Speed doesn’t kill?

Pootling around the pages of the Torygraph’s motoring section as I am wont to do on a lazy Sunday afternoon, I came across an article based on a book excerpt about scare stories called “Speed Cameras, the twisted truth”. As everybody knows, the sensible Canadians ditched speed cameras and have very effective Police patrols (I know this from personal experience). This means that the Police have enough Traffic resources to stop suspect vehicles and catch ‘impaired’ drivers before they can do serious harm. They also nick you for speeding or if your vehicle is in an unsafe condition, but that’s part of the law and they enforce it fairly.

I’m adding a sidebar link to Mr Smith’s “Safe Speed” web site, because I’ve read what he says, checked the statistics from several sources, and find merit in his arguments. He is not arguing for no speed limits, only for the rest of the Highway Code to be enforced properly, and not by cameras but real live coppers who can keep the lid on the downright anti social and stupid simply by their presence.

To be honest, I’ve always wondered about the bald assertion that speed kills in ‘over a third’ of all RTA’s (Road Traffic Accidents). Not that speed doesn’t kill, but the actual figure is running at more like 12.7% (Including ‘probable’ and ‘contributory’ deaths) than the 35% I’ve heard quoted by the ‘Speed is really, really bad’ lobby. The major causes of death on the UK’s roads appear to be what used to be called ‘Driving without due care and attention’ and what they call over here ‘Impaired driving’ (Drink or drugs).

Mr Smith also came in from a slating a while back from the Guardian’s George Monbiot (For whom I have little respect – See sidebar for ‘Autorantic Moonbat’) who apparently called Paul Smith’s side of the argument “The road rage lobby”. Monbiot can’t have read Safe Speeds web site content, which far from being the irresponsible organ Monbiot outlines, is a very sober and structured set of articles arguing for a return to less two dimensional means of Traffic Enforcement than speed cameras.

As an ex-parking enforcement officer I can recall seeing people deliberately driving the wrong way up one way streets, vehicles climb the kerb while their drivers were talking on their mobile phones, pedestrians made to scatter on crossings, and all because a lack of actual on street enforcement. Of course we parking plodders would call the incidents in to CCTV when we saw them, but 90% of the time you didn’t even get an acknowledgement. We did used to help with the odd drunk driver giving one or two of our number a mouthful. On five out of six incidents where we called in “Driver very abusive, breath smelled strongly of alcohol.” we heard that the culprit had been caught and booked for Drink Driving. That felt good. I’ve (As I’ve probably mentioned before), lost a lot of close friends to people who thought it was safe to drive while rat arsed, and really have no love for anyone like that.

As a keen motorcyclist, I recall a number of my friends fell victim to the ‘SMIDSY manoeuvre’ and took a header over some fools bonnet as a result. Sometimes they didn’t survive, and all because the car driver wasn’t paying proper attention. I’ve known court cases where the bench have sided with the errant driver just because the injured party was riding a motorcycle. I can only account for my own relatively unscathed survival in twenty plus years of riding (In most weathers) to sheer paranoia, good road instincts, and simple good luck. Oh yes, and paying close attention to the tenets outlined in the Police riders manual ‘Roadcraft’.

As for speed alone being the cause of any misfortune, it doesn’t kill as many as by those so blind they should not have a licence (Poor eyesight). Nor does it kill anywhere near as many as those who drink, drive whilst on medication (I include ‘just a dose of Night Nurse’), illegal drugs, or drive whilst ill, and who amongst us hasn’t done that? Nor does it kill as many as those who basically are not paying proper attention to what they are doing, the impatient, the careless, feckless and occasionally utterly idiotic.

Besides, I’ve always reckoned that the best places for speed (Sorry, Safety) cameras is actually in urban and suburban areas. Say for example at pedestrian crossings and junctions where people routinely ‘jump the lights’ and block junctions. They have such cameras in situ here in BC, and no one complains because the sane folks hereabouts reckon that jumping a red light is about as safe as slapping a hungry Grizzly across the nose with a wet hanky. Yet certain idiots still persist in doing it. Jumping the lights, that is. You don’t tend to find much left after a hungry Grizzly Bear has finished with someone.

What the hell, you can’t tell someone who just won’t listen. Especially if they support the current UK governments position.

It isn't worth it

Perusing the news while waiting for Mrs S to get home, and saw this account of a man who died over of all things a parking space. I know it's easy to get heated over, but there are nobler and more fitting ways to meet your maker than a stupid row over a parking space.

