North Yorkshire Police Must Lie about Fatal 4

The total piety of that specialist breed, the road traffic officers actually has them believing that their work, attacking, prosecuting and harassing drivers is cost effective and just.

They do not understand that, without drivers, our economy and they, cease to exist and we all die. Drivers are not the enemy of the State but just ordinary people with limited ability and means struggling to keep society going.

After 300 billion driver miles a year, there is less death on the road from all causes than from accidents in the home, from strangulation, hanging and self harm but by the multi billions being expended by a road safety industry of profiteers and anti drivers, you would never believe that most of this attention on drivers is totally out of proportion and counter productive.

The traffic officers, like their whole corrupt industry, are incapable of looking outside their bubble. They cannot see that the damage and hampering of major infrastructure is costing so much that we are killing more people from the economics of it, as well as directly from false road safety policy which focuses on profit more than accident causes.

In these tweets you can see an example of a traffic Ch.Ins caught up in this bubble and it hasn't occurred to him that none of this is altruistic at all. How much do these machines cost? Who profits? What is the cost of stopping all these drivers? How many people actually do die only because a driver was drugged? See my letter to a Minister

And again. the Fatal 4 lie is included in his message. See the lie hereThis senior officer knows that 'speeding' causes nothing and so the Fatal 4 is a lie to promote the speeding industry and for no other reason. Fatal 4 does not include dangerous and careless driving that are undoubtedly fatal so that is how corrupt and dangerous these people are really prepared to be.

See more on NYP dishonesty & use of bereaved for false statements

I challenge Ch Insp Phil Vickers to be honest about road safety if he possibly can be.

Economically society has no need for this breed of officer who really does see drivers as a priority of police expenditure. It is about time other police realised that, when the economy suffers, they go short of funds yet they have a branch which is part of a counter productive no cost benefit industry of vast sums that could be better spent elsewhere in the police.   

See why this traffic monolith must be culled 

#EMOpSS have 900 DrugDrive kits to use during our #Fatal4 Campaign @SouthTRPT @TRPTNorth @LincsRAPT @LeicsRAPT https://t.co/Qvd3SVS6n2

— Ch Insp Phil Vickers (@CIPhilVickers) November 29, 2015

@CIPhilVickers @LincsRAPT @SouthTRPT @TRPTNorth @LeicsRAPT So if these kits are for a good cause, why are they sold for profit?

— Keith Peat (@BogTrotter1) November 29, 2015

@CIPhilVickers @LincsRAPT @SouthTRPT @TRPTNorth @LeicsRAPT Yet more death from accidents in the home & strangulation. The kits. Altruistic?

— Keith Peat (@BogTrotter1) November 29, 2015

@CIPhilVickers @LincsRAPT @SouthTRPT @TRPTNorth @LeicsRAPT Must be nice to focus on your own costly bubble like this.

— Keith Peat (@BogTrotter1) November 29, 2015

Serious Collision Investigation Units? OMG!

Look at this story about a straight forward fatal road accident where an unprotected human on a flimsy frame and wheels got hit by a large piece of moving metal and died. See it here. 

For a start it's no longer an 'accident', so that loads of money can be wasted in searching for a culprit and someone to prosecute. So we now only have 'collisions.'

What is astounding is that 'cash strapped' police forces are maintaining units to investigate accidents at all. The cause, as in this case, is often self evident and where it isn't immediately self evident, then let's just accept it and move on?

PC Jim Lovell, from the Serious Collision Investigation Unit at Three Mile Cross, said: “I would like to hear from anyone who was in the vicinity on Tuesday night and either witnessed the collision or saw either of the vehicles before it happened."

That's the sort of appeal we hear on Crimewatch after a murder or robbery isn't it? It was a bloody accident for goodness sake.

It's not as if these investigations are going to prevent another such accident. All they do is to, very expensively, look for someone to blame and to prosecute. In my day we just accepted the reporting beat officer's report and if there were anything in that that would indicate wrong doing, then a summons was also added. Now police forces are sustaining special units to hound drivers, and some are even called detectives too with all the perks and expenses that detectives enjoy. 

How can police forces plead that they're cash strapped when they are using up cash to turn accidents into crimes? Let's have these coppers back on the beat and mostly to be interested in crime and violence where most of us want them. 

Look at this piety:  

End of a long day, I open a letter sat on my desk

My eyes water

I'm reminded why we do this job#POLICE pic.twitter.com/cA6adhkofS

— Ch Insp Phil Vickers (@CIPhilVickers) February 23, 2016

@CIPhilVickers @mrwilliam Did this bring her back? Did it discover a method of stopping it again? What dis this costly exercise achieve?

— Drivers E. Midlands (@EastMidsDrivers) February 24, 2016

@mrwilliam Sorry to be so tough but road safety ain't no popularity contest. https://t.co/mZseMtpTC0 @CIPhilVickers https://t.co/HioJmfOoYq

— Drivers E. Midlands (@EastMidsDrivers) February 24, 2016

Yet another pretty young doctor thinks she's a road safety and driving expert

We have already commented on the amount of people with no CV in driving, road safety, accidents and prosecution having a major say in the subject. The worst are the academics that use their honors to give themselves credibility in a subject for which they know very little about. In this case, Dr Fiona Fylan, chunters on about the psychology of speeders -based on it's always their fault- without addressing what actually causes speeding and dangerously confusing speeding with dangerous driving too. 

