In message , ARW
writes
"charles" wrote in message
. ..
In article ,
Robin wrote:
But that's where you're wrong. Members of Speedwatch have the legal
authority to operate a speed "gun". Others haven't.

They also have the police issuing letters that state a car was exceeding
the speed limit - no "alleged", no admission that there might have been
an error. And with no right of appeal - which is justified on the basis
that the driver can take civil action against the police or the speed
gun operators.

Poor diddums, getting a letter from the police. how can you appeal
against
a letter, anyway?


It's something to wipe your arse with - along with the satisfaction of
knowing that you have wasted other people's time and money because they
cannot issue you with a speeding ticket.

I am surprised at the underlying level of anger engendered by what I see
as an advisory activity.

I suppose living in a *large* village I am more concerned with the
impact of *through traffic* than what the locals get up to.

The set up here is a small group of volunteers armed with high viz
jackets and an easily read display board. How speeds are obtained and
recorded is beyond my knowledge. The location is invariably close to the
exit from a 30 zone or just inside for the other direction.

Speed data gathered may be used to trigger a mobile enforcement set up
(camera van) but not noticed so far.

I see them as a low cost harmless deterrent. Or is the consensus that
posted speed limits are irrelevant and road safety should be left to the
preferences of the driver?


--
Tim Lamb