Driver who flashed others to warn of police speed trap is fined £175.

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
At the risk of sounding daft but im a bit puzzled by why they fined the guy. Cameras are there to make people slow down and remind them to be more aware of their speed. He was warning drivers to watch their speed just the same as you would if there was a hazard ahead or if you considered someone to be driving in a reckless manor.

Imo its far better that if people are not aware of the speed they are traveling at or if they are in excess of the limit they slow down gradually rather than spot the camera and then slam their brakes on which could cause an accident.

To me cameras dont really work. as people that are speeding just speed up again after passin the trap. After a trip to the Lakes i noticed a sign stating how many people had died or suffered injuries on the section of road i was traveling on, also in Llandudno they have recently put up signs which display the speed you are traveling at. these seem to be more effective if you ask me. Sorry if ive rambled, i feel i may have gone off on a tangent.
 
Last edited:
At the risk of sounding daft but im a bit puzzled by why they fined the guy. Cameras are there to make people slow down and remind them to be more aware of their speed. He was warning drivers to watch their speed just the same as you would if there was a hazard ahead or if you considered someone to be driving in a reckless manor.

Imo its far better that if people are not aware of the speed they are traveling at or if they are in excess of the limit they slow down gradually rather than spot the camera and then slam their brakes on which could cause an accident.

Thing is, it's not in his remit to provide this "service", and his flash of headlights could easily be misinterpreted by other drivers and therefore not have the desired effect. Each driver is responsible for monitoring his own speed.

Are you suggesting that every time we pass another driver we should flash our headlights to remind them to watch their speed? Or should we only do this when there's a known risk of being caught speeding?
 
....It would appear that this is a good example of why the law is best left to experts and that a person defending themself generally has a fool as a client ;)

Also... Mr. Thompson's line of defence was based on the idea that speed traps constitute a safety hazard as he was previously involved in a crash. This is a bad idea - the police would have to accept that their speed traps are actually causing accidents, and this is not going to happen... far better - as some suggested here - if he would have concentrated on points-of-law instead.
 
Thing is, it's not in his remit to provide this "service", and his flash of headlights could easily be misinterpreted by other drivers and therefore not have the desired effect. Each driver is responsible for monitoring his own speed.

Are you suggesting that every time we pass another driver we should flash our headlights to remind them to watch their speed? Or should we only do this when there's a known risk of being caught speeding?

You have a point but, i see it as prevention is better than cure, as if someone is caught speeding its usually because they are not paying attention and have passed the speed trap and have continued to travel above the speed limit.
 
You have a point but, i see it as prevention is better than cure, as if someone is caught speeding its usually because they are not paying attention and have passed the speed trap and have continued to travel above the speed limit.

Fair enough, but are you really preventing the other driver from speeding, or just tipping him off so he doesn't get caught on that occasion?

As the prosecutor in this case told Mr Thompson: "‘You are causing people to brake to avoid going through a speed trap at an excessive speed and all it does then is allow people, when they are past it , to pick up speed again and speed on."
 
On that front i stand corrected.
 
A thought on the moral as opposed to the legal argument of flashing to warn drivers of a speed trap ahead.
You make a valid point, but as our resident TrafPol JOB-BLACK-RAT described in his post in this thread, intelligent application of the law can have a much wider reaching deterrent effect than dispensing "justice" through the post at some time in the next fourteen days to a handful of errant motorists.

The main points of interest in this case as far as I'm concerned are that it appears that:
  • The Police officer who reported Thompson for the "offence" failed to collect the evidence required to secure a conviction
  • The CPS prosecutor failed to present the evidence required to secure a conviction, and
  • The Magistrates erred in law by convicting
Other than that, everything's fine and dandy :rolleyes:

The reality of the situation is that for law enforcement to be effective, policing has to be by consent. JOB-BLACK-RAT described very effectively how, by the use of intelligence and discretion, that can be achieved and the great benefits it brings. All that the police, CPS, and magistrates have done in this case is to reinforce the prejudices that are held by many that speed limit enforcement is more about revenue raising than safety. I'd call that a massive own goal.
 
I thanked J-B-R for his post because I felt it made refreshing reading, but before we get too carried away, may I just introduce a little balance.

Firstly, it was only due to the fact that the driver J-B-R described had been issued with an FPN that he chose to start warning other drivers in the first place. Therefore, if that first driver had himself been warned by someone else, chances are he'd have just continued on his way. This is therefore an arguement for the effectiveness of issuing an FPN.

Next point: the school will still be there even when J-B-R and his colleagues are not. Will the driver he stopped still be driving up and down for years to come to warn drivers of the actual hazard, or was he only minded to do this while there was a 'speed check' in operation?

