Weather
Dorset traffic light speed camera list is fake (From Bournemouth Echo)
When news happens text pix and video to 80360. Start your message with BE then leave a space.
Dorset traffic light speed camera list is fake
6:42pm Thursday 9th July 2009
A LIST claiming to give the locations of 12 further traffic light speed cameras in Bournemouth and Poole is false, it has been confirmed.
The information currently circulating via email claims the new ‘speed on green’ cameras on the A350 Holes Bay Road are not the only ones in the area.
But the Dorset Safety Camera Partnership (DSCP) said the two on Holes Bay Road were the only two in the county.
All the other locations do have red light safety cameras to catch drivers who jump the lights but do not monitor the speed of those driving through green lights.
Johnny Stephens, the Partnership’s head of fixed penalties, aid: “The DSCP can confirm that there are two Speed on Green camera sites in Dorset, both on the A350 Holes Bay Road in Poole. Further information about all safety camera locations in Dorset can be found on the website at dorsetsafetycameras .org.uk.
“Speed on Green safety cameras have been introduced as one of the measures used in Dorset to prevent serious and fatal collisions in the county.
“They will ensure that drivers abide with the legal speed limit and drive at appropriate speeds for these busy traffic light junctions.”
More News stories
- Go ahead for Poole's Twin Sails Bridge
- Heroes to make their Telemark
- New move to expose school place cheats
- Pedal-powered firefighters to tackle heathland fires
- Positive response to Imax survey
- Karen’s best friend Coco up for award
- £2.5m plan to rescue roads from potholes set to start next month
- Backing women in business
- National Trust offers Dorset fresh air to stressed city workers
- Pair use hose to help save fire-hit cottage in New Forest
Your Say YourEcho
ferret38, bournemouth says...
7:01pm Thu 9 Jul 09
Insight, says...
7:27pm Thu 9 Jul 09
Staff at one of Britain's biggest speed camera units could face job cuts after funding has been halved.
Transport for London has cut the budget of the London Safety Camera Partnership from £5.9 million to £3 million."
This is just the first in a series of sweeping cuts to speed camera quangos across the country.
There, that'll teach you camera people to fiddle your figures to make it look like you're doing a good job when you're not.
When you've filled the media with tales of your success the government believed you, now you're going to pay for it with your jobs.
Oh dear, what a pity, never mind.
(The frightening part is, because the government believed the propaganda, not only do we have impotent speed cameras who're losing their funding, we've also lost 20% of our 'real traffic police'. You camera supporters must surely be getting the big picture and realise what you've done by now?
Perry_Winkle, Poole says...
8:02pm Thu 9 Jul 09
PokesdownMark, Bournemouth says...
9:44pm Thu 9 Jul 09
How can the DSCP continue to put people at risk by leaving this speed camera in place? It is outrageous!
Dorpol, Wimborne says...
11:13pm Thu 9 Jul 09
Peggy Babcock, Poole says...
8:03am Fri 10 Jul 09
ry8000, Bournemouth says...
8:48am Fri 10 Jul 09
Pathetic money making scum. Get more police, and get rid of these hideous & useless cameras.
Adrian XX, Poole says...
9:37am Fri 10 Jul 09
Pathetic money making scum. Get more police, and get rid of these hideous & useless cameras.
Why do you want more police? You would have to pay more council tax for more police. Surely it is better to be caught by a camera than by the police? At least with a camera you don't have to sit in the police car for 15 minutes while they take your details, tell you off, lecture you on how dangerous your driving is etc.
Peggy Babcock, Poole says...
10:05am Fri 10 Jul 09
ry8000 wrote:Yep - there are measuring lines on the road. Of course, you could choose not speed or jump lights you know....
I assume there should now also be measured paint lines on the road as a visual verification of the speed? Or do we just have to trust that the cameras are calibrated properly now? Pathetic money making scum. Get more police, and get rid of these hideous & useless cameras.
gerbil112, Poole says...
