. Have you even been in one? That says a lot then.
"My whole point was low driver skill" Exactly, when coupled with high speed, then that's what causes the accidents. It doesn't matter if you have low driver skill if you are driving at 10mph. you would kill no one. That's why police are clamping down the speed because that's what kills people. Also, you can't tackle driver's skills when they haven't done anything wrong. Meaning There's nothing to catch them with and to force them to attend any courses if they haven't broken the law. The whole thing around river's awareness course is that a driver broken a law due to their incompetence and the police uses the points and fines as a leverage to force the drivers to attend drivers course. And you can't even make a blanket rule to force all drivers to attend courses because that's just won't work. No country in the world does it.
"As for the last point, which again I don't see how its controversial, they shouldn't lose control at, 20mph or 50mph. " LOL They shouldn't and they won't is a different matter. Even professional racing drivers lose control! Would you say that they are low skilled? Even the best drivers In the world could lose control. It would be very naive of you to think that it won't happen if they are skilled. The difference is, if they do lose control at 50mph, the chances are that they are going to make big damages, meanwhile if they lose control at 20mph, it could be just a fender bender.
And actually, you claim that it's only 13% of crashes is caused by speeding. That may be true on paper because they can't claim that people travelling under the speed limit as "speeding". But excessive speed for the condition will be the contributing factor for almost all crashes. Just imagine if they are travelling at 1mph compared to whatever speed they are travelling at, would they have crashed if they were doing 1mph? Exactly. Speed is ALWAYS the factor there. That's why the government is trying to lower the speed limit across the board.
The amount of people in the comments trying to justify speeding is shocking. Speed limits aren’t in place for no reason and nobody is above the law unless there is a massive emergency you need to attend to.
To me, Its all part of driving. You have insurance, road tax, MOT & driving licence - because if you don't you're looking at some form of retribution or punishment, such as a fine, points Gaol/whatever if you don't have them. So why speed? You know what will happen if you're caught!
Very informative, thank you.
Thankyou David
Cash cows 100%, there’s one near me that always sits at the bottom of a hill around a blind bend on a dual carriageway, it’s such a hill that if you actually let off the accelerator and let the car coast by itself you’ll reach 75-80mph, so you literally have to brake to avoid speeding which in my opinion, braking on a dual carriageway so you don’t exceed by a few mph is far more dangerous than not braking at all.
Improve road saftety by getting poor and dangerous drivers of our roads. Complain to the judges and courts about letting people of for driving offences to easily. But there again its easier just to fine them, again it's about cash.
You can sit and spout all you like, but they should be renamed as cash converters.
If it's just about cash, then why bother with points and driver awareness courses? Surely if the government want to get as much cash as possible, then they would probably do the following...
1) Make the camera vans blend into the background (maybe a camouflage design).
2) Not bother with points or disqualification for speeding (12 points or +30mph over the speed limit) - you can't fine a driver if they're not on the road.
3) Not have a plethora of speed camera signs in places where there are static or mobile speed cameras.
@@robsayer8028 he even said they made money off speed awareness courses and points the higher your insurance the more tax you pay on that insurance 😂 it’s all money for the goverment they ain’t stupid😂
@@Philljag if that's really what you believe then you'll have to find a political party that will do away with speeding offences. I really don't fancy your chances though... (by the way, the road safety partnership gets money from the speed awareness courses, not the government).
@@robsayer8028 The amount of money police forces in England and Wales receive from drivers attending speed awareness courses has jumped by almost a third.
Figures obtained by the Press Association show that the contribution a constabulary gets for each person it sends on a course leapt from £35 to £45 last month.
With around 1.2 million drivers attending speed awareness courses annually, police forces will now collect £54m each year.
@@Philljag again, it's not just the police that get the money (after expenses such as hiring the place where the course takes place) from speed awareness courses. It goes to the Road Safety Partnership which includes the police, the local councils, National Highways, the NHS and the fire and rescue service (to name but a few). Look it up for your area. This money (I'll take your figure of £54m per year as accurate) is the amount for the whole of the UK, and is used to improve road safety.