Dr Fylan

See her in action here..We note that she is involved with Road Safety GB yet another spurious organisation to which all local road safety officers, also with no CV defer. More on them here and here 

I have written to Dr Fiona explaining what speeding is and what causes it as follows:

Dear Doctor Fylan,

We are ex police driving & road safety experts.

I expect that your objectives are for best, not profit or ideologically based road safety.

Please do read our explanation of speed related offences. bit.ly/1FfO0BR and in particular the fact that 'Speeding' cannot cause an accident. Thus there is no such offence of death by speeding. The fourth category you describe are not just speeding but driving dangerously. Were they to kill anyone the charge wouldn 't be death by speeding. It is crucial that we do not refer to dangerous driving as speeding.

With regard to coercive speed awareness courses for profit, we cannot find any legal authority whereby police can waive due judicial process on payment of money to anyone other than the courts. In fact we jail police officers who offer such wheeling and dealing. See bit.ly/1i8buJQ & bit.ly/17KEa8P In any case these courses are valueless because they are not teaching the truth about speeding, the cameras and the limits either. In fact they are counter productive because they depend on and need speeders to subsist. This is why high volume sites are allowed to continue to fail by many thousands of cultivated speeders when the problem could be corrected. If a site generated 10s of 1000s of accidents, would police just take pictures and money or find out what's going wrong and correct it? So here is the evidence of a mercenary fiscal objective.

The unintentional categories you speak of are victims of a set formula which, as an expert driver and someone who studies many speed limits too, can tell you that it is caused by either an enticing road layout, lack of sufficient signage reminders, or  inappropriate speed limits which can all be easily corrected if the true objective is to reduce speeders and not to keep the speeding industry in business.

I am sorry but my studies show that those who deliberately speed slightly are very rare but those that do deserve a ticket ;even though if the limit were appropriate and set scientifically as opposed to the unqualified political parochial aspirations, as they now often are, there would be less of those too. I am afraid that your premise is that the limit is correct. What is the driving cv of the person who picks the number?

What is serious is that all this profitable focus on speeding that cannot cause accidents is at the expense of ignoring some accident causes totally and others partially. This is killing people. An example of this is the Fatal 4 campaign where only 3 are fatal but speeding, which isn't but makes a lot of money, is included yet dangerous and careless  driving,  which undoubtedly kill people, are excluded. How dangerously corrupt is that?

Are you sure that you can put your qualifications in support of such dangerous profiteering?

Please do not hesitate to contact us for independent expert  road safety, driving, and prosecution advice.

Wishes

Keith Peat

www.driversunion.co

Let's see if the good doctor is just another interested in self promotion by propaganda or someone genuinely interested in road safety?

Police tell students 'speeding' doesn't cause accidents.

Edmund King

I have been banging on for ages that 'speeding' cannot possibly be a cause of anything but driving too fast for the circumstances ( dangerous driving) does cause accidents. See understanding speed here. The last Lincolnshire Chief Constable confirmed my statements on this but ,if in doubt, why is there no offence of causing death by speeding? And what else can be concluded from rule 125 of the Highway Code which confirms that it's driving too fast below the limits that causes accidents.  

That being the case, why so much focus on speeding via a multi million pound road safety industry at the expense of totally ignoring some accident causes and a lack of attention to others? This lack of focus for profit on accident causes is actually killing people.

So obviously, the coercion of attending speed awareness courses for cash and no points, is simply exploiting thousands of perfectly safe drivers who have fallen for confusing and inviting road layouts, inappropriate speed limits and or inadequate signage. See more on this here

So why have profiteering from companies such as AA Drive Tech for a situation set up and allowed to continue, by the authorities, thus feeding the profiteers? 

This week a national radio presenter, with no CV in road safety at all, tweeted 'I loved my speed awareness course today with Mohammed and Paul. Absolutely fascinating. Best afternoon detention ever' And later, in discussion with me, on their program, demanded that all drivers should be sent on these courses. Eh? but who's to pay for this? The drivers? Some £3.33 billion from the economy? How many lives would we save if this money went into the NHS, the police who are suffering shortages, fire and rescue and ambulance instead. Don't depend on the Road Safety Industry-especially the ardent and short sighted traffic cops- to suggest this. 

I have already criticised other media people for becoming sycophantic over these fraudulent courses and then, dangerously use their influence, to promote this scam with no CV whatsoever in the matters of road safety, driving and prosecution. See an example here with Richard Madeley. So brainwashed are they, they now see themselves as experts in road safety, driving and prosecution..

Edmund King of the AA loved the tweet so much he re-tweeted it.Of course he would. He's a director of the firm that ran the course. I told the listeners about this. How brazen Edmund is after already having been exposed nationally for his vested interest in the scam. See King exposed here.  

When I pointed out that the courses do not tell the truth and tell their students that their actions couldn't cause an accident, the presenter told the nation that one of the instructors had been honest and told them that speeding cannot cause accidents.

So therefor the Fatal 4 campaign, which includes 'speeding' as one of the 4, is a lie then. What better example is there of speeding being promoted, for profit, when dangerous driving and careless driving, which certainly do cause fatalities, are not even included in the list?  In fact police even exploit bereaved to perpetuate the profitable lie. See it here.

Broadcasters and journalists would serve us all better if they attacked road safety profiteering instead of promoting coercion and fraud. At the very least they shouldn't preach to the nation on a matter for which they are not qualified.

See Are the courses legal?