...Mike Todd, Chief of Greater Manchester Police, who has cut burglaries by 18% by re-deploying coppers from motorist-persecution to other duties.
Interestingly, road deaths are down by 5% as well.

He says: "It is important what people think of us. We have to remember these are generally law-abiding, decent members of the public. If they are prosecuted for speeding and they think we are unreasonably running around with random speed-checks, they are unlikely to co-operate when we need them".

Since joining the force a year ago, he has not added a single speed camera. His message to his officers is clear - chase the real criminals, minor speeding offences can wait.

He continues:

"If you drive past a school at 40mph when there are kids about, you deserve to be prosecuted. If you drive past the school at 40mph at 2am, you may be stopped and warned".

"There is no room for discretion if you rely on robots. We want thinking men and women out there".

............

Little by little, we may be seeing the long overdue return of common sense. Place your bets - how long before some yoghurt-knitting 'road safety' group try to sue him?

Believe it or not I actually agree!

By deploying police away from traffic duties other perceived more serious crimes can be dealt with. That's why plenty of speed cameras operated by civilians and all paid for out of revenue from law-breaking motorists will also help reduce other crimes.

It will also ultimately identify people driving around and speeding without registering their details. - A list of numberplates can soon be drawn up and an instruction put out to stop & arrest on sight. It's worth spending police time to catch and investigate as a lot will also be into other crime.

If you don't break the law then you have nothing to fear.

Why are you so wound up Mr Bogush?

> "By deploying police away from traffic duties other perceived more serious crimes can be dealt with."

Yes, and?

> "That's why plenty of speed cameras operated by civilians and all paid for out of revenue from law-breaking motorists will also help reduce other crimes."

Yes, but using the money spent on those civilians for more real policemen, or even more real traffic police, will reduce real crime even more.

In fact real traffic departments used to clear up more real crimes (burglary, rape, robbery, murder, etc, than the CID did!).

But there isn't a net profit from the cameras, is there?

So they are actually reducing the money for real policing, aren't they!

> "It will also ultimately identify people driving around and speeding without registering their details. - A list of numberplates can soon be drawn up and an instruction put out to stop & arrest on sight. It's worth spending police time to catch and investigate as a lot will also be into other crime."

The secon part is spot on.

Unfortunately drawing up a list of number plates isn't going to help, is it?

As they keep on changing the numbers they use.

And they use yours, and mine.

Or they would do if you drove.

But you don't, do you!

Speed cameras "caught" one guy in, I think, Greater Manchester 17 (seventeen) times (someone correct me if I've mis-remembered that figure).

In ONE day.

But the police never did!

> "If you don't break the law then you have nothing to fear."

> "Why are you so wound up Mr Bogush?"

Double Errrrrrrrrmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

I've just given you one reason:

The real dangerous drivers use your registration, and leave you to prove your innocence (if you can), as a motorist doesn't have human rights like "liberals" insist that the real criminals are allowed.

And I've given you lots of other reasons before!

Can't you read?

Several traffic officers, one not even anonymously, have admitted that over half of their speed trap sites are illegally signed, or even illegally set.

What about those people with clean licenses who got caught "speeding" under 40 when the 40mph signs on their front road were taken down to "signify" it was now a 30, without any notice.

Or all those people, including a nurse who got enough points on her spotless license in a week to lose it, and several other NHS employees, with clean licences, who got caught between two junctions where the new, lowered limit, signs were placed outside the stretch where people were "speeding" within the old limit between the two junctions?

What about those roads where they changed the limit and "forgot" to put the new signs up untill after they've raked in some dosh?

Or where they have an inappropriate and/or lowered hidden limit policed by a hidden camera on short stretch of a fast road road?

Or even, as I've seen myself, one that then goes UP again after the camera as the road becomes a village street!

What about the people driving under the limit, who get caught by cameras that record them as speeding if they are doing under 17mph in a flat backed vehicle?

Or the guy (the only one, honest, it was a freak, one off, occurence, as was the fact it wasn't picked up by a human, trust us, we're a safety partnership) who had his 27.5mph speed counted twice by the camera and was prosecuted for doing 50 in a 30?!

I myself have been pulled for doing 5mph BELOW the limit by two highly trained and experienced traffic cops who were so busy watching their highly accurate, calibrated speedo to notice what the actual limit was. It's that easy to stick the limit then?! Good job a child didn't run out between us as they were busy looking at their speedo!

And haven't I just posted about a guy who has just been prosecuted for speeding on a road that the authorities insist is a 30.

Despite it having a 40mph sign on it!

Are you blind George?

Is that why you can't drive?

 

Of course, that only covers the human rights, justice, and selfish aspects of the case against:

> "If you don't break the law then you have nothing to fear."

> "Why are you so wound up Mr Bogush?"

That only covers the fact that you can be criminalised, and treated and punished far worse than a real criminal, for transgressing an arbitrary edict, while doing no harm, and threatening no harm, to anyone.

 

Of course there are other aspects.

 

Like the fact that artificially reducing limits increases accidents.

Like the fact that introducing speed cameras increases fatalities.

As you have had proved to you time and again.

Or, rather, you have been given the evidence time and again.

However you are either too blind, or too stubborn, or too brainwashed, or...... to see what would be obvious to you if you knew the first thing about driving.

Without needing any of the mass of evidence you have been given.

 

And, of course, there is the small matter of the cost to the economy of slowing down traffic for no good reason.

The cost to the welfare state.

And the NHS.

The thousands of extra accidental deaths that will occur in hospitals over and above the figure which is already far higher than the fatality rate on the roads (which should be the most dangerous environment most people experience, and which most people experience every day, unlike hospitals).

And the tens, if not hundreds of thousands of extra unneccessary deaths that will occur in the NHS and the welfare state.

All of which George is quite happy to see in exchange for getting back at motorists for whatever "crime" he thinks they have committed.

 

Why are you so wound up Mr Painter?

 

And/or who do you work for?

 

Well said 'Bogie' could'nt have put it better myself.
G-P. is obviously a brainwashed-b-dead moronic sycophant, of the lowest order.
she-he-or-'IT', is totally without reason,
should be ignored at all cost,
If you want to be a clown,(G. Pntr) 'Join a Circus'
you will be 'well at home' with the other ANIMALS.