Next point: why is it that a driver flashing his headlights is seen as a greater deterrent than the mere presence of the police? If the purpose of mountng the speed check was simply to ensure that everyone who drove past the school that day observed the speed limit, presumably this could have been achieved (as others have suggested) with a couple of prominently placed signs.

Final point: if the people driving past that school would have been speeding had they not been warned, then they're clearly not concerned about the increased risk of injuring a child. They're just concerned about being stopped and/or fined. By helping to ensure that none of them was actually stopped, this "helpful" driver has left them free to speed past any other school they like.

I appreciate that the end result was that the speed limit was almost universally observed that day, but the message I'm getting is that this was only achieved by the presence of a speed check and the unauthorised assistance of a volunteer. Remove either of these two elements and you're back to square one.
 
Since roads passing schools tend to be the places where speeding can have the worst consequences - I , for one , would be happy to see a fixed speed camera outside EVERY school in the land - how many drivers would then take a chance on speeding past it - not knowing whether or not it was active that particular day ?

Since many councils are now taking down 'revenue collecting' cameras from other locations - how about just re-siting them outside schools in their area ?

Even just the camera housings outside schools would be enough of a deterrent , regardless of whether they ever operated .

Similarly , CCTV cameras to monitor those selfish people who park in the prohibited areas outside schools would meet with my approval also .
 
A thought on the moral as opposed to the legal argument of flashing to warn drivers of a speed trap ahead.

Seeing/reading that a person has been killed by a speeding driver is unfortunately not unusual. So is it better to warn such a driver so they avoid prosecution and continue to put lives at risk, or let them get caught and suffer the consequences and hopefully learn the error of their ways.

That is my view too , and mainly why I do not give such warnings .
 
After a trip to the Lakes i noticed a sign stating how many people had died or suffered injuries on the section of road i was traveling on.

Perhaps they should put up 'coffin' (or similar) signs up at the roadside on the approach to locations where there has been a fatal crash ? Multiple coffins would indicate multiple deaths and might be sobering for some drivers ?
 
Therefore, if that first driver had himself been warned by someone else, chances are he'd have just continued on his way.
Perhaps, but almost certainly at a lower speed than the almost 50% over the posted limit that J-B-R issued the FPN for.
Next point: the school will still be there even when J-B-R and his colleagues are not.
Absolutely true, but there are now lots of drivers who are fully aware that it's an enforcement site and will (hopefully) drive with more caution than they otherwise may have.
why is it that a driver flashing his headlights is seen as a greater deterrent than the mere presence of the police?
My experience is that an alarming number of drivers posess such poor observation skills that a good number of would probably have driven through the check zone oblivious to the fact that enforcement was being carried out. The aggrieved p*ss-taker who J-B-R stuck on did a fantastic job of advertising the presence of the check and the knowledge that it's an enforcement site will now be in the heads of those who were not above the FPN threshold, but were perhaps travelling more quickly than was wise. Many who travelled through there that day will also speak with others, saying something like "did you see that nutter driving up and down outside the school last week flashing his lights because there was a speed trap?", and thus the word spreads even farther. That has to be a good thing, surely?
 
Perhaps they should put up 'coffin' (or similar) signs up at the roadside on the approach to locations where there has been a fatal crash ? Multiple coffins would indicate multiple deaths and might be sobering for some drivers ?
They do something similar in some French departements: a black crucifix at the roadside where a death has occured.
 
if speed cameras are there as a deterant to stop speeding (as the police say), thats just what he was doing and so do i
 
Perhaps they should put up 'coffin' (or similar) signs up at the roadside on the approach to locations where there has been a fatal crash ? Multiple coffins would indicate multiple deaths and might be sobering for some drivers ?

ROADPEACE remember me plaques are more common at scenes now www.roadpeace.org
 
Interesting - I hadn't heard of them , nor have I seen any of the plaques hereabouts .

There is some useful info on the website .
 
if speed cameras are there as a deterant to stop speeding (as the police say), thats just what he was doing and so do i

Speed cameras are there to catch speeders so they can be punished with a fine and points on their licence. What makes them a deterant is knowing you can and will be punished if caught.
 
Interesting - I hadn't heard of them , nor have I seen any of the plaques hereabouts .

There is some useful info on the website .

Think thier more common down south 'same with the ghost bikes' left at scene of cyclist fatals.

These signs seem more appropriate to me than flowers as they will not fade away.

Still rare but getting better known, I've dealt with more than 60 fatals in last 3 years and only 11 I recall having the remember me sign now.
 
Sadly, no matter what we do to highlight or try to prevent death by dangerous driving, one thing is clear.

The vast majority of us on this forum are good people, good drivers and are highly unlikely to become on of the causes of sad statistics.

I'd be in favour of swapping speed detectors for sniper's rifles in built up areas if it meant motorway speed limits could be relaxed.
 
A tad extreme but I get the gist of the post.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom