Police officer captures a speeder shortly after setting up

GTA Driver

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2015
Messages
1,264
Reaction score
602
Location
Greater Toronto Area
Country
Canada
Dash Cam
Iroad 3300CH, G1W-c, Mobius C, A119 v1 & v3, A118-c2
Consider passing the car in front but notice other that car and other cars slow down. I can see why down the road. Doesn't result in having cars behind me from slowing down though.

Officer catches one of them


Edit: best to watch in full screen
 
Last edited:
Easy 'take', gifted!
 
Easy 'take', gifted!
I think he missed his target though!

Looks like they could do with some of those cameras that automatically send out fines in the post, could send out thousands every day there :D
 
The pretty much automatic stuff they have in out mobile ATK vans can handle 2 lanes of traffic, not sure if they can handle more lanes, we do have some places where motorways are 3-4 lanes but its rare.
The Yanks on the other hand i recon almost find it rare to drive on a road with just 2 lanes, and i think they go up to like 6-7-8 lanes.
Cops here targeting the motorways with more lanes i think set up camp on a overpass where they can shoot to any lane with their handheld laser gun, this also mean they can have a number of colleagues sitting in wait on the on ramp.
Still measuring off the side of the road and in traffic, must mean that often one car block another car, so it cant be ideal for multi lane control.
And what about the states that dont require a plate on the front of the car ? nothing to identify them by then, so you will have to measure them when they have passed which i assume are also possible.
 
And what about the states that dont require a plate on the front of the car ? nothing to identify them by then, so you will have to measure them when they have passed which i assume are also possible.
No problem with lasers measuring speed from behind, however then the camera doesn't get a photo of the driver's face. Not really a problem here because the vehicle owner will be responsible unless he/she can get someone else to accept the fine.

Maybe they should fit some readable plates on the front like everybody else?

Not sure we use many lasers here now, they are not completely reliable, especially the hand held ones if you don't hold them very steady, the ones in the vans are better. I suspect most fines these days are from cameras reading the number plate, and then reading it again a km down the road, if you have averaged more than the limit then you get a fine in the post. If you want to overtake someone at a little over the limit then it's not a problem as long as you slow back down promptly.
 
Same here, if you cant tell who drove your car, well then you will get the fine as its owner.
Indeed the cops here always use a tripod for the laser.
 
could send out thousands every day there
Nah - folks wouldn't ever allow the government to stand if any started such underhand tactics for purely monetary objectives :)
 
I dont think it help with these moneymakers, the law should be changed to allow for confiscating the car for a period of time, or a periodical driving ban.
Fines dont do it i am sure, at least not with the still small chance of getting one.
 
Nah - folks wouldn't ever allow the government to stand if any started such underhand tactics for purely monetary objectives :)

Ontario had Photo Radar between October 1994 to July 1995. The political party that pledged to remove it in the Spring 1995 provincial election got elected primarily over this issue. Here's is the timeline. Now since photo Radar has been removed, I believe the average top speed cars are going are 20 to 30 KM/h from what it was 20 years ago. If I did 120 KM/h 25 years ago, maybe one car would pass me every 10 minutes. Now that appears to low speed on open road.

The argument against photo radar here in 1995 was it
  1. a cash cow
  2. never made the roads safer
  3. Was a violation of privacy as photos were sent to the owner or family of the vehicle as one family member knew where the other family member was at a specified time and WITH WHO!!!.;)
The argument I gave most credence to was from the police themselves, is that it took them of the roads and in the van and therefore unable to enforce or pursue reckless drivers. My solution, given that was a cash cow, was to hire someone, not necessarily a police officer and keep the experienced officers on the road.

From 1993 to 2006, I used to travel a stretch of road of about 330 km from where I grew up to where I live after I left my parent's nest. Did it 15 to 30 times a year and never got a ticket.
  1. Never be the fastest car
  2. Drive a little faster after a car passes you, but keep lots of distance
  3. Slow down when cars in front slow down
  4. Slow down when approaching bridges or approaching communities with Provincial police detachments
Oh yeah, Ontario has license plates front and back.

