Police Scotland to issue formal warnings

[st13phil]

A certain proportion of drivers, lets say 30%, will take this as a near miss and slow down for a while. The remainder will issue a mental "stuff it" notice but will have something already on file the next time they get caught doing 10mph+ over the limit. So maybe fines and points can be argued upward.

I suspect that's the thinking. The vital bit missed out is that of the 70% who issue a mental "stuff it" notice, a fair proportion will take the view that the Police would be better employed on other matters and another - probably significant proportion - will become less likely to assist the Police when they otherwise could do so.

The idiots that dream up policy like this (and I tend to concur with GVM's view of who those people are likely to be), and those toadies who think their participation in them will improve their elevation on the greasy pole, completely forget that policing has to be by consent of, and with the cooperation of, the public. Alienate enough of them and the police will cease to function.

 

[tec]

There is a similar system in England, except the people checking speeds are usually pensioners with nothing better to do, and it's called Speedwatch.

The Speedwatch OAP's record your speed and pass the registration number to the police whom issue warning letters.
If you get too many warnings you get a visit from the Police, but they can't prosecute you as far as I know.

 

[219]

Issue a formal warning and it costs the price of a stamp.

A certain proportion of drivers, lets say 30%, will take this as a near miss and slow down for a while. The remainder will issue a mental "stuff it" notice but will have something already on file the next time they get caught doing 10mph+ over the limit. So maybe fines and points can be argued upward.

But try and prosecute people who are 2mph over the limit for a second or subsequent occasion and you are going to waste hours of police time on people who have the common sense to challenge accuracy of instruments, adequacy of technique, suitability of location, etc. etc. etc. They'd be lucky if one in ten resulted in a conviction.

The failure in the policy is the people who will get 3, 4, 10 formal warnings for being just over the limit and don't get an invitation to meet the beak. They will (quite rightly) conclude that it's all just bluster.

By the way, my E-Class is the first car I've ever had with a speedo that doesn't over-read. It is absolutely accurate not only against a hand held satnav but also against the only certain method, which is by counting and timing the marker posts on an empty motorway with cruise control set.


.

I'm not going to dispute your logic , and fully agree that the 10% +2 mph guideline is there as a rule of thumb precisely because of such arguments about accuracy of readings , momentary lapses of concentration , 'de minimis' pleas etc : however , the fact remains that speeding is an absolute offence and , notwithstanding ACPO guidelines , the letter of the law , as it stands , is that even one mph over the limit is an offence , so if there were other aggravating circumstances such as 10 previous documented warnings , an offender could , technically but quite legally , end up in court on a specimen charge of one instance of 1 , 2 or 3 mph over the limit and the other recorded offences taken into consideration .

The ACPO guideline is not law : it is just a guideline as to how an existing law is enforced , and the enforcement can vary under certain circumstances .

I'm also not sure how Police Scotland sit within the UK Police forces nowadays ? I wonder whether Sir Stephen is still a member of UK ACPO , or whether , in Scotland , he stands apart and is effectively an association of one

 

[LTD]

If the Police are starting to play a game using calibrated cars and guns then it should stand to reason that car manufacturers are forced to do likewise for motorists and provide a legally-accurate speed determination system that is in line with the legislation being adopted.

Having a guess-o-meter on your dash is not fair at all.

 

[Brooks22]

Having read a few of the newspaper articles about it, I think this is mostly bluster. It doesn't really enable them to do much more to you than before. It's understandable why they want to do this... many of the vital statistics for road safety in Scotland are worse now than before. But cracking down on relatively innocent drivers isn't the way to bring about improvement.

Instead, the government should be focused on investing in better, safer roads for us to drive on.

 

[219]

I agree to a point : there can be few drivers who can accurately maintain speed all the time without straying over or under a desired speed by a small margin ( say up to 2 or 3 mph ) due to factors such as variations in gradient , needing to direct one's concentration to more than just speed , restlessness etc .

I don't think a momentary straying over by a very small margin , which is corrected , ought to be penalised , but we will just have to wait and see how this turns out .

Yes , some roads are in a poor state of repair and could be improved , but most incidents are the result of poor driving and could be better addressed by education - I think this is where the government/police are trying to go . Perhaps those caught for the same thing three times ought to be sent on a course of some sort ...