If it was not a cash cow it would not be illegal to tell people to slow down before the camera.
How so?
I agree totally about the use of speed cameras, and the benefits they bring. The only thing that wrangles me is that on the odd occasion - and we've all done it - that you momentarily lose concentration on you speed, and say find yourself at 35 in a 30 - and it's really easy to do - the camera van will clock you at 10% +2 (gov't guidelines) - and you'll get 3 points and a £100 fine - with absolutely no leeway given, as may have been the case in the old days when a police car stopped you. Personally I would give 1st offenders a warning letter if they exceeded the limit by a small amount - and only then progress to the usual points and fine if a second offence occurred or if the speed was exceeded by a substantial amount.
No, 10+2 is ACPO guidelines. No leeway given? That IS the leeway! Plus you'd be offered a course first before points and a fine.
no the 10% + 2 is to account for inaccuracy in the speedometer. Not the momentary lapse of concentration from the driver. @@Only_Fools_and_Audits
@@20252c You misunderstand, I never stated anything about concentration lapses. The 10% + 2 is published in the ACPO guidelines that has yet to be overwritten by the NPCC.
They do hide behind bushes. I got done for overtaking vehicles and the van was behind a Bush in a well known area. As I was overtaking I should have fought it but I felt it was more hassle than its worth as if I won they would be out to get me
@@NoBody-gf8ie why you deleting comments officer dibble? 👮♀️
The laser would not work from inside a bush.
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 so why do so many hide in bushes then?
@@Philljag That is just an urban myth.
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 wow my eyesight must be an urban myth then 😂😂
Does the windows have to be open for the camera to be operating? Or can they operate through the closed tinted windows ? Just found you on UA-cam, just subscribed 🤙🏼
I'm pretty sure they can. Those vans can be mobile and driving around and they can catch you speed up behind them as they are driving.
The windows need to the open, the equipment is only approved for use through ‘open air’ (ie no obstruction).
The detector uses lasers to measure distance over a set time (and calculate speed) and so the glass/plastic will affect the functioning of these lasers 👍
@@geko7844 Those cameras can still catch you speeding while the mobile speed van is driving. I’d presume the tinted window would be closed while moving, right?
@@zouzou_u no, they can’t. The device requires an operator to be sitting at it, which they can’t do whilst it’s moving and the windows are closed when it’s moving.
In addition, the device works by measuring a change in distance over a set time and calculating an average speed over that distance. If the device is moving at the same speed as the target, then it will record a speed of 0 as there has been no change in distance. They are not designed to work on the move. Traffic vehicles have devices which can measure speed ‘on the move’ but these vans cannot.
@@geko7844 that’s not what I’ve heard. I can’t take your word on it lol.
Plod lying right there, up in the North East where I live they do hide the vans on blind bends, hill summits and laybys. And just for clarity I have never had a speeding fine in 39 years of driving cars, HGV's and riding motorbikes.
Most of the ones I've seen are nearly always on bends or curves. I've even seen a cop with the tripod type stood under a big tree in the dark.
So you mean in places with poor visibility where you can’t see what’s coming or possibly broken down? And Devon and Cornwall isn’t in the North East. Each force has their own policies
@@GCMYT well done George you have passed basic geography, you're right Devon and Cornwall is nowhere near the North East! But up here they do hide the vans as I said in my original comment.
Cash cow sell it how you want. There may be some places where there set up after concerns from locals but I have seen these deliberately parked on blind corners etc. This is dangerous because people's reaction is to hit the brakes regardless of what they're speed is.
He being a policeman will NOT say they are Cash Cows.
