Revenue driven, Target driven or Road Safety?

[Mike Rowley]

Just heard on the BBC that Devon & Cornwall Police have the highest number of motoring fines for any force outside of London.

Perhaps our Chief Constable has more in common with Brunsom than we thought.

[Johnnyb]

Just heard on the BBC that Devon & Cornwall Police have the highest number of motoring fines for any force outside of London.

Perhaps our Chief Constable has more in common with Brunsom than we thought.

Either that or we have the worst drivers outside London

[GIXXER KID]

think it might have something to do we with me and my love for illegal number plates

[Mervin]

too much money being spent on road policing, and not enough on protecting the people i reckon, burglary ,rape,shoplifitng, mugging etc are now just about approved occupations, get on a bike or in a car do a little over the speed limit , and you are one of the biggest crooks on earth
merv

[Mervin]

Just to confirm my suspicions the BBC local news has this minute announced that burglaries are on the increasein devon and cornwall
Merv

[simon]

Trouble is that more people die on the roads each year than die in all other crimes combined.

[Mervin]

but that is mostly self inflicted surely prevention would be better than chasing around the countryside in high powered cars, show some of these idiots the consequences of accidents, and i dont mean just speeders the idiots that drive around in bloddy great knightsbridge tractors looking over the hedges in stead of at the road etc
merv

[Mike Rowley]

Trouble is that more people die on the roads each year than die in all other crimes combined.

Quite so but do you believe that speed is the dominant cause of these deaths? The governments own statistics suggest that in only 6 - 7% of fatal accidents is excessive speed the primary cause.

The Police/Government strategy seems to be that they have given up on accident prevention measures as too difficult or too expensive. it is called regression, when a task proves too difficult, beyond your capabilities you regress to one that you can achieve, thus Chief Constables regress to become traffic cops. They concentrate on an easily enforceable offence in an effort to reduce the consequences of accidents whilst at the same time giving the impression of doing something. In addition, they please their political masters by generating revenue where accident prevention measures such as road design improvements, seperation of pedestians and traffic and advanced driver/rider training would be very expensive.

Consequently, we see periodical moves to lower speed limits on all roads. As they get us acustomed to a particular limit they reduce it by an increment then reduce it again after we have become acostomed to that, hence the proposals to reduce national speed limits to 50mph and a lower limit of 20mph for built up areas. The logic of this strategy is that all injury and fatal accidents can be iliminated if the speed limits are low enough therefore limits could eventually come down to 10 - 15mph in towns and 30mph on motorways. This also makes public transport more attractive, this is a long term aim for politicians and bureaucrats since it reduces the amount they spend on road infastructure and maintenance. It also keeps us oiks off their roads!

[Johnnyb]

The logic of this strategy is that all injury and fatal accidents can be iliminated if the speed limits are low enough therefore limits could eventually come down to 10 - 15mph in towns and 30mph on motorways.

The day that happens then i get on a ferry with a one way ticket..............

[simon]

I don't see it as a conspiricy. The fact is that we share the roads with a significant minority of people who are incapable of judging speed and distance and it because of these people, we have these draconian laws rammed down our throats. I do think it is important to bear in mind though that the current proposals are just that. Proposals. Nothing has been etched in stone. Yes we are seeing 20mph speed limits being imposed but in my area, that is only during school kicking out time. I do think we tend to over react. The previous poster has said that we have periodical moves to limit speeds on all roads. The fact is we don't. The national speed limit is the same today as it's always been. Yes occassionally we see some limits reduced on some roads, but across the board, that hasn't happened since 1977 when the speed limit for cars and bikes on dual carriageways was set at 70mph with single carriageways carrying a 60mph limit.The limits remained untouched until 1999 when the 20mph limit was set for some built up areas but even then, it is only on particular roads, as highlighted, and not across the board and discretion to introduce them was given to local authorities. Of course speed is very much on the agenda nowadays, but if you honestly believe that speeding fines are a good "earner", then forcing us off the roads, as the aforementioned posted implied was happening, would be somewhat counterproductive don't you think ?

[Mike Rowley]

Of course speed is very much on the agenda nowadays, but if you honestly believe that speeding fines are a good "earner", then forcing us off the roads, as the aforementioned posted implied was happening, would be somewhat counterproductive don't you think ?

That of course, assumes that you believe that politicians and bureaucrats think logically and that far ahead. The evidence is overwhelmingly to the contrary.