10:40am Fri 10 Jul 09
Perry_Winkle wrote:If you go the the DSCP website and read it carefully, the list is for all camera's in the area. However, only TWO are listed as "Speed on green".
The odd thing is that the list came from the DSCP website - I got the email yesterday, and followed the link. Looks like since then there's been a litle bit of surgery on their website. Just like the cameras - smoke and mirrors, and hey presto, the truth is whatever you want it to be...
The fake e-mail has been changed by having the words "plus speed on green" removed from the Holes Bay listing, implying that ALL the cameras listed are of this type. Try this link: http://www.dorsetsaf
etycameras.org.uk/in
dex.php?option=com_c
ontent&task=category
§ionid=8&id=28&I
temid=43
Insight, says...
10:58am Fri 10 Jul 09
9:37am Fri 10 Jul 09
Why do you want more police? You would have to pay more council tax for more police. Surely it is better to be caught by a camera than by the police? At least with a camera you don't have to sit in the police car for 15 minutes while they take your details, tell you off, lecture you on how dangerous your driving is etc."
From your description we must assume you've had the experience of being caught by a 'real police officer' and prefer to know where the cameras are which allow you get away with any number of offences anywhere else including drinking and taking drugs.
It appears the only real support for cameras comes from those who'd prefer not to have real police back on the streets.
Adrian XX, Poole says...
11:43am Fri 10 Jul 09
From your description we must assume you've had the experience of being caught by a 'real police officer' and prefer to know where the cameras are which allow you get away with any number of offences anywhere else including drinking and taking drugs.
Not so. I would prefer the cameras to be hidden and notice of their whereabouts to remain unpublished.
verwoodbadger, Verwood says...
12:37pm Fri 10 Jul 09
kinc, Bournemouth says...
12:40pm Fri 10 Jul 09
I thought there had to be a history of accidents to be able to place a camera!
There will be more accidents now due to people slamming the brakes on to avoid a speeding ticket, before this people could speed up to cross the junction when the lights started to change.
Insight, says...
12:54pm Fri 10 Jul 09
12:37pm Fri 10 Jul 09
Children, children! Will you all play nicely together now please!
Yes, comments at this level really do encourage mature debate, keep up the good work.
Adrian XX, Poole says...
11:43am Fri 10 Jul 09
I would prefer the cameras to be hidden and notice of their whereabouts to remain unpublished.
Well, you'll be pleased to hear that the law does allow this, however, as expected you failed to mention how even hidden cameras would deal with the rise in drink and drug related accidents, which isn't much of a surprise really.
Insight, says...
12:56pm Fri 10 Jul 09
If you work for a partnership, unless you're the manager you're facing redundancy in the not too distant future.
Perry_Winkle, Poole says...
1:06pm Fri 10 Jul 09
gerbil112 wrote:Agreed gerbil - that's what it says now, but on Wednesday it was ambiguous about where the 'speed on green' cameras were. The website has changed since then.
Perry_Winkle wrote: The odd thing is that the list came from the DSCP website - I got the email yesterday, and followed the link. Looks like since then there's been a litle bit of surgery on their website. Just like the cameras - smoke and mirrors, and hey presto, the truth is whatever you want it to be...If you go the the DSCP website and read it carefully, the list is for all camera's in the area. However, only TWO are listed as "Speed on green". The fake e-mail has been changed by having the words "plus speed on green" removed from the Holes Bay listing, implying that ALL the cameras listed are of this type. Try this link: http://www.dorsetsaf etycameras.org.uk/in dex.php?option=com_c ontent&task=cate
gory §ionid=8&id=28&
amp;I temid=43
guymanda, poole says...
1:26pm Fri 10 Jul 09
Perry_Winkle, Poole says...
1:52pm Fri 10 Jul 09
guymanda wrote:Then I apologise - I must have been reading what I expected to see, not what was there!