Edit: Added the wink
 
Last edited:
Radar and laser both in use here, but mostly radar. And yeah, paying attention to what the other cars are doing is smart- you should be doing that anyway, but when a bunch of cars do the same thing together there's a reason for it so look out especially well then. Cops here have their favorite places to set up radar, and they don't often do that anywhere else, so you can learn the spots to be extra-cautious, then speed elsewhere with little risk. Till recently, the County didn't bother with casual speeding and ten over was pretty safe, but now they have radar in unmarked SUV's accompanied by another unit, marked or unmarked, and 5 over is a guaranteed ticket. It's beginning to have some effect with the smarter more observant local drivers, but speeding is still the norm here :( I still chuckle at their attempt at "stealth" through these unmarked cars- they're all in the dark blue Police color which nobody else buys, have cheap small hubcaps, visible radio antennas, and are kept clean and polished beyond your average car. They stand out like a sore thumb to me :LOL: State Patrol's unmarked cars blend in much better, unless you see the lights inside or notice their tiny 800MHz antenna they look just like the other Camaros and Chargers. SC Law prohibits photo ticketing without an officer's visual verification on the scene, yet some places have visible red-light cams anyway and they are somewhat effective since few people know about this law. I do expect that at some point they will change that law once they realize how much money they can make with them.

Phil
 
I captured an officer in an unmarked brownish charger catch a shoulder driver. Pretty stealthy as I thought to myself look at this guy in the charger drive on the shoulder before seeing the other car and the lights. They should have more of these.

In all my driving, I have only seen a bridge blitz twice. Thats an officer with radar or laser on the bridge and cruisers waiting at the on ramp. That would be an effective way to catch a group of them.
 
Don't think our cops use radar any more, mainly because it can't target individual cars and is often inaccurate. We still have a few radar speed cameras but even then it has to be confirmed by two photos taken a fixed time apart showing the vehicle passing over lines on the road, which very often don't match the radar speed.

One advantage of automated speed cameras over cops is that the cops themselves can't get away with speeding, and this story is proof that you need front licence plates ... one very expensive mistake:
An ex-policeman who tried to dodge a speeding fine by claiming a Frenchman was driving his vehicle has been jailed for nine months.

He was clocked at 38mph in a 30mph zone near his home.

The court heard that a speed camera clearly snapped the policeman behind the wheel of the Ford Transit minibus.

He now stands to lose most or all of his police pension, the court heard.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/derbyshire/6450373.stm
 
That's at least addressing the problem. Of all people, the enforcers of the Law should be the ones most closely abiding with it. We don't get much of that here in the US.

Radar can be accurate, and if deployed and used correctly can single out one car in a group. That this can happen doesn't mean that it always does happen. An example: Cop with radar on the roadside, aiming it at three lanes of approaching traffic in the distance. The shallow angle and the beamspread of the radar will not allow singling out one car of the three abreast. Now adjust that angle to be less shallow and more diagonal and then the radar will first have it's beam met by the furthest car, then the middle car, and then the nearest car. Now you can differentiate between those same cars. Cops here in my State are trained in this technique, and this was explained to me by a Cop I know. But there are many things which can cause radar to be inaccurate in measuring speeds. Most of the common things are also taught to the Cops here, but they will not make note of them in handing out a ticket even if they know the problems were present at the time. You have to know them and present them in Court yourself if you want to beat the ticket.

The old adage of "Speed Kills" is pure BS. Speed doesn't kill, crashes do. Speed can contribute to the likelihood of a crash and will definitely play a part in how severe a crash is if it happens, so speed is relevant, but not concise. No single speed limit can be right for every driver, vehicle, and situation and almost never is there an instance where a minor variance in speed makes a major difference in traffic safety. One or two over is almost never unsafe, but it can get you a ticket which is based on that premise. So we should see things like radar and speed cams for what they really are- revenue generators for the government, not safety enhancements for the populace. The good in speed limits is in that it tends to maintain an even flow of traffic which is indeed safer, and it also keeps those without an understanding of vehicle dynamics from exceeding the limits of themselves and their vehicles. But really, it is only major differences in speed that create unsafe situations and heavily contribute to crashes. Unaddressed is that the difference in speed also applies in the other direction- going too slowly for the situation. This is as equally unsafe as going too fast, for it disrupts smooth traffic flow, yet most of the time there are no limits on how slow you may legally drive. Minimum speeds are almost always found only on freeways/motorways where overtaking is generally easy to do safely, but are absent on two lane roads where overtaking safely may be impossible. Kind of backwards logic, don't you think?

What would be safest of all is to have a recommended speed limit with a requirement that all people stay within say ten percent of it as long as that is possible for them to do this. This allows for slow trucks and cars with small engines to deviate beyond those limits where they must and keeps all the traffic moving at close to the same safe speed. Allowances for slowing of the whole in rain or icy roads etc could be easily written in, with the deciding factor of a speed-related ticket being whether a person was staying within ten percent of the speed of traffic around them. This would of course require thinkling and some math on the part of the people and the enforcers of the Law, but it's not so hard to do and it is questiionable whether someone unable or unwilling to do that should be allowed out there in the capacity of a driver or as a Cop enforcing traffic laws. But we won't ever see this, and the reason is that it would result in less revenue for the Government and nobody intentionally lowers their income when they don't have to.