A fixed speed camera will permanently deter speeding at that location. A mobile van will not, as no one knows it’s there. You’ve just shown that as soon as a vehicle rounds the corner, you’ve got them; wouldn’t it be more fair to do a secondary check, now the van is in sight, as likely the vehicle has slowed. Therefore its argument as a speed deterrent is invalid and it’s pure purpose is as a “trap” to generate revenue. Driver education goes a lot further to controlling speeding, where as instant catch-and-fine from a faceless operator in a van only portrays the police in a negative light.
If for cost reasons it’s not viable to place a fixed camera, why not place a couple of temporary signs (while in operation) a few hundred meters either side saying “mobile speed enforcement deployed ahead”. Watch how safely everyone drives then, and if they don’t, they deserve to be caught or educated. What you say at the end I agree with, drivers did sign up to the rules, but as you well know 95% of the driving public are a thick as pig shite (where driving without due care is more of a problem than speed) and need constant herding like sheep with brain damage. Just a thought, but won’t be taken on board I understand.
These are cash cows end of lol
Are average speed cameras better for controlling speed?
Nice video.
Bit of a obvious question no?
Different system, different deployment. Average speed works over a greater distance, not better, just different.
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 ASC keeps speed legal and consistent. Speed cameras tend to make some drivers slam on the brakes then speed up again.
@@SirHackaL0t. If a percentage of drivers lack the required confidence to drive without the reaction of stepping on the brakes, that is their problem and nothing whatsoever to do with anything parked by the side of the carriageway.
Your comment identifies the very common human trait of attempting to pass the blame.
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 Clearly you don’t drive. So many people brake suddenly because they’ve seen the speed camera.
Great video thanks. I've never been a fan of single speed cameras, especially on multi lane roads. The number of times I've had people overtaking me then swerve right infront of me and brake when they see one in unreal. I think the average speed concept is much more reasonable. I think the only thing that gets my back up with these mobile vans is when we are told that they only put one where there are a high number of accidents. That's not true. If they said they only put them where there are a high proportion of speeders I would completely agree. As for the range I was once caught speeding by a handheld at 917 meters so they are quite impressive.
The placement of mobile vans at high collision sites ended in 2007. You are way behind the times.
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 so are the people running the speed awareness courses then 🤷♂️ Thanks for updating me 👍
@@cynic-al I am uncertain what you are asking. Yes, people run the courses.
So those efforts you can use to catch criminals rather than focus on this. Schools need to teach childrens about road and when and when not to cross roads.
Can a Camera Van park illegally & still catch motorists speeding? I've seen them parked in bus stops which surely is illegal & any evidence gathered cannot be used 🤔
They do not park illegally, they have exemptions provided by the local authority written in to the relevant Traffic Regulation Order:
EXEMPTIONS FROM PROHIBITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS EXEMPTIONS FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES 51. 1) Nothing in this Order shall apply to any vehicle on an occasion when it is being used for fire brigade, ambulance or police purposes, if the observance of that provision would be likely to hinder the use of that vehicle for the purpose for which it is being used on that occasion.
So all perfectly legal.
Do the vans have the same tolerance as a usual speed camera IE 10%+2mph? Or do they just get you for going anything over.
Always wondered
most of them give you a bit of leeway usually 10%+2 but they measure GPS speed most cars Speedo’s aren’t 100% accurate and you’re typically going slower than you think
@@kyenev They donot mesure "gps" speed.....
The camera sends a unseen laser beam and this is what measures your speed.
@@EnemyDwarf-TTV yes which is your gps speed
@@kyenev Come on explain this further.
@@nickolasreeks4743 right so for instance most modern cars (not all cars) your Speedo might for instant read 34mph but you’re only actually travelling 30mph. Not sure why manufacturers do this. So if you’re doing 34 on your Speedo and you see a van you’ll obviously not be doing 34 miles an hour exactly and it’s usually a few mph less. Then you get 10%+2 leeway usually so you can be doing much over 30 on your cars Speedo before you’re clocked speeding
so its designed for safety ..... then why is it mobile ??, no seriously ... why is it mobile, if there is an accident blackspot then the council should install a hard wired speed camera and not wastes £60,000 - £90,000 on a van, those vans are cash cows, nothing more, nothing less
Because each speed camera is around £70,000 and can only be in one place. If a van does indeed cost between £60,000 to £90,000 and can be used in several "blackspots" each day, then to me that is not a waste of money.
