Your Press
Get in touch: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting YORK to 80360 or send an email »
Crackdown on bad drivers
8:07am Wednesday 4th July 2007
Comments (59)POLICE are aiming to cut the number of accidents on roads in York and Selby in a high- profile blitz on drivers who fail to obey the rules of the road.
Operation Capable, which begins this week, will target speeding and other driving offences on the roads where the highest number of people are killed or injured in crashes.
It will run every day from 8am until 8pm for the rest of 2007, when police will review the results.
Chief Inspector Dave Hall, head of operations at York Police, said: "The initiative is for central area's road policing group and is aimed at reducing casualties on the roads.
"We will focus on a number of routes around the area where percentage wise we have a greater number of casualties."
Police will be using high-visibility patrols and speed cameras to enforce the rules of the road.
They will be cracking down on drink-drivers, people who don't wear their seatbelts and motorists who use their mobile phones while driving.
Officers will also using their powers to seize vehicles which they find are uninsured or unworthy, and using the Automatic Number Plate Recognition technology to run checks on vehicles in a bid to catch wanted people and find stolen vehicles.
North Yorkshire Fire & Rescue Service will also be deploying its Speed Matrix sign.
Chief Insp Hall said: "The operation will continue for the rest of the year and we will evaluate it at the end of that time.
"We want to try and make an impact straight away. Our main focus is to reduce road traffic collisions in line with a Government initiative.
"A lot of this is about raising awareness. It's not just about enforcement. We tend to concentrate on crime - things like burglary and vehicle crime - and it's easy to forget how damaging a road accident can be to somebody's life." He said extra resources would be ploughed into targeting specific hotspots if police found there were places where there were a lot of accidents occurring at specific times of day.
Drink-drivers and criminals who use vehicles to travel will be the main focuses of road policing officers in the evenings.
Roads in spotlight
* The A64* The A1237 from Copmanthorpe to Hopgrove roundabout* The A59 at Moor Monkton* The A1079 from Grimston roundabout to Kexby Bridge* The A166 from Grimston roundabout to Gate Helmsley* The A19 from Fulford Interchange to Escrick* The A64 at Bramham Moor* The A19 between Escrick and Selby Bypass* The A19 Selby Bypass to Whitely Bridge* The B1222* The A162.
Your Say YourYork Press
girls can eat yorkies too, york says...
8:21am Wed 4 Jul 07
TG, says...
8:31am Wed 4 Jul 07
Well, that will last about 5 minutes as the first offenders to be taken off the road will be ALL the police vehicles.
SilverSurfer, Surfing says...
8:33am Wed 4 Jul 07
Lou, York says...
8:42am Wed 4 Jul 07
rs, york says...
8:42am Wed 4 Jul 07
Romper Stomper, York says...
9:09am Wed 4 Jul 07
Tax Payer, York says...
9:20am Wed 4 Jul 07
Romper Stomper wrote:I could not agree with you more.
Money is the only reason why it's easier to tackle traffic offences than more important crime. All the offences listed above come with a fine where as smackheads who ransack your house get a slap on the wrist and maybe a bit of community service. Plus most people who commit traffic offences are decent people with jobs who will pay their fines and the rare occasion that they actually catch someone for burglary the scrotes have no money so can't pay anything.
Bemused, says...
9:31am Wed 4 Jul 07
Police car careers into garden and lands in a shed
By Helen Gabriel 10:07am Monday 25th June 2007
A POLICE car ploughed through a garden and ended up in a shed when it lost control after a crash on the A63.
Shocked witnesses watched as the car took up an entire Hawthorn hedge by its roots and crashed through the garden before plunging into a big stack of bricks, knocking them to the ground, and ended up in a garden shed.
Might be as well to put their own house in order first, by investing in some driver training courses!
a, york says...
9:58am Wed 4 Jul 07
Garrincha, York says...
10:04am Wed 4 Jul 07
TJH, York says...
10:08am Wed 4 Jul 07
Bemused wrote:On what basis did you assume (as almost everyone else did who commented on the original story) that the police driver was at fault in this incident. There were two vehicles involved - how do you know that it wasn't the driver of the other vehicle who was responsible?
Police car careers into garden and lands in a shed By Helen Gabriel 10:07am Monday 25th June 2007 A POLICE car ploughed through a garden and ended up in a shed when it lost control after a crash on the A63. Shocked witnesses watched as the car took up an entire Hawthorn hedge by its roots and crashed through the garden before plunging into a big stack of bricks, knocking them to the ground, and ended up in a garden shed.Might be as well to put their own house in order first, by investing in some driver training courses!
tricky ricky, malton says...
10:22am Wed 4 Jul 07
Wimbledon is, on the telly says...
10:46am Wed 4 Jul 07
Bemused, says...