I must disagree - I checked the website on Tuesday when I received the email and their website did state only the Holes Bay had the speed on green.
Still think DSCP is a thieving bunch of scallywags though...
Insurgent, poole says...
2:41pm Fri 10 Jul 09
Peggy Babcock, Poole says...
2:56pm Fri 10 Jul 09
Insurgent wrote:What are you on about? The junction in question is Holes Bay / Sterte Road.
Blame it on Asda....that junction is the cause of all this...
Adrian XX, Poole says...
4:15pm Fri 10 Jul 09
Well, you'll be pleased to hear that the law does allow this, however, as expected you failed to mention how even hidden cameras would deal with the rise in drink and drug related accidents, which isn't much of a surprise really.
I prefer cameras to deal with speed so that the police have more time to deal with drink and drugs.
Whether they use this extra time for this or any other useful purpose is another topic altogether.
dorsetspeed, Poole says...
4:32pm Fri 10 Jul 09
They certainly don't deter boy racers who can basically easily do whatever they want.
dorsetspeed, Poole says...
4:33pm Fri 10 Jul 09
The sooner the DSCP are shut down, the better, and they seem to be doing their best to promote how irrelevant and damaging they are.
Seems like only politicians are stupid enough to believe them.
The “don’t speed if you don’t want to get caught” argument does not justify these parasites carrying out highway robbery and doing nothing to target dangerous drivers or promote better road efficiency.
Adrian XX, Poole says...
4:59pm Fri 10 Jul 09
Cameras don't "deal with speed", except for within a few meters of the cameras, which doesn't really acheive anything. Neither do they deal with driving too slow, or driving too fast within the speed limit..
They do deal with speed. On average more people stick within the speed limit when there are cameras present. If you drive along the Wessex Way the majority of people are going at or below 50mph. Without the cameras they would be going faster. Yes, there are people who speed up when they have passed the cameras, but they are in the minority. I would support a move to average speed cameras which are almost 100% effective at keeping people within the speed limit.
Quite obviously cameras cannot detect people driving too fast or too slow within the speed limit. Why would you expect them to?
The "don't speed and you won't get caught" is still good advice.
dorsetspeed, Poole says...
5:11pm Fri 10 Jul 09
I don't expect them to, they can’t because they are unintelligent, but inappropriate and dangerous speed is just as likely to be 25 in a busy residential / commercial area, as 35 on a wide dual carriageway, which both have 30 limits, a good demonstration of why fixed speed limits cannot define what is or isn’t safe. Intelligent policing could correctly target inappropriate and dangerous speed, rather than speed above an arbitrary fixed number.
Yes, many people drive at 50 up the Wessex Way, but is this because they just drive slow, or because they’re driving within the limit? Many people drive at 60 on motorways. Anyone who wants to drive at 90 can and will.
Insight, says...
5:35pm Fri 10 Jul 09
4:15pm Fri 10 Jul 09
I prefer cameras to deal with speed so that the police have more time to deal with drink and drugs.
Whether they use this extra time for this or any other useful purpose is another topic altogether.
What extra time?, we've already lost 20% of our road going police nationally and in many areas there's been a reduction in patrols of up to 80% because the funding and targets hasn't been allocated for active policing to tackle the likes of drink and drug drive.
There is no 'extra' as the increase in drink/drug and hit and run collisions across the country clearly indicates.
Cameras don't make the roads safer at all, if anything we're more exposed to illegal road users than we ever have been before.
I know it's difficult for the camera fans to grasp, but you obsessive types really aren't doing the rest of us any favours at all.
PokesdownMark, Bournemouth says...
5:36pm Fri 10 Jul 09
Unless they are the people who are 3 points off a ban. In which case it is somewhat understandable!
I suspect similar at the junctions only obviously this will be potentially more dangerous. If the real aim was to prevent speeding at the junction they should put speed cameras about 200 yards back. This would also prevent people racing to get through a green then braking hard to pass at 30mph. Which is something you see all the time.