Actually, just seen another costing for a rural static speed camera of £40,000. Still can only be in one place though...
There are many hundreds of sites, a van can attend all, especially locations where statics cannot be deployed.
"The money certainly doesn't go to anything like Christmas parties." 4:05 🤣
Good spot, thanks for endorsing.
When you have cars in areas which are speed enforced, especially by average speed cameras, the drivers are concentrating on their speedo rather than eyes on the road.
I'm in Wales and the 30mph speed limit is being lowered to 20mph. Locally to me they have just installed 6 miles of average speed cameras along a 20mph road. This was paid for by council and confirmed in the press release that all money goes to the police.
I have already tried to drive 20mph on these roads and it is quite difficult, I was watching my speedo and going through the gears a lot more. I do have cruise control and have to set it at 17mph because the car can creep over sometimes. But to travel 6 miles at 20 mph will take best part of 20 minutes.
That’s ridiculous!
Do you object to the speed limit or the idea of a speed limit? These vans aren't declaring the speed limit there enforcing it.
@@PCDelorian In this case, I feel a 20mph speed limit being enforced with average speed cameras over 6 miles is insanity. I use this road daily for 3 miles as there is no other option and it is torture.
There are cars parked on this road, so you have to give way and come to a stop regularly. Yesterday I reset my cars computer and it recorded over 3.4 miles my average speed was 14.3mph, 14 minutes and that was only half the length of the road!
Rubbish cash cows nothing more..
only the HATER`S who have been nicked for speeding will give this vid the thumbs down. period.
Hopefully it gives people more of an insight :) I won’t judge on peoples opinions, but I know what you mean! I actually lost my license for speeding so I know the pain
I’ve never been done for speeding, I have a clean licence amazingly but because I dislike them means I’ve been caught? Bootlickers should move to North Korea!
Iv'e been driving for 39 years now cars, bikes and HGV's I once got a parking ticket at 18 years old and thats it never for speeding I've given it a thumbs down I'm a total hater of camera vans hiding on bends, hills and laybys and they do PERIOD.
@@andrewwww7684 I love em 🥰🥰🥰🥰
@@t5jerry because you're a clown.....gotcha
Parking 40 feet from a national speed limit sign taking photos of people leaving a 30mph into a 60mph is what I would call entrapment or obtaining money on a technicality. Now if it was coming into a 30 from a 60 then that's acceptable and more of a danger .
😂 you could call it that but you’d be wrong 🤦🏻♂️ that’s not what entrapment is 😂😂
Cash Cows. There’s been a 40mph limit on a street in my town for many many years. Had plenty of signs up ahead of it.
But now… they’ve reduced the speed limit to 30mph, took all the signs down and just put one up either side of the camera about only 20 metres away. I only saw it recently and slammed my breaks on. So I was always doing the correct speed but now I may be a criminal for SPEEDING. Why didn’t they put large interim signs up informing the public of the speed change coming and when it was in force. SCAM
There cannot be repeater signs on a restricted road.
0:28 I'm going to come collect the road
Whilst I understand most of it but I don't understand how alerting other drivers is illegal. What good is a £100 fine if a child still gets knocked down? Also why are they mostly on dual carriageways and not in 30 zones? I don't know of any in my area that are positioned in 30s or near schools. Especially purposely placed on way to race tracks, car shows etc. always on the dual carriageway nearby but not in the 30mph zones
@@NoBody-gf8ie worcestershire/Warwickshire
It's only illegal because they are corruptly controlling the law. It's purely because your are taking money from them
I just realised this is Devon+Cornwall. Never had an issue with their placements down there. Infact they have always seemed much more legitimate to me.