If the victim had been fifty years younger I'd be putting in a nomination for the Darwin awards.

Likewise, to threaten a Parking Attendant, then hit two Coppers over a lousy ticket is just so deeply sad.

Some people really should learn to use the challenge procedure instead.

A little seasonal crime prevention advice

Got into a bit of an argument with an anonymous commenter on the previous post about 'Trick or treat' and Halloween. I haven't changed my mind about enjoying the festival, but it seems some of you need help to deal with the more aggressive types out there.

Now I'll repeat and enlarge upon some of the advice I gave in response to the complaints that the festival is used for aggressive and intimidating behaviour by some. Some of which is tried and tested (By me in person), other stuff I'm familiar with having worked in the byzantine labyrinths of local Government.

First you have to get clever with the bad guys. Not threatening, but making it not worth their while to bother you. Don't want 'trick or treaters' calling? Right, buy the cheapest and least pleasant candy / sweets you can. Don't do anything that puts you in the wrong, but pay lip service only to the tradition and keep your 'guests' at the front door. Get rid of them quickly and don't get into a conversation; nod, smile "One handful only dear. Thank you." Ensuring that word gets around that you have "Crap sweets" should keep the little tinkers at bay for a couple or three years. What you are trying to do here is remove or limit their motivation. Any complaints from them can be dealt with by a cunning "Sorry chaps, you're a bit late - they're all we've got left." Any demands for food, drink, or alcohol should be dealt with by a "This isn't a bank / pub / supermarket you know. Goodnight." and a puzzled expression like you don't know what they want. After all, you'll have done your part - they've had the sweets - the 'bargain' is kept. Speaking for myself, I always answered the door wearing a fright mask and doing my 'hunchback' routine. Never had a problem.

There is another means of dealing with the bad guys, but you need training and more than a little nerve to do it. It is a method I used on every working day when I did foot patrol as a Parking Enforcer. It consists of trying to 'engage' the person who is making the threats, and getting them to behave like a reasonable adult. Without training I wouldn't even try it.

Going further down the line, if you have already had trouble with such 'visitors' and vandalism / threats etc, you can try and get some informal advice on the problem from the local nick. See if they can help. This sort of problem is independent of all festivals, and if you've already been assaulted / had your property vandalised - this is nothing to do with any festival. You are their 'bitch' and the little jokers I'm thinking about love that power. They get off on it. Film them in the act if you can, but make sure they don't see that tell tale red light on the camcorder or webcam. No sense in provoking matters.

Now if you are afraid that going into the local nick might make you a bigger target, then may I suggest this course of action; go to your local Council offices and ask for the Councillor who has the responsibility for the local Police committee. Not a 'Manager' or 'Liaison Officer' who will put you on a spreadsheet and promptly forget about your real problems, but the Councillor who works most closely with the local Police. Bend their ear, politely explain the problem in detail without naming names or pressing charges and make the Councillor's life difficult until a positive solution is found. They want the plaudits and the votes, so make them think that this is a golden opportunity for them to make a 'name' for themselves and get re-elected more easily. If that proves no use, get on to your local MP, in person at their 'surgery' if possible, and try a similar approach. The machinery is there, all you have to do is find at what level the levers of Local Government trip and things start to work in your favour. This will entail taking some time off work, but if you have a problem - You've got to deal with it somehow. As you may have found, there is no short cut.

As for the festival; try getting into the spirit of things. Wangle an invite to a party. Don't be alone. Always remember that with 'aggressive trick or treaters' you are dealing with 'pack psychology'. They prey on the weak because it makes them feel big. It's a low self esteem thing on their part. If your gang is bigger than theirs - they will not bother you so much and you may even be able to relax a little and actually enjoy yourself.

Look, this advice is the best I can offer without details or being there, and I'm not in that line of work any more. Hells bells, I'm not even in the UK any more, and 'Trick or treating' is a bit better organised over here in British Columbia (It's only really for under 11's anyway).

Anyway, I know that it is November 1st now and a bit late for advice on 'Trick or Treat' but best of luck to the afflicted amongst you. I wish you joy and surcease from your troubles; who knows, next year you may even rediscover something you thought was gone forever.