Almost all of us speed at times, sometimes unintentionally and some do it by choice. And since we have hard limits to contend with instead of smart limits, we have to learn how to avoid having a minor discrepancy in our speed causing us a problem. Like the OP's situation there are often warning signs of the possibility of strict enforcement if you know what to look for, and doing that also keeps you in practice of being observant of the world around you, which is the most important tool for achieving safety that we have. Drive safe within the speed limits and do avoid getting busted because you know that will happen eventually when you speed!

Phil
 
What would be safest of all is to have a recommended speed limit with a requirement that all people stay within say ten percent of it as long as that is possible for them to do this. This allows for slow trucks and cars with small engines to deviate beyond those limits where they must and keeps all the traffic moving at close to the same safe speed. Allowances for slowing of the whole in rain or icy roads etc could be easily written in, with the deciding factor of a speed-related ticket being whether a person was staying within ten percent of the speed of traffic around them. This would of course require thinkling and some math on the part of the people and the enforcers of the Law, but it's not so hard to do and it is questiionable whether someone unable or unwilling to do that should be allowed out there in the capacity of a driver or as a Cop enforcing traffic laws. But we won't ever see this, and the reason is that it would result in less revenue for the Government and nobody intentionally lowers their income when they don't have to.
10%? Not sure how that would work on this bit of road, from Friday:

Speed limit is 70mph, for most of the video clip 70 was a sensible speed, but most people are doing about 40, when I get to the point in this framegrab the fast lanes are blocked by people doing 37, and the tanker and his tailgater on the left are doing about 16mph. The blue truck on the other side appeared to be doing about 6mph, so does that mean people passing the blue truck should do 6 + 10% = 6.6 mph maximum?

Presumably the blue truck was only doing 6 mph because he didn't trust his brakes, he was only heading towards an 800ft drop!

The silver car on the left only has one headlight on - must have a wonderful view of the road ahead with less than 1 white line length between him and the truck, and plenty of time to enjoy it at 16mph! No diesel fumes to enjoy with current UK trucks though. He was sticking to your rules, far to dangerous to overtake.

If the fast lanes had been clear then I would have moved to the right lane to pass the trucks rather than slow down, leaving an empty lane between us.

y4m2nFyGSYNYgPi7N2nNoEs6uPEgEg5-vugVAV9E-2uKL_Pry9fMdPtgywQ9URINUoX5bjH0TPj3AyB1_HhXjRD66tHpVvkHRi8ezh0WEjhbNHFO_xz_N7O1xl2pNW0IqG5Non2G2GwnastKMAQHx0v0s-PLQgh1NaVClB3ohMLgZcQ-AxoAarhRTL0qi5xHAIG



Maybe your 10% doesn't apply here since the road markings tell us to treat the road as 3 independent lanes, rather than 1 lane + 2 overtaking lanes, ie after overtaking you should not move back to the left lane until you reach the top of the hill.
 
Speed limit + or - 10%, so 63 to 77 for vehicles capable of keeping those speeds during normal road conditions. The truck is excused as they're doing the best they can. Only in worse road conditions (snow, ice, rain, fog, etc) where slowing is necessary for safety you would stay close to the average speed of traffic. Understand the concept now?

Phil
 
Speed limit + or - 10%, so 63 to 77 for vehicles capable of keeping those speeds during normal road conditions. The truck is excused as they're doing the best they can. Only in worse road conditions (snow, ice, rain, fog, etc) where slowing is necessary for safety you would stay close to the average speed of traffic. Understand the concept now?

Phil
Ahh, so that silver car would get a ticket for doing 16 when he should be doing between 63 and 77? I'm fairly sure the car was capable of more than 16mph. And nearly all the other cars where doing between 37 and 50, so would also get tickets, it would only have been me and the trucks that would not have got a ticket!

Of course, before handing out the tickets the cops would need to prove that they were capable of faster speeds, which might be difficult, although I probably had one of the smallest and oldest engines and was well below full throttle in top gear most of the time.
 
Maybe I wasn't clear, but all those unable to maintain the proper speed are excused and simply do the best they can to keep up. If the car is OK but the driver cannot handle the road speeds safely they should not be out there driving, and should be limited to roads which they can use safely. For those who have problems with the math when speeds are slower during bad conditions, simply staying close to the speed of those around you will keep you out of trouble. Simple enough. And for the Plod, now they can sell most of the radars and speed cams and focus on general traffic safety instead, which will gain us more safety than focusing on exactly limiting people to a specific speed.

Phil
 
Back
Top