AA Survey - Low level of enforcement

[reohn2]

Has anyone actually done that cost-benefit equation though? It's easy to point to, but what proportion of those injuries actually trouble the NHS for treatment, and at what cost, and similarly what's cost, with what degree of certainty to reduce them by x, y, or z percent?

I'm just a bit sceptical, perhaps because of the many and various business cases I've seen on my travels claiming all sorts of benefits that somehow either never seem to accrue, or more usually, never actually get measured.

I take your point,but usually about every second trip on the motorway,on average a 30 mile trip,I'll see a couple or three cars on the hardshoulder,bumpers piled in sometimes with ambulances in attendance,all due to inattentive driving,I occassionally get caught up in a loooonnnngggggg jam due to a more serious incident.
Around theGM/Cheshire M6,M62,M56,M60 area it only needs one incident and the motorways are choc solid for what can be hours.
Very occassionally there'll be two seperate incidents which can really put the cat among the pigeons and jams can sometimes last all day.
Lots of work time,deliveries,lost,and lots more pollution excreted than otherwise would be.
Just a window into what I see when out in the car or I hear on the radio.
Thing is though these incidents are caused by bad driving of maybe one or two individuals.
I've mentioned on here before of having a grandstand view,two vehicles in front of us,of a loonie on the M5 who cut across the front of an articulated tanker that was forced to brake the trailer swinging sideways knocking two cars out of the way overturning one in the process and collecting a further car under the trailer.
That driver who shot off up the slip road never to be seen again caused the death of a family of three,due to the tanker catching fire with them still in their car underneath the trailer,and four other casualties,one serious in the other two cars,and the M5 North bound blocked for 7 hours.
The human tragedy alone is heart breaking,the rest much less so though not insignificant,how the tanker driver,who escaped uninjured,felt I can only guess.
I've witnessed a few others,not as close up,though a couple were equally as gruesome.

[Wanlock Dod]

Ah, but who pays those costs?

Society pays those costs, and in doing so provides several opportunities for corporate profit.

[Cyril Haearn]

I think we're probably agreeing more than disagreeing (as often!) - there's a deal more jostling and jockeying than there was - it's more like London was when I drove there regularly - just everywhere now, but the true "loons" are still mercifully few IMHO.

I think the vast majority are unfit to drive
Spend some time observing vehicles at a junction with a STOP sign and you will realise that hardly any can even read
Alternative facts welcome

Were that the case it would be utter carnage on a daily basis, which manifestly isn't the case. Considering the pressure on road space, most people get along with each other most of the time. Of course the times when that's not the case will always be foremost in the mind.

That said, there's a big case to be made for both better road design to be routine, not the exception, and ongoing driver education, such as the Public Education Films of yore.

Please, observe traffic at a STOP sign when you get the chance, how many stop?
I submit that people who can not (will not?) read are unfit to drive
BTW, one imagines STOP signs are not put up "just for fun"

[Bonefishblues]

I think the vast majority are unfit to drive
Spend some time observing vehicles at a junction with a STOP sign and you will realise that hardly any can even read
Alternative facts welcome

Were that the case it would be utter carnage on a daily basis, which manifestly isn't the case. Considering the pressure on road space, most people get along with each other most of the time. Of course the times when that's not the case will always be foremost in the mind.

That said, there's a big case to be made for both better road design to be routine, not the exception, and ongoing driver education, such as the Public Education Films of yore.

Please, observe traffic at a STOP sign when you get the chance, how many stop?
I submit that people who can not (will not?) read are unfit to drive
BTW, one imagines STOP signs are not put up "just for fun"

That's a binary way to judge fitness to drive. Other measures are available which may be more sophisticated.

[Cyril Haearn]

Ignoring a STOP sign is an endorseable offence

If the cops openened their eyes they could sieze thousands of licences every day

I wish they would, it is not a matter for opinion or interpreatation

STOP sgns are not put up for fun. Or are they? The question may be answered seriously too

[Bonefishblues]

Ignoring a STOP sign is an endorseable offence

If the cops openened their eyes they could sieze thousands of licences every day

I wish they would, it is not a matter for opinion or interpreatation

STOP sgns are not put up for fun. Or are they? The question may be answered seriously too

So let's say there is such a correlation. Why aren't motorists bumping into each other literally all the time?

Failure to stop is indeed an endorsable offence - 3 points. The law says I can carry on driving though*, providing I don't accumulate sufficient points to consider a ban (of course if I say my aunty's a bit poorly, then I can keep on driving with anything up to a billionty-six points )

*indeed .gov describes these, generically, as "Minor motoring offences"

BTW, the Police can seize a vehicle, not a licence AIUI (happy to be corrected). Only a Court can revoke a licence, I thought.

[reohn2]

I knew someone once who(when there were bobbies about)got stopped for going through a STOP sign,turned out he had no VED,insurance,MOT,L plates or licence.
And he didn't like it when I told him he deserved everything he got for his unlawfulness.

It's often said that the one's caught committing 'small' crimes are found when stopped,to be committing bigger ones.

[Grandad]

Set up a separate police force solely to enforce the motoring laws and pay for it out of enhanced fines.

[mjr]

Has anyone actually done that cost-benefit equation though? It's easy to point to, but what proportion of those injuries actually trouble the NHS for treatment, and at what cost, and similarly what's cost, with what degree of certainty to reduce them by x, y, or z percent?

