Newsreader
14th Aug 2004, 05:34
The rules dictating where speed cameras can be placed by police will be relaxed to cover longer stretches of road near accident blackspots.
http://www.landrovernet.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=9479&stc=1
Police chiefs have said that present rules are too restrictive and force them to wait until people are killed or hurt before action can be taken. Under the draft rules, the maximum distance covered by a mobile camera site would go up from 5km (3.1 miles) to 20km (12.5 miles), it reported. It means police would still have to prove there was a history of casualties on a stretch of road, but they would no longer be tied to placing cameras in the immediate area where accidents happened.
Richard Brunstrom, Chief Constable of North Wales and head of road policing for the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo), said: “We have a particular problem with motorcyclists slowing down for the cameras but then speeding up and dying on the next corner. We need to keep people’s speed down along the whole stretch of road.”
However, although fines have gone up from 400,000 in 1998 to two million last year, annual road death tolls are virtually unchanged at 3,400 rising to 3,508 last year, the newspaper reported. And police have come under fire from motoring organisations for focusing too heavily on cameras as a way to cutting road casualties. But Mr Brunstrom said: “We have got cameras at almost all the identifiable casualty hotspots and yet deaths haven’t gone down because they are happening elsewhere.”
While accepting the need for greater flexibility, RAC Foundation executive director Edmund King was concerned police were “putting all their eggs in one basket”. He said: “Rather than being so obsessed with cameras, they should look at other measures to improve road safety.” For example, making a hidden junction safer may be better than installing cameras, he said.
http://www.landrovernet.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=9479&stc=1
Police chiefs have said that present rules are too restrictive and force them to wait until people are killed or hurt before action can be taken. Under the draft rules, the maximum distance covered by a mobile camera site would go up from 5km (3.1 miles) to 20km (12.5 miles), it reported. It means police would still have to prove there was a history of casualties on a stretch of road, but they would no longer be tied to placing cameras in the immediate area where accidents happened.
Richard Brunstrom, Chief Constable of North Wales and head of road policing for the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo), said: “We have a particular problem with motorcyclists slowing down for the cameras but then speeding up and dying on the next corner. We need to keep people’s speed down along the whole stretch of road.”
However, although fines have gone up from 400,000 in 1998 to two million last year, annual road death tolls are virtually unchanged at 3,400 rising to 3,508 last year, the newspaper reported. And police have come under fire from motoring organisations for focusing too heavily on cameras as a way to cutting road casualties. But Mr Brunstrom said: “We have got cameras at almost all the identifiable casualty hotspots and yet deaths haven’t gone down because they are happening elsewhere.”
While accepting the need for greater flexibility, RAC Foundation executive director Edmund King was concerned police were “putting all their eggs in one basket”. He said: “Rather than being so obsessed with cameras, they should look at other measures to improve road safety.” For example, making a hidden junction safer may be better than installing cameras, he said.