Regards

Bill

All hallows eve

Everyone seems to complain about Halloween. In my heady youthful days before PC we had pub games like dunking for apples (Messy, but lots of fun), Yard of ale drinking contests, apples on a rope, pig or ox roasts and bonfires (No vegetarian option). Fancy dress (For all ages). Jumping the bonfires. All good clean fun with only the odd black eye after the 'kissing game' (Heterosexuals only please).

The local Police paid us the odd visit, but didn’t get in the way. Even the vicar used to put in an appearance just to check we pagan country folk weren't doing any worshipping of devils / human sacrifices etc. It could get a bit boisterous, but nobody forced you to join in. Fights were quickly broken up and anything but a one-on-one punch up (“Take it outside lads”) was unheard of. Two on one was actively discouraged and thought of as downright cowardice. Nobody sat in a corner with a disapproving sneer and glass of cheap white wine either. If they did that, they could stay at home. We had fun. Rumbustious, old fashioned fun.

That’s what I found was missing from the UK before I left. No one seemed to really enjoy anything but the discomfiture of some other poor sod any more. There was something mean and crabbed about life in general. Gangs of teenage children bullying others because they (The gangs) have no real self esteem (Or goals, or anything) of their own. Schadenfreude ruled, especially in the media. The anti-everything faction of which has done incalculable damage. They know who they are by their own confessions. The middle class wasters of the sixties and seventies, who like accountants, knew the price of everything and the value of nothing. Spawny eyed wassucks.

Recent Governments wanted to control everything so they could get the credit and cover themselves in glory. Now they do. You can’t play a tune in a pub without paying the ‘entertainment tax’ or having a special licence. Singing and dancing is Verboten. The threat of a visit from unfriendly gangs often puts a damper on parties before they get going. Once upon a time, the organisers could stand up to them and deny them entry, occasionally at gunpoint, but you can’t do that nowadays can you? The UK populace have all been made ‘victims’ and very rarely does anyone pitch in on the side of the good guys any more.

Ergo the feast of All Hallows, Samhain, Halloween. ‘Trick or treating’ over here in Canada can be fun if you make a little effort. I got a bowl of candy ready and used a glove puppet to answer the door last night. It was a barrel of laughs for all concerned. Used to do the same back in the UK. The looks on the little kids faces when you opened the door dressed as a hunchback “Yeth, young marsters and misstwethes?” was well worth the preparation. It was fun too. Good old fashioned fun. Wonder what happened to it.

Juvenile? Immature? Maybe. All I know is that it beats the hell out of the alternative.

New rules

We bought our first car in Canada on Tuesday. A 1998 Ford Windstar. Not the best liked of vehicles, but as both Mrs S and I find it comfortable and apart from a couple of minor niggles like the column gear shift and a warning light that stays on, even though there isn't a problem, not a bad piece of kit.

Being a cautious soul, I am sticking to the posted speed limits, which seemed to annoy one person in a Budget rental pickup that roared past us with much obscene gesticulation, indicating that he was much displeased with my obedience to the traffic laws. I did not respond, basically because I already knew what kind of person he was, and didn't need to make my feelings known by word or deed. That boy needs to grow up a bit.

That said, it feels odd chuntering along in Kilometres an hour, and don't ask me how weird it feels being able to turn right on a red light. I'll get used to it, eventually.

Oh yes, welcome to another Police related site to the sidebar www.police.info

Tomorrows ban

Just a few idle thoughts whilst out on patrol watching smokers huddling wetly under trees and awnings in the intermittent rain on the first day of the UK’s indoor smoking ban. This annoyed me a little because these are my favourite lurking places and my supply of fresh air was reduced. By the way, for those of you who are interested, you can smoke outdoors. So long as you don’t light up in any publicly used enclosed area like a Mall, Shop, Restaurant or Pub, you’re OK.

As an ex-smoker I feel the ban is a bit draconian; yes, I know smoking is really bad for you, and that it increases the risk of heart attacks, cancer, pre term abortion and other assorted nastiness. I don’t do it any more, but there are others that do and take that chance. They’re grown ups and know the risks – so what?

Regrettably I’m sure total prohibition is only a step away. What will this lead to? No more smoking anywhere at all? Speakeasies for smokers? Organised crime being handed yet another way of making millions? This does tend to beg the question; what’s the next candidate for a ban?