[simon]

Of course speed is very much on the agenda nowadays, but if you honestly believe that speeding fines are a good "earner", then forcing us off the roads, as the aforementioned posted implied was happening, would be somewhat counterproductive don't you think ?

That of course, assumes that you believe that politicians and bureaucrats think logically and that far ahead. The evidence is overwhelmingly to the contrary.

The funny thing is that you could open any motoring / bike magazine from 10-20-30 years ago and you will see people voicing exactly the same concerns. I remember MCN signalling an end to biking as a result of the helmet law being introduced. The fact is that very little actually changes. We live in a society that is utterly dependant on the revenue gained from the sale of fossil fuels and to believe that there is a conspiricy to get motorists off the road, thus cutting off this vital cash supply line, is very naive.

[Mike Rowley]

The funny thing is that you could open any motoring / bike magazine from 10-20-30 years ago and you will see people voicing exactly the same concerns. I remember MCN signalling an end to biking as a result of the helmet law being introduced. The fact is that very little actually changes. We live in a society that is utterly dependant on the revenue gained from the sale of fossil fuels and to believe that there is a conspiricy to get motorists off the road, thus cutting off this vital cash supply line, is very naive.

Quite amusing that you consider me naive, I will take that as a compliment at my age.

If you consider modern society is committed to revenue from fossil fuel taxation you need to explain why politicians are currently pushing hard to develop wind and tide generation as well as replacement of nuclear power stations. Why also are the current vehicle exise duty rates set to heavily favour electric and hybrid vehicles? A person who is less naive would realise that HM Treasury will very quickly find alternative means to levy the revenue they loose from fuel oil sales and find ways of presenting that taxation as socially desireable. Incidently, what makes you think that vehicles fueled by so called sustainable fuels will not be able to exceed speed limits?

I note you haven't addressed any of the specific points I made, you merely confine yourself to stating a pro police/government opinion. Maybe you might address yourself to the points I made referring to regression, abdigation of policy to prevent accidents in favour of the easier, more revenue friendly policy of reducing the consequenses of RTAs by reducing mechanical impact (speed) and the fact that approximately 6% - 7% of all RTA have excessive speed as the primary cause. The inescapable logic of the current policy is to continue to progressively reduce speed limits until a point is reached whereby no injury or fatal RTAs occur. Such speeds are going to be very slow indeed.

Contrary to your earlier post, the evidence is overwhelmingly that of reducing speed limits. The proliferation of 50mph limits on A roads, 40mph sections of non- built up roads and 20mph being substituted for 30mph in built up areas within Devon and Cornwall is undisputable. The present proposal is to extend this to make rural A roads 50mph. It is a fact that D & C Police raise the second highest revenue from motoring offences in the UK whilst.

There is a proposal to develop a system based on GPS technology combined with a database to allow all vehicle speeds to be controlled in accordance with the speed restriction of the road they are travelling on. The technology is already available to achieve this it merely needs the political will to enforce its fitting to all vehicles. Such a national sytem would negate the revenue gathering charge. However, when speeds have been reduced significantly and injury, fatal accidents still occur then the authorities are going to have to address the real causes of RTAs. The emperor will indeed have been seen to have no clothes.

[simon]

I note you haven't addressed any of the specific points I made

Like wise, you sidestepped the point I made.
This thread is about revenue made by speeding fines.
You claim in your earlier post that the Governments ultimate goal is to get us all off the road.
Wouldn't that be counterproductive.
What about the loss of revenue this would incur, assuming you really do believe that speeding fines are merely a kind of stealth tax.

[Mike Rowley]

I note you haven't addressed any of the specific points I made

Like wise, you sidestepped the point I made.
This thread is about revenue made by speeding fines.
You claim in your earlier post that the Governments ultimate goal is to get us all off the road.
Wouldn't that be counterproductive.
What about the loss of revenue this would incur, assuming you really do believe that speeding fines are merely a kind of stealth tax.

Quite the contrary, I dealt with all of your specific points. Try reading my posts again. The point you make re- revenue I have dealt with in some detail. You have merely repeated it here without addressing any of the issues I raised. you might care to deal with points made rather than continually trying to change the issue as your arguments are rebutted.

I know what the thread is, I initiated it and you have yet to deal with the main question.

You have a familiar debating strategy.