www.DorsetSpeed.org.uk   please contribute: info@dorsetspeed.org.uk

Exposing incompetence, greed, waste, danger and corruption in the speed enforcement industry
Skip Navigation Links
Update 2017
Coverup, protection
Original articles
Name and shame

Dorset Speed facebook group was shut down!!
Here is the link to the new group

Dorset PCC David Sidwick admits "Community Speedwatch" causes dangerous driving!!

A short while after David Sidwick, in charge of a £150m budget for Dorset Police, demonstrated that he didn't even understand the simplest example of compound probability, now he has stated:

"In Dorset we have an excellent Community Speedwatch scheme made up of 86 teams and over 700 volunteers (as of December 2022) carrying out vital work, and keeping us all safe on Dorset’s roads."

and ....

"Not only do the volunteers help keep our roads safe but they do so whilst experiencing an increasing level of abuse from the public. Over the last year, there has been an increase in the number of drivers shouting highly abusive language or making obscene gestures to the teams whilst they are conducting speed checks, with over 240 instances recorded so far this year. I want to take this opportunity to make it clear that this behaviour is not acceptable. I am even more shocked to find out that some drivers are putting themselves and other road users at risk just to be abusive to the volunteers by taking both hands off their steering wheel to make insulting gestures, over-revving engines and using their mobile phones to video volunteers."

Thanks David for confirming what I have observed and commented on previously at the link above.

Now then, is there any chance of any processing? Here are some further observations:

1. As I mentioned in my last item, speed limits today are generally set not by any analysis or even any basic knowledge, but generally by councillors presumably thinking that what they are doing will be popular while deliberately turning a blind eye to the facts. Therefore by definition speed limits can no longer be relied on to indicate what speed may be appropriate or safe and increasingly, are set far below the appropriate speed for the road type and condition. It therefore follows that as unpalatable as it may sound, exceeding the limit moderately is not likely in itself to be dangerous, whereas an over-reliance on one surprisingly small factor in road casualty obviously is.

2. Again, as unpalatable and wrong as it might be, the REALITY is that if you treat people like children, many will probably respond accordingly and behave badly. As David has observed, there is no possibility that triggering aggressive negative behaviour is not dangerous, and I predict, that sooner or later, there will be injury resulting from the ridiculous speed watch nonsense, whereas, it is quite possible that no road safety improvement results at all.

Now that (finally) David Sidwick understands that interventions that have not been properly thought through can have negative consequences, I wonder if we will see a proper justification dealing with all of the issues of crowding pavements with groups of people close to and irritating drivers? And if this cannot show with complete impartiality a benefit on balance, presumably he will ask the chief constable to stop this immediately?

Or will he just ignore it and carry on in defiance of logic when he knows that if he thinks about it too much he could not avoid the realisation that he really should stop it?

I think I know the answer!