Moral dilemma….warning oncoming traffic of speed traps.

You

The purpose of speed traps should be to get drivers to slow down if they are speeding. Warning drivers presumably does this.
Sadly speed traps seem to be a means of raising money rather than getting traffic to slow down. Certainly around our way the random speed traps are not in areas where there have been accidents or incidents. Such accident black spots have remained firmly speed trap free.

The purpose of speed traps is to catch and punish speeders. The police know where speeding is rife.

Speeding is a killer. I would not be in favour of warning other speeding cars and would love to see more speed cameras and heavier fines. S

Have always understood it is an offence to warn others of speed traps. This, from my late DH.

Oops, DH who was a police officer. I never have done nor will I ever warn others, drivers shouldn't be on the road if they are not adhering to the law and deserve to be caught.

A child hit at 20 mph may live. A child hit at 24 mph may not.

Smileless2012

I've always understood that to do so is a chargeable offence.

It's surely crime prevention rather than an offence? (In my book anyway!). I'd have thought it was OK - whatever it takes to get someone to slow down.
Though I did once get pulled over by a cop in Richmond Park because I'd flashed a warning at another car. I got a thorough telling off (though did point out the crime prevention aspect) and he only let me go because he was originally from Cornwall and my car has a Cornish registration. We discussed the Helford regatta.

MissInterpreted

Surely if you are warning someone, then they are going to slow down, which is the object of the exercise. Some drivers are repeat speeding offenders and seem to almost take fines in their stride, so to speak.

But is getting the driver you warned to slow down the object of the exercise?

Surely not, it may help them avoid a fine right now, but it will not make those who habitually exceed speed limits stay within the limits.

Do you not have a system in the UK where repeat offenders are either made to pay a larger fine, or are banned from driving?

Let those whose driving endangers other road users be caught and fined as soon and as often as possible.

In Germany they announce speed trap locations on the radio. I totally agree that speeding drivers should be punished but why not warn them and make them keep to the speed limit ?

karinu

In Germany they announce speed trap locations on the radio. I totally agree that speeding drivers should be punished but why not warn them and make them keep to the speed limit ?

I am pretty sure that our local radio does that here in the part of Central England where I live - or at least they certainly did 6 years ago, when my car radio still worked and I listened to it while driving.

As the announcements said which locations were going to be targetted that particular day, I always assumed that the police themselves must providing the information, as who else would have that information in advance?

I certainly would advise other drivers, most of which are ordinary people like me going about their daily business in a safe manner. If creeping marginally over the speed limit gets a fine and 3 points then a simple flash can not only redyce speed of other drivers but also save a lot of hassle. Those who are speeding by some margin deserve all they get and probably won't take any notice of me anyway. Some years back the AA would also signal the presence of plod to other traffic.

I understand that generally you are allowed a discretionary 10% over the proscribed limit, so if only marginally over it is unlikely you would receive a fine, but at the very most go on a driver speed awareness course, which can only be a good thing.

Speed awareness courses can be offered even for those who exceed the speed limit by quite a bit, if not repeat offenders. Depends on area I think.

I never warn anyone of a speed camera ahead, if they are speeding and get caught then they need to suffer the consequences. Saying that warning them means they will slow down which "is the point" doesn't make any sense - if they didn't know there was a speed camera ahead they wouldn't slow down and won't slow down unless they can see a speed camera so could potentially be speeding all the time which is unacceptable.

grandtanteJE65

MissInterpreted

Surely if you are warning someone, then they are going to slow down, which is the object of the exercise. Some drivers are repeat speeding offenders and seem to almost take fines in their stride, so to speak.

But is getting the driver you warned to slow down the object of the exercise?

Surely not, it may help them avoid a fine right now, but it will not make those who habitually exceed speed limits stay within the limits.

Do you not have a system in the UK where repeat offenders are either made to pay a larger fine, or are banned from driving?

Let those whose driving endangers other road users be caught and fined as soon and as often as possible.

Speeders,if persistent can be banned. When caught, they are fined, points on their licence and speed awareness class, which they also have to pay for, so they can't escape paying some fine.

Yes Speed Awareness Courses have to be paid for, but the positive thing is evidence shows that they are actually quite effective at reducing accidents. It may not affect their motor insurance either.
Those who warn people may be preventing them being “re-educated” 😀!

Farzanah, generally people who are a small amount over the limit are not fined, those a little bit further get offered a speed awareness course provided they haven't been on one within 3 years of the last and those who are much more over the speed limit are fined or have to go before the court. If you don't want a Speed Awareness Course, you can accept a fine.

If you accept a fine you get points and have to tell insurance I think too.

Farzanah

If you accept a fine you get points and have to tell insurance I think too.

Yes. Some insurance companies also want to know about Speed Awareness Courses too!

Driving down the M6 last week, I was using the sat nav to get to an unknown place when it suddenly announced that there was a mobile speed camera ahead. No worries for me in the inside lane doing around 65mph but when I arrived at the 'mobile camera' on a motorway bridge it was actually a National Highways Officer (not police) having his lunch.

icanhandthemback

*Farzanah*, generally people who are a small amount over the limit are not fined, those a little bit further get offered a speed awareness course provided they haven't been on one within 3 years of the last and those who are much more over the speed limit are fined or have to go before the court. If you don't want a Speed Awareness Course, you can accept a fine.

Not any more - even just slightly over the 20 mph limit in some areas results in a fine.

It does seem like a money-making exercise.

That’s interesting Callistemon I thought fines were discretionary at very minor infringement.
I guess in time people will just get used to driving at this speed in urban areas. Where it has been introduced apparently it has shown to cut road deaths and injury, so it saves money if you like in that respect, but saves families grief too.

It's not just urban areas, though. I can understand outside schools, in areas where there might be a lot of pedestrians, but every village is now 20 mph; sometimes there is not a soul around when we go through.