One of the things I’ve noticed over the years is that these issues tend to come in stages; first there is the irate voice in the wilderness, then a minority campaign by the ‘concerned’ followed by several abortive attempts at a ban. Next come some half arsed measures like banning public consumption; next follows total prohibition, followed by liberalisation a few years later because the ban proves unenforceable. Hunting anyone? Fishing shortly to follow?

Alcohol is next in the frame obviously; the media outcry over ‘binge drinking’ is quite ferocious, so picking that as the prime candidate isn’t one for Einstein. My take on it is; what do you expect when you allow extended licensing hours for the sale of Alcohol, especially in a country where people are culturally conditioned to drink large quantities in short sessions. Mind you, in countries where Alcohol is forbidden to all but a few, civil unrest and violent insurrection seem quite common. Where a little civilised tipple is permitted and even encouraged, life is seems more laid back. Unless you’re an aggressive type with an excess of testosterone and a chip on your shoulder, that is.

If we have any form of Prohibition, we should look at how it was tried in the 1920’s and 1930’s in the USA (Amongst other places), and look what happened there. Organised crime built, and continues to build, empires on the illicit sales of alcohol (Amongst other substances).

After alcohol, what will be next on the ban list? Well my money is on coffee. It’s got a number of factors which are almost guaranteed make the ‘ban everything’ brigade target its consumption. For one thing, it’s very American. To some people anything remotely connected with the USA is anathema (Even some Americans feel this way). Their virulent hatred passes irrationality and has more than a hint of being well over the event horizon of complete frothing insanity and accelerating. Their thought processes seem to follow this general route; they hate America, ergo America is evil; Coffee is predominantly an American habit, therefore Coffee is evil. Not because Coffee, or Coffee shops are really that bad, but because of the USA connection. To my mind that’s rather like wanting to shut down all the Chinese takeaways because you don’t like the foreign policy objectives of the Peoples Republic of China. In addition there is already a groundswell of semi organised whining against the Coffee shops that will probably culminate in a number of media outcries (Rather like in the 19th century), followed by an attempt at some sort of ban.

Of course there are the ‘health’ issues. Over consumption of Coffee can be bad for you, it’s a diuretic (Make you want to wee more) and even mildly addictive. Although this can also be said of teas, some of which have a higher tannin and caffeine content than coffee.

Strangely enough, many of these complaining voices appear to have a religious or pseudo religious foundation. A lot of the ‘anti’ arguments (Coffee, alcohol, tobacco) appear to have their complaints couched in phrases cocooned within religious or politico-religious imagery. If they (the complainants) don’t like other people obtaining gratification from a practice, they are often heard to describe it as ‘un-Christian’, ‘anti-Islamic’, ‘anti-Zionist’, or ‘anti-pagan’. Never mind that the derided practice or substance was not around when said religious factions holy books / scripture were originally written. Their misdirected zeal scatters like shrapnel. Furthermore, it is my observation that said complaining voices seem to be guilty of making up their own prejudices as they go along. It does not really seem to be anything to do with religion at all. They’re just anally retentive power freaks who use it for their own twisted agendas.

This seems particularly true as it seems to me that people of a certain mindset are drawn towards the evangelical, of whatever religious persuasion. They can’t attain power any other way, so they use the smokescreen (Heh!) of religion or politics to obtain it. That’s how they obtain their gratification. The ‘comments’ section of any daily newspapers website seems to attract these armchair prohibitionists (Of whatever kidney) like wasps to jam.

To my examination, all this talk of “It’s bad for you” looks more like a power trip than a health thing. Over consumption of anything is very bad for you, but that doesn’t mean we should ban everything certain minority pressure groups don’t like. Lets face it; you can even overload your system with water if you work hard enough at it. Under certain conditions even oxygen can prove fatal. Try banning either of those and see what happens.

Failing that, why don’t the ‘ban everything’ faction try breatharianism? Then see what happens.

Update: There have been a couple of stories in the mainstream press alleging that a ban on smoking outdoors is imminent. Funnily enough, when you click on the links the stories have been replaced by less inflammatory pieces.

Incidentally, to those commenters who have made some very wordy posts re how good the ban is, and how it is not the top of a 'slippery slope'. Please read your history. Prohibition of Alcohol swept in on a wave of middle class approval too. Don't take my word for it. So long as this pack of jokers are in power, the trend will continue.