If you guys find the time take a field trip to the midlands and if you see the vans you'll soon see why people here aren't too impressed.
Infact I'll go one better - over the next month or so I'll keep my eyes out and pin the locations of them then send you co-ordinates and you can have a look on maps to see what you think of them.
Ohh they are definitely for cash. Every time I see one its in a tricky stretch of road in the middle of nowhere that's normally down hill,I haven't even seen one outside of a school or hospital before. And when I was with my brother in Dorset we both said to each other this is speed camera territory, so we both fixated on the speed to be absolute bang on and surprise surprise we still got a ticket ,so they obviously knew the car wasn't local and decided to corrupt the numbers knowing for well we couldn't prove them wrong (the dash camera doesn't record speed unfortunately)
Please provide verifiable statistics that show the need for them outside schools and hospitals.
Corrupt the numbers?
2 days ago, i seen police staff on top of a dual carriageway and he was driving a black Astra and he was pointing a camera up the carriageway. This has nothing to do with getting the public to slow down, it is there purely to make money. The placement of the camera was not at an incident blackspot. It's just disgusting and morally wrong
So you openly want people to die before anything is done about recognised speeding issues???
How do you sleep at night?
This video places the van in a place where it is for safety purposes. Speed camera vans are often found on dual carriage ways which does tell a different story of making it a cash cow. Kids don’t get run over on dual carriage ways.
Germany have better drivers and higher speed limits. I do think we should raise our speed limits at least on motorways as its generally safe to do 80-90 in the right hand lane.
I get that 30mph should be the default for towns and villages as standard as theres a high risk to pedestrians.
What training do UK drivers get to drive at 90mph?
I agree with most people here. In Northern Ireland they are always in a "sly" spot. Not a high risk or accident black spot or a spot where speeding is particularly dangerous.
Locally they frequent behind a hedge in a side road on a stretch of 60mph dual carriageway. Got ticketed for doing 80 in a 60. I never seen the van, the report said it was in Dixon's garden centre, which closed 10 years ago, but I know the little layby field entrance they were in and it is camoflauged and why I didn't see them.
Another is the 60 down to 40 and 40 up to 60 at the end of the carriageway, getting both people either braking late or accelerating early. Scum bags.
I also got a false ticket, but didn't appeal it as I was given false information by the Speed Awareness instructor. He told me that EU laws regarding dual carriageways now mean an NSL dual carriageway was only 60mph unless it had a steel or concrete divider. So I was done for 70 in a 60. I later found out that the UK completely rejected said laws as it would be far too expensive to implement. So any reservation makes the NSL 70mph IIRC.
Here is the thing that makes the 99% cash cow. They place there vans where they will catch the most speeding people. NOT stop the most people speeding. The money from the vans goes to the local authority, the more they raise the more they get. There are no checks and balances, it's entirely corruptible.
I can think of a dozen different places we could use a speed van or a patrol car to make VERY dangerous situations more under control, especially around school in/out times, but no, nowhere to be seen.
Superintendent Adam Thomson is North Yorkshire Police’s Neighbourhood Policing Commander for York and Selby said new smaller camera vans were now in use by the force, with cameras which covered the front, rear and sides.
Supt Thomson said the aim of these vans was to reduce the number of deaths on the roads, and ensure motorists drive more safely.
He said: "As well as catching people who blatantly flout motoring laws such driving at excess speed, the equipment is also able to identify drivers using hand-held mobile phones and other common offences like failing to wear seatbelts."
I've ridden >1,000cc motorbikes for six years without any speeding tickes or incidents. Why? Effective risk management and forward planning. In a 30 zone, there are many risks that mean we should keep our speed under good control. Speed Cameras also tell us that this is a high risk location, and are also are typically placed where there have been a high volume of accidents (like an A road with a T-junction for example). On the open road like a national speed limit area, we can move swiftly and make great progress.
Cash cow , Never seen one on a school road or near a school , only on a A road or B road .
Both Devon & Cornwall UA-cam clips are right by schools.