Insight, says...
5:39pm Fri 10 Jul 09
All this time the partnerships have been claiming success at camera sites which the government now claim as a 40% reduction and that they've met their targets.
In a ridiculous twist, they're cutting the funding for cameras and inspite of the increase in death by other forms of dangerous driving the numbers of police are likely to be cut as public sector spending comes under severe scrutiny leaving all of us with nothing but an ageing collection of delapidated twentieth century polaroid cameras on poles.
I know you camera fans don't want to hear the truth, but that's the way it is.
PokesdownMark, Bournemouth says...
5:55pm Fri 10 Jul 09
Futher info here:
http://www.independe
nt.co.uk/news/scienc
e/speed-cameras-do-n
ot-save-as-many-live
s-as-claimed-924508.
html
You can use the same effect to prove touching your nose lowers the number you get when you throw a dice. Get 6 dice. Throw each in turn. For the ones that are a six, lets call these the dangerous dice, touch your nose and rethrow. The dice should give a lower number!
dorsetspeed, Poole says...
6:04pm Fri 10 Jul 09
DSCP seem to be pushing the limits though, I’m hoping this time they’ve gone a bit too far.
peterdw777, says...
7:22pm Fri 10 Jul 09
Maureen Arthur, Hamlet of Poole says...
8:18pm Fri 10 Jul 09
Insight, says...
10:06am Sat 11 Jul 09
It's far simpler to tell them that when they resurface the road at camera sites with the expensive hi-grip tarmac, it cuts collisions by half compared to the worn out shiney stuff that caused the accidents at the site in the first place.
It is a con, because the camera is irrelevant.
Insight, says...
10:09am Sat 11 Jul 09
Banned drivers have learnt the best way to continue driving is to simply copy the number plate from a legal vehicle of same make model and colour and they're basically invisible to all the technology.
Speed Cameras allow automotive identity theft.
Insurgent, poole says...
12:15pm Sat 11 Jul 09
Peggy Babcock wrote:The fact that since ASDA was built there have been over 13 collisions because of the Junction. Before it was built there were no collisions hence the scammera partnership placing these new cameras at Sterte junction(100 yrds up the road from ASDA)to stop collions happening when the traffic gets backed up.
Insurgent wrote:What are you on about? The junction in question is Holes Bay / Sterte Road.
Blame it on Asda....that junction is the cause of all this...
Insight, says...
2:47pm Sat 11 Jul 09
This doesn't only mean there's a growing number of otherwise banned and illegal uninsured and unlicensed drivers out on the streets who're virtually immune to prosecution because the technology has been circumvented.
It also means we're all likely to get prosecuted for their speeding convictions and you won't get any sympathy from the obsessive camera loonys, they, just like people who refused to believe the world was round, simply won't accept their technology is ludicrously falible, unreliable and easy to cheat.
In the world of speed cameras, you're guilty unless you can afford to prove yourself innocent and as we're all beginning to see, finding yourself guilty of someone elses crime is becoming a serious problem that the law simply has to start addressing.
Nick2, Bournemouth says...
8:57pm Sat 11 Jul 09
You have all missed your calling….
You should have been journalists.
It is like reading the Sun. “EU Law says we need straight banners…”
It is pandering to the great unwashed. Half hearted stories that play on our sense of justice, but only tell half of the truth.
The police can no longer afford to put more Traffic Officers on the road without MASSIVE increases in funding. I am not prepared to pay for that, I pay enough council tax thank you very much.
It is totally irrelevant if camera partnerships make the money it is claimed it does. It makes a lot of turnover, true. But profits are negligible. Don’t take my word for it, research their accounts and see for yourself.
Best of the bunch is that the scandal papers claim that funding is being cut, making them go out of business (As quoted by Insight, 7:27pm Thu 9 Jul 09). If they make so much profit, why are they being funded?
One of these can not be correct!