10:53am Wed 4 Jul 07
On what basis did you assume (as almost everyone else did who commented on the original story) that the police driver was at fault in this incident. There were two vehicles involved - how do you know that it wasn't the driver of the other vehicle who was responsible?
If it was the other driver's fault, their press officer should be sacked for not insisting upon putting the record straight.
GDave, York says...
11:02am Wed 4 Jul 07
X, At Work says...
11:07am Wed 4 Jul 07
If the police went to the First York depo and followed bus drivers, they would make a fortune. I followed 2 busses today, both must need servicing. neither ones iindicators worked.
TJH, York says...
11:21am Wed 4 Jul 07
Bemused wrote:The accident was under investigation so there is a limit on what the police can say. Reread the original article - there were several notable omissions like 'the police vehicle was/wasn't responding to an incident' or 'the police vehicle did/didn't have it's lights and sirens operating'. As the ever intrepid Press reporters only managed to interview witnesses who hadn't actually seen the incident, perhaps the lack of clarity has more to do with the quality of reporting/editing!
On what basis did you assume (as almost everyone else did who commented on the original story) that the police driver was at fault in this incident. There were two vehicles involved - how do you know that it wasn't the driver of the other vehicle who was responsible?If it was the other driver's fault, their press officer should be sacked for not insisting upon putting the record straight.
bouldermonkey, York says...
11:29am Wed 4 Jul 07
Those drivers who do things REALLY dangerous wil;l not be caught because the police cant be arsed to do real work.
Typical!
Speed does not kill.
INAPPROPRIATE speed kills.
Chris, york says...
11:29am Wed 4 Jul 07
yzfpete, bugthorpe says...
11:35am Wed 4 Jul 07
Also the police should be looking at there own driving skills, they cut you up, dont indicate (when not on a call) when on a call they dont indicate as they think blue lights are all they need, but how can you give way when you dont know where they are going?
Then, ive seen 4 in the last month using there mobiles whilst driving!
So much for setting an example!
XXX, York says...
11:39am Wed 4 Jul 07
bouldermonkey wrote:You have defeated your own argument ending with INAPPROPRIATE speed kills. Thats why they will be stopping people who drive at INAPPROPRIATE speeds. Loose the chip from your shoulder.
So basically, they're just going to park up with speed guns and target speeding drivers. Those drivers who do things REALLY dangerous wil;l not be caught because the police cant be arsed to do real work. Typical! Speed does not kill. INAPPROPRIATE speed kills.
Chris, york says...
11:49am Wed 4 Jul 07
Romper Stomper, York says...
11:51am Wed 4 Jul 07
a wrote:It's a film I watched recently. Just a unique name, nothing more.
why are you called romper stomper?
As for Garrincha's comments above...do you really think that smackhead would have ever been caught if you hadn't of done it yourself? Usually it takes the police about 3 days just to respond to a burglary.
bouldermonkey, York says...
11:53am Wed 4 Jul 07
XXX wrote:You need to really open your eyes sunshine and look at the facts as they are.
bouldermonkey wrote: So basically, they're just going to park up with speed guns and target speeding drivers. Those drivers who do things REALLY dangerous wil;l not be caught because the police cant be arsed to do real work. Typical! Speed does not kill. INAPPROPRIATE speed kills.You have defeated your own argument ending with INAPPROPRIATE speed kills. Thats why they will be stopping people who drive at INAPPROPRIATE speeds. Loose the chip from your shoulder.
My argument hasnt been defeated at all, my argument is based entirely upon fact and experience.
They say that speed is the cause of most deaths on the road...
It isnt.
Instead of targeting people doing 55 in a 50 zone and saying they're dangerous, how abouts targeting people who insist on doing the full 30mph in a residential zone when its **** it down with rain. Sure, they're doing the speed limit, but the conditions dictate that it's an inappropriate speed.
Romper Stomper, York says...
12:00pm Wed 4 Jul 07
XXX, York says...
12:09pm Wed 4 Jul 07
bouldermonkey wrote:There is no point going into this with you. Because your opinion is the only one allowed. They cant prosecute at 55 in a 50 anyway. You really are full of it. Look at the facts???? Look at them yourself. Stop and read your own comments. I need say no more......
XXX wrote:You need to really open your eyes sunshine and look at the facts as they are. My argument hasnt been defeated at all, my argument is based entirely upon fact and experience. They say that speed is the cause of most deaths on the road... It isnt. Instead of targeting people doing 55 in a 50 zone and saying they're dangerous, how abouts targeting people who insist on doing the full 30mph in a residential zone when its **** it down with rain. Sure, they're doing the speed limit, but the conditions dictate that it's an inappropriate speed.bouldermonkey wrote: So basically, they're just going to park up with speed guns and target speeding drivers. Those drivers who do things REALLY dangerous wil;l