Sir Policeman when a robber robs or knife user stabs someone from 1 or 2 meters away in front of CCTV they never bother to catch him because there’s no money to generate.
They do bother 🙄 but it’s a little harder as people don’t have reg plates on to identify them! Also the police don’t profit from speed enforcement.
nonsense
If everything that bloke said was true, I agree with it.
Thing is, I live in Spain and here there is no mistake at all that it's all there for revenue collection. For instance, in my town there is a road that goes to the beach. It's a very wide road. The speed limit used to be 50kmh (30mph) and that tbh was quite slow all things considered. I went to the beach several times with this elderly person and he goes pathetically slow, but even he broke the speed limit. Okay, fast forward to now, they've lowered the speed limit in that same road to 30kmh (20mph) and it's that slow that I went at 50kmh with a police car behind me and he started flashing me to speed up, he also got within a few feet behind me. Absolutely nobody goes the speed limit.
However, it's commonplace for the police to leave a tiny little camera (with no police car or anything visible anywhere) just next to a bush.
My friend got caught doing 70kmh (perfectly reasonable speed for that sort of road) and got fined 300€ + I believe 2 points off his licence.
Example 2: You thought oh that's you're town. Can't be like that in big cities... Think again. In Benidorm as you're coming off the motorway at the levante exit, there's a long-ish road down to get to the main bit of the city. It's a 4 lane road, that's extremely wide and also going downhill. Now that used to be 70 and even that was a tad slow. Bare in mind this road has no cycle lane, no pedestrians or anything. It's purely for cars. What do you reckon they've done with the speed limit? 60? 50? Nah. 30kmh on a downhill, 4 lane road that's only used for cars. That's 20mph. You'd hit bout 30mph on a pushbike without pedaling. So not only would it be wrong to fine people doing 35kmh in what should be a 70kmh (and was), but they go a step further and go to great lengths and hide the camera 🥲
So in conclusion, it is definitely purely cash collection on poor people that don't deserve it.
The points go ON the licence, not off it.
Its blatantly obvious its a cash cow, otherwise killing somebody by dangerous driving would mean life not 5 or6 years.
I've only ever been caught speeding once, and that was a guy with a radar gun. I was doing 75 in a 30 on a motorbike and I'd just passed my test.
He said there's no way on earth he could let me go with a warning, but he did put it down as a minor (SP30). So all I got was 3 points and a fine. I should have lost my license.
Lesson learned.
I now have Class 2, Class 1, Car and bike license and I never speed. Your license is hard to get and easy to lose.
Was Queen Victoria on the throne at the time?
Quote at 2:50 in video "One thing you probably didn't realise was that the camera has a range of about a 1000 metres. So if you'd seen the camera van it's probably too late and it's already seen you" and @3:18 "just the presence of this van is doing enough to slow people down. So ultimately its doing its job"
But hang on a minute they were all clocked by the van @ 1km. Before they saw the van. So none of them were speeding before seeing the van. In other words it was no deterrent, and contrary to their concerns while at that location no one was speeding. Earlier in the video he made a big thing about visibility. But his statement confirms the camera is in effect covert because it is not seen before being clocked. If it was the deterrent claimed. One would be clocked after seeing the van & if ignored speeding recorded. These are NOT for safety.
I witnessed one of these vans on a dual carriage way which did not clearly sign the speed limit on the road. My sat nav informed me the speed limit was 60, and that was the only indication of the speed limit for that road. How many cars will have been fined for speeding, only to risk an even bigger fine informing the police the signs are inadequate?
It is a national disgrace that cameras are positioned where the speed limit is unclear. After all they are there for safety? All fixed speed cameras should include a physical speed limit sign in the cameras field of view, which was also visible to the driver at the time the photo taken. (The latest cameras record a measured speed which is NOT VISIBLE to the driver and provide no means of independently verifying accuracy. Not only that but many signs are hidden by tree branches/vegetation obscuring drivers views of essential information.