The best bit is they catch speeders, which is also against the law. They are designed to catch normal people and warn them by means of a fine and points that their driving standards do not comply with the law.
They are NOT designed to catch dedicated criminals who normally circumvent the law. That is why there ARE still traffic units out there.
If you continually take risks and get away with it, it becomes a habit. Just travel from A to B and look how many bad habits are out there…
Speeding, indicators, cutting up a roundabout, overtaking on double white lines.. the list goes on and on.
If you think you are a good driver, take the online test and find out for yourself if you are still good enough.
Or are you too scared?
Insight, says...
11:46pm Sat 11 Jul 09
This will naturally curtail some of their activities.
It is also clear that these partnership quangoes are comparitively expensive to run and the hundred or so million would be better spent on front line traffic police which would go some way to replacing the 20% the country has already lost.
You are correct about some of the disgraceful driving on our roads today, but then, there's nobody out there policing it, so what do you expect.
As for speed cameras themselves, well, they're a twentieth century example of wishful thinking, designed primarily to alter driver behaviour, but they're simply too easy to circumvent and as it becomes clear they're not very good at their only purpose I suspect the cut in funding to partnerships is a discreet government U-Turn on a project that was really supposed to pay for road repairs so that road tax could be squandered on illegal wars in the middle east.
The speed camera era is almost at an end, there are superior and more cost effective ways of putting 'real police' back on the roads to do the job properly, it's just a pity we're still wasting money on cameras.
Nick2, Bournemouth says...
11:55pm Sat 11 Jul 09
You are quite right there.
With the introduction of the GPS Sat Navs (1st programme this season’s Top Gear) that limit the car speed automatically, even if voluntarily at the present. We will soon enter an era that has the possibility that they may be able to transmit your speed to a central register throughout your journey.
One day someone will write “I do miss speed cameras”.
Insight, says...
12:16am Sun 12 Jul 09
"We will soon enter an era that has the possibility that they may be able to transmit your speed to a central register throughout your journey."
You are probably right Nick, however, the lessons learnt from history shouldn't allow technology to overtake common sense.
We live in the playstation generation where buzzwords such as hacking are fully understood and any technology has a short duration of effectivness.
Once anyform of in car tracking device is depended upon and theres enough money in it, the device will be abused and rendered useless.
Just think, as secure as the device will be, it'll take nothing more than a bit of lead flashing stolen from a building site to render the antenae useless and make the vehicle invisible to the technology.
It's only a question fo time.
Insight, says...
12:21am Sun 12 Jul 09
Unfortunate, but true!
dorsetspeed, Poole says...
10:58am Sun 12 Jul 09
The whole debate about what’s safe and what’s not, what’s lawful and what’s not, what limits and enforcement methods should be is one thing (and one area where a considerable injection of common sense is needed).
But consider the outcome of current policy:
-widespread disrespect of speed limits, the police and the law
-deteriorating driving standards
-a driving attitude of the majority that avoiding detecting for speeding is the most important issue, not driving safely or politely.
-determined speeders and boy racers driving at dangerous speeds as they wish
-unacceptable accident counts
Consider also that proper policing would reduce accidents and congestion, so if the finances were set up properly, it would more than pay for itself.
There is no aspect of current road safety policy that isn’t corrupt and / or misguided, and there are a million things which could be done to make it better.
Nick2, Bournemouth says...
11:51am Mon 13 Jul 09
Lots of what you say I agree with, but we differ on some major points.
The deteriorating driving standards are NOT a result of any policy.
Some time ago I did some major research into driver behaviour for an OU sociology paper. My personal results were that nearly nothing will change driver behaviour except the fear of punishment.
Over the years there have been some major studies throughout Europe trying to understand this behaviour. It was found that, once we get into the Faraday’s Cage that is a car, MOST people’s attitudes change significantly. (Even the mildest person can change).