Where there’s smoke – there’s fined

Lunch break recently. There was a continuous rotating discussion about the English smoking ban that comes into force 1st July 2007. Almost half of the Parking Enforcers in our district are smokers, so not being able to bunk off for a quiet ciggie on your break is going to make some of my brethren even less loveable than at present. As if that were possible.

The situation at present is as follows; you can’t smoke in our mess room, and from 1st July won’t be allowed to smoke in the entire building. Now the law as it stands forbids smoking ‘in the workplace’. Now, speaking as someone whose workplace is the Streets, does this mean that any of my smoking brethren cannot bunk off for a quick smoke whilst out on patrol? Or, provided of course that they have removed their cap and epaulettes, they can, provided they have logged off on a ‘break’. No one has given us any guidance on this as yet. As if they will until it becomes a ‘disciplinary matter’. Please note; we are not deemed to be ‘in uniform’ when without these items, and if seen booking a vehicle whilst not properly attired, then any Penalty Charge Notice issued when not ‘in uniform’ can be made invalid upon challenge.

Now the ‘official’ guidelines (Key points) from the Smoke free England website are laid out below;
· From 1 July 2007 it will be against the law to smoke in virtually all enclosed and substantially enclosed public places and workplaces.
· Public transport and work vehicles used by more than one person will also need to be smokefree.
· No-smoking signs will have to be displayed in all smokefree premises and vehicles.
· Staff smoking rooms and indoor smoking areas will no longer be allowed, so anyone who wants to smoke will have to go outside.
· Managers of smokefree premises and vehicles will have legal responsibilities to prevent people from smoking.
· If you are uncertain where you can or can't smoke, just look for the no-smoking signs or ask someone in charge (If you ask me, no one’s told me anything so I won’t have a clue - sorry).

Our discussion opened when Chris lit up his usual badly rolled ‘tab’ and stood in the mess room doorway to smoke and talk as usual. “You jacking it in before first July mate?” Pete asked him.
“I’m going to try.” Chris took a short drag on his roll up and coughed like an old tractor. I never fathom why he still smokes, what with his bronchitis and all.
“Where you going to smoke if you can’t?” Davey asked him.
“Have to go outside won’t I?” Was Chris’s rather surly response. He’s had several run ins with Management over the past few months and he’s less than enchanted with them because of this.
“Yeah, but you’ll have to leave Council property, which’ll put you outside the grounds. You thought about that?” Davey pointed out; tell you the truth I think he was winding Chris up more than a bit.
“If I don’t, none of you lot’ll rat on me will you?” Chris asked with an unpleasant twist to his mouth like he’d just tasted a dead skunk.
“Don’t be daft.” Pete replied.
“We’re your mates, get off.” Asif is a smoker himself, so that was predictable.
“No one here is going to tell, you daft prat.” Colin reassured.
“Unless it’s Henry.” Pete leaned his chin on his hand moodily.
“Or that square eyed bastard Jago.” Davey observed.
“They’d sell their own mothers to suck up to Management.” Pete said.
“And they both smoke.” I pointed out.
“Fucking hypocrites, the pair of ‘em. You want to watch those bastards.” Pete wagged a warning finger.
“We already do Pete, already do.” Davey replied. The rest of us nodded sagely. There is a certain coterie amongst us who are well known backstabbers. They lack the spine to deal with issues face to face and go running to Management over the slightest disagreement. Even Management have gotten teed off enough to issue an edict that ‘petty matters’ should not be brought to them. Not that this has stopped Jago and Henry so far. Pillocks.

At the moment of writing, we Parking Enforcers haven’t been asked to join the ‘enforcement’ side of the smoking ban. That is to be done by a separate band on non-uniformed ‘inspectors’ (Praise the Lord). Speaking as this particular Parking Enforcer I shall be refusing to enforce the ban unless we can use it to get rid of the wino’s who occasionally pollute our car parks. I already have my work cut out doing normal patrol duties, so unless some serious extra money is on the table for this purpose (And even if there isn’t) our illustrious leaders can go whistle. For myself, all that is going through my mind on the subject is the following thought; phew! At least there’s going to be someone out there less popular than us.

Addendum: Looks like those new ‘Anti Smoking Inspectors’ may in turn have someone to look down on. Will we have Binge Drinking Inspectors next? Oh yes, and don’t think that being middle class will save you from any putative predations. Hells bells, it’s enough to drive you to drink. Oh well, mine’s a large one with a Fixed Penalty Notice chaser. Cheers!