Some Concluding Comments on the Speed Camera Affair

There was an interesting interview with Julie Spence,the outgoing head of Cambridgeshire police in the Telegraph the other day. It has been given coverage in other newspapers, including the Mail. The gist of it is that she says middle class folk who (rightly) want to see wrongdoers face the consequences of their actions, but do not apply this philosophy when breaking speed limits, are really being quite hypocritical (I agree.) It relates to the decision to remove fixed speed cameras in Oxfordshire, which has been criticized by the chief constable. I did a posting on the effectiveness of speed cameras here so I won't rehash on this one. Instead I want to highlight on some of what Ms. Spence has said, some of the loaded comments added by the Mail, and most importantly some of the comments to the article, which I believe are at the heart of the speeding problem.

" Julie Spence, one of the country's longest-serving chief constables, described speeding as 'middle-class anti-social behaviour'.

She said: 'People think, "We should be able to get away with it".
'They wouldn't tolerate lawbreaking by somebody else but they do it themselves without thinking.

'It all seems OK until something tragic happens, like their child dies because of a road traffic accident."

This needs to be highlighted more often, and we will see it in the comments below. Laws have to be applied evenly, objectively with a give and take, not just on the subjective whim,- say if the face fits, which some seem to want. It aint practical (not to mention in the spirit of the rule of law) It's always ironic that [law] is most in need of objective application to be both practical and fair, but is perhaps the most subjective issue of all.

"Her comments will put her at odds with many middle-class motorists, who feel persecuted by speed cameras and believe they are a 'soft target' for fines.

Many motorists who are caught speeding complain that they are being used to line the pockets of councils."

If that is the case. How do Gatsos single out Middle Class people? Won't they zap anyone speeding? And why are they being removed in a cost cutting exercise, if the rake in cash?

"Speeding fines raise about £100million every year - and many drivers believe that police should instead be targeting more serious offenders."

Thus in lies the problem.

"But Mrs Spence, 55, said that while anti-social behaviour is often associated with rowdy youths or vandalism, 'for too many it is the antics of drivers who refuse to accept that speed limit signs apply to them"

Good point.

"'Driving without care or consideration for other road users is probably among the worst kind of antisocial behaviour in its truest sense, because serious offenders can, and do, kill."

Ditto.

It is also difficult for the Mail to paint her as a do-gooder, Gordon McNueLiebore nanny state PC, pc (or whatever), when she says stuff like.

" that too much police time was spent on 'social work', blames the 'have-it-all' society for many social problems.

'Easy credit, drink as much as you can, have it when you want, buy this, buy that and buy the other,' she said.

'This irresponsibility costs - you play while others pay - and I think we have got to the point where we need to have a little more responsibility"

The underlying problem I have with this whole thing is that there seems a whole set of drivers out there who just will not accept that speeding is a big deal at all. That the right to drive very fast, should possibly be weighed against the right not to have a tonne of Mercedes smearing someone/something onto a primary A - road. Comments like this:

" These Chief Constables have themselves to blame for their in efficient and useless forces....... Now they need to make changes, get officers off paperwork and "elf and safety" rubbish and get on with what they are meant to be doing and SUPPORT THEM"

"Interesting that Criminals (think GBH, robbery with violence,etc) and speeding motorists are being spoken about in the same terms."

Well they aren't. But the end result of all can be carnage and maiming, and deaths, senseless horrible deaths at that. That is what she was trying to say.

"Well, she just about epitomises everything which is wrong with UK - stupid politically correct idiots over promoted far beyond their capabilities making daft comments. I recall my last speeding offence on M6 on a quiet Sunday morning doing 82 MPH. I was clocked by one of those silly vans which sit on the top of motorway bridges - for goodness sake I was the only bleeding car on the road. Are they all bonkers, how in heaven's sake is that worthy of a fine and 3 points. About time these PC coppers were thrown back to wherever they came from - pushing pointless paper around in some pointless job I've no doubt.

My heart bleeds.

"She wants to seriously consider why the majority of people in the UK are too scared to go out at night in ANY city or major town. Speeding drivers I can handle, the thugs that control our streets I cannot. Hasn't she got anything better to do with her time?"

Trying to stop both of them I think. Speeding cars are as good at breaking bones as muggers.

"The police just love to attack the middle classes don't they, possibly because they are soft targets and don't assault the police when they get caught. A sense of proportion from the police would be helpful along with some recognition from them that there is an understanding that burgulary , theft and assault are very different concepts from travelling in your car at 5-10 mph above the speed limit."

They are different concepts, but getting hit by a speeding car can be a lot more painful than a punch in the face.

All these comments are in the green. I didn't include all the ones about "the police should catch proper crooks instead of picking on middle class people." or "working class people speed too." (she never said they didn't.) And they highlight a worrying trend that some drivers just really downplay the dangers of speeding, and see it as "acceptable.". I really got an insight into how entrenched this desire to speed was when I saw "Police Camera Action" the other week. We saw three habitual speeders (heavy duty speeding. Up to 170 mph on the A 14, in one case) meet a 4 year old girl who was paralysed from the neck down, brain damaged and unable to breath without a ventilator. Her life totally, utterly ruined by a head on smash with an oncoming driver (who admitted to continuing speeding after the accident happened!) One of the drivers clearly was trying to wrestle with his desire to speed, against the terrible human cost of the worst case endpoint of this desire. We've made progress in making the roads safer (8000 in 1966 to 3000 in 2007), but this blase attitude to speeding, relative to the perceived dangers of robbery and assaults (which don't result in 3000 fatalities per annum, let alone 8000.) shows we have a way to go. But with brave officers like Julie Spence, who is willing to face the wrath of the more vocal "speeding lobby", we may be able to bring that figure down.