We feel safe and secure, the road becomes “mine”, not “ours”. We allow ourselves the belief that we know better. No-one thinks that they are doing anything wrong.
Having stopped errant vehicles myself it is amazing what responses you get.
Here are a few I’ve heard:-
“Can’t you leave us (car drivers) alone and catch some proper criminals?”
“You can’t give me a ticket as I pay your wages.”
“I am a friend of the Chief Constable and he will sack you for this.”
“I am a better driver than you are, as it IS possible to drive with a cigarette in one hand and a phone in the other.”
I have also been driven at on a few occasions while attempting to stop vehicles….
The talk about “Proper Policing” is very well. But what do you consider “Proper Policing” to be?
The only way I see to have this “Proper Policing”, is to have a car and traffic copper parked at every junction. As I said earlier, at a massive cost. This finance would come from where? Us.
Last I heard it used to cost the police £75 to process a ticket. So for every £30 NEFP ticket issued the tax payer pays £35 of it. It is my belief that is mainly why “minor” infringements may be ignored sometimes, they are just not cost effective.
As I said before, I can see that more and more traffic offences will become automated. Or even worse, put out for private tender.
Insight, says...
12:38pm Mon 13 Jul 09
You say "The deteriorating driving standards are NOT a result of any policy" and "My personal results were that nearly nothing will change driver behaviour except the fear of punishment"
While in the same comment you also say, "Having stopped errant vehicles myself it is amazing what responses you get."
Do you not see the problem here.
Those people who've learnt to drive avoiding cameras while driving dangerous nearly everywhere else, aren't facing punishment because there's nobody left on the road to catch them.
Proper policing is about doing 'all of the job' not just trying to convince the media that a collection of convictions less than ten mile an hour over a speed limit (because 97% of them are) solves any kind of problem, when all of us can see it's the druggies, drunks and loonies who surf cameras who kill people.
Having read this, please don't try to put words in my mouth, don't try to imply that I might be saying that those less than 10mph over a limit are ok, they're not, but the authority cannot go on pretending that catching shaols of minnows does anything, while totally ignoring the dangerous big fish just because the dangerous fish aren't stupid enough to get caught by a photo booth.
Speed cameras are as easy to avoid as a pedestrian crossing, you simply slow down for a hundred yards, that's fine, as long as you don't want to cross a road more than a hundred yards from a speed camera....
Those who drive dangerously aren't scared of speed cameras and only foolish people believe that they are!
Insight, says...
12:49pm Mon 13 Jul 09
Stop wasting fifty thousand pounds a time on easily avoid static cameras.
Stop paying operatives to sit in vans drinking tea all day operating notoriously inaccurate equipment. If you're going to pay a wage to anyone on the road, pay a real police officer.
Stop wasting money on partnership managers, who's salary would probably pay for at least three real police officers.
Stop paying to fill the newspapers with propaganda that no one is falling for anymore. In any month long 'real police' operation, anywhere in the country, the conviction rates for anything from speeding to drink drive is shockingly high, so it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what's going on out on the streets the other eleven months of the year when all that's there are stupid, immobile, impotent speed cameras.
For every life lost on the streets it costs the tax payer over a £million pounds, the biggest causes of death on the road are dangerous driving and alcohol with drugs on the way up.
If we slash the number of drunks by 50% the police force has paid for itself.
The only difficulty here is the camera fans having to admit their gimmick doesn't work and forcing the government to cough up funding and targets for 'real police operations' that will be more cost effective in the long run.
The camera philosophy does not work and wishful thinking and misleading propaganda isn't going to change that.
dorsetspeed, Poole says...
1:10pm Mon 13 Jul 09
You seem to acknowledge that there are some serious problems on the road which can’t be tackled with existing automated camera technology. Your suggestion that the only way to police properly is to have units on every junction is absurd. Just 1 proper team based in the Poole area may well have observed and disciplined those responsible for the Holes Bay pileup this morning for example, and perhaps prevented this disaster.