I'm just a bit sceptical, perhaps because of the many and various business cases I've seen on my travels claiming all sorts of benefits that somehow either never seem to accrue, or more usually, never actually get measured.

Yes, that calculation has been done many times. I think the figure for Norfolk last year was a £14m/year cost of collisions involving walkers and cyclists (but the site I saw it on seems to have gone offline so that's another thing I'm going to follow up ) and as I mentioned, there are many more motorists hurt than walkers and cyclists, so I'd expect the total cost to be much higher.

If no-one's measuring them (and I agree that's a problem), then how do you know they never accrued?

[Bonefishblues]

Has anyone actually done that cost-benefit equation though? It's easy to point to, but what proportion of those injuries actually trouble the NHS for treatment, and at what cost, and similarly what's cost, with what degree of certainty to reduce them by x, y, or z percent?

I'm just a bit sceptical, perhaps because of the many and various business cases I've seen on my travels claiming all sorts of benefits that somehow either never seem to accrue, or more usually, never actually get measured.

Yes, that calculation has been done many times. I think the figure for Norfolk last year was a £14m/year cost of collisions involving walkers and cyclists (but the site I saw it on seems to have gone offline so that's another thing I'm going to follow up ) and as I mentioned, there are many more motorists hurt than walkers and cyclists, so I'd expect the total cost to be much higher.

If no-one's measuring them (and I agree that's a problem), then how do you know they never accrued?

I was explaining the source of my scepticism - including benefits that don't accrue (or are double-claimed by disconnected programmes/business cases), or simply remain unmeasured when everyone moves on to the next shiny thing, so may or may not have accrued - or may have over-delivered - who knows?! I've seen all of the above, and some.

re Norfolk, £14m cost of incidents seems cheap (bear with me please) when potentially offset against what the cost might be to make a measurable reduction/improvement. Such is public policy, first explained to me by a Law Lecturer last century, and unchanged since.

[mjr]

re Norfolk, £14m cost of incidents seems cheap (bear with me please) when potentially offset against what the cost might be to make a measurable reduction/improvement. Such is public policy, first explained to me by a Law Lecturer last century, and unchanged since.

I don't understand how you conclude that. We're micturating the Get Britain Cycling level of spending up the wall every year with basically nothing to show for it except repairing injured walkers and cyclists or laying them to rest, while all the other public health negatives of our low cycling levels (still above the national average nonetheless) continue to accumulate. It seems a no-brainer that it's worth spending some more on walking and cycling now to start reducing this waste of money year after year.

[Bonefishblues]

re Norfolk, £14m cost of incidents seems cheap (bear with me please) when potentially offset against what the cost might be to make a measurable reduction/improvement. Such is public policy, first explained to me by a Law Lecturer last century, and unchanged since.

I don't understand how you conclude that. We're micturating the Get Britain Cycling level of spending up the wall every year with basically nothing to show for it except repairing injured walkers and cyclists or laying them to rest, while all the other public health negatives of our low cycling levels (still above the national average nonetheless) continue to accumulate. It seems a no-brainer that it's worth spending some more on walking and cycling now to start reducing this waste of money year after year.

What's the spend necessary to make this happen? £14M doesn't go a long way, despite seeming like a lot of money to you & I, and that's the saving as a result of a reduction to zero incidents.

[Cyril Haearn]

The unmarked police car was out on the Autobahn last week
Two drivers were caught and offered therapy*, there was a lot of detail about them in the report, why they broke the law and how they would be punished

* therapy: the cops spend a lot of time showing them videos of their driving and "advising" them

One wonders whether that was all they had time for in an eight-hour shift

9998 were not caught

Quoting myself..
I wonder whether the cops really do this to avoid catching too many
They could have spent the shift at the roadside and caught hundreds of speeding criminals

[Cyril Haearn]

I knew someone once who(when there were bobbies about)got stopped for going through a STOP sign,turned out he had no VED,insurance,MOT,L plates or licence.
And he didn't like it when I told him he deserved everything he got for his unlawfulness.

It's often said that the one's caught committing 'small' crimes are found when stopped,to be committing bigger ones.

It is well known that those apprehended committing traffic offences are often involved in "real crime" too

Real crime!!!???

[thirdcrank]

... So if you want to drive badly, I suggest avoiding West Norfolk

The case reported in this link was in Norfolk, although IMO it illustrates more generally what drivers think they can get away with. Charged with speeding (evidence from a mobile speed camera) the defendant, with eight points already on his licence, sent an advocate to court to argue on his behalf for a short immediate ban, rather than more points and a probable longer ban (I don't know if as a company chief exec he felt he could not argue exceptional hardship, or whether that's being saved up for later if he gets to 12 points.)

Anyway, the bench at Norwich Magistrates' Court granted his request.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/lotus ... -1-5364344

He's the head honcho at Lotus, the performance car company, and his explanation - it's hard to call it mitigation - was that he liked to test-drive the company's products and that's what he'd been doing on this occasion. ie, This isn't somebody claiming some personal emergency, but rather it's to some extent premeditated with the implication that it goes with the job. Magistrates' are limited in the sentences they can impose, but IMO, this behaviour was high on the scale of aggravating factors.