The cost to businesses, accident investigation, hospitals, etc of this single event probably dwarf the cost of a decent team for a year. With the finances handled properly it could work very well.
Driving standards have deteriorated as police have been replaced by completely ineffective speed cameras. Cameras do not provide fear of punishment, you just slow down before them and speed up after them other than that you can do what you want.
You point seems to be that things are going to get worse and that what needs to be done can’t because of mismanagement of finances. Yes, agree with you completely, that’s why there needs to be protest and change, and not just submission and a “can’t do” attitude.
Adrian XX, Poole says...
4:38pm Mon 13 Jul 09
Your suggestion that the only way to police properly is to have units on every junction is absurd. Just 1 proper team based in the Poole area may well have observed and disciplined those responsible for the Holes Bay
If just one unit, it is extremely unlikely they would have been in the area at the time. In a town the size of Poole, you are going to need hundreds of officers for any meaningful enforcement.
dorsetspeed, Poole says...
5:11pm Mon 13 Jul 09
I don't think hundreds is at all necessary. A single unit, operating over a period of time, would be extremely effective at filtering out the loonies (like those who caused misery for thousands this morning)
Such a unit may not have been in the right place at the right time for this event, but would have been likely to have noticed such drivers previously. Most bad drivers are bad all the time, they get away with it until the inevitable happens at some point.
Insight, says...
6:59pm Mon 13 Jul 09
The reasons why speed cameras don't work is that you know where the static ones are and you know where the mobile ones are likely to be and further, putting a set of cloned plates on any given car renders it uncatchable.
Police (even a small number) work, because you don't know where they are and unlike speed cameras, they're not so easily fooled when they pull you over and ask to see your license and smell your breath on the way home from the pub.
The highest casualty reduction rates in the UK are in the two countys that don't operate speed cameras and have stubbornly continued to do the job properly inspite of political pressure.
Why should we be second rate citizens?
JJMcClure, Corfe Mullen says...
1:49pm Wed 15 Jul 09
Cameras also seem to be in the wrong places. There is a camera in Corfe Mullen just in the 30 limit by the side of fields where there are not many people but by the school where nearly every car a see speeds there is no camera.
Nick2, Bournemouth says...
8:36pm Wed 15 Jul 09
Adrian XX wrote:Forget it Adrian XX. They are fanatics.
Your suggestion that the only way to police properly is to have units on every junction is absurd. Just 1 proper team based in the Poole area may well have observed and disciplined those responsible for the Holes BayIf just one unit, it is extremely unlikely they would have been in the area at the time. In a town the size of Poole, you are going to need hundreds of officers for any meaningful enforcement.
They seem to believe that 1 extra car makes the police omnipresent.
(They must have x-ray and telescopic vision).
I however know from my time in the force that, when I sat in a police car:-
A. I could only be in one place at a time.
B. I could only see as far as anyone else.
C. When dealing with one offence I could miss others.
But, never having done the jobs themselves, they know it better than me!
Aren’t they wonderful?
Insight, says...
9:23am Thu 16 Jul 09
Random policing with real police officers has a distance halo effect of up to 22 kilometres with a time before dissipation of up to three weeks.
In other words, the psycological effects of having real police on the roads performing random checks is hundreds of times more effective and efficient than those of speed cameras.
But as you say you're a former police officer Nick2, I suppose you already knew that even though you make no mention of it?!
Insight, says...
9:25am Thu 16 Jul 09
You obviously think you know best though!
Nick2, Bournemouth says...
11:44pm Wed 22 Jul 09
You obviously have a God syndrome and are totally detached from reality.
If not, do you need the help of a good physiatrist?
Distance Halo effect? You are not from planet earth.
Here it is more in line with “What the Cat can’t see, the mice wont greave over”.
My God, wake up and smell the Poo.
PRAT
Local Advertisers
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
ferret38, bournemouth says...
7:01pm Thu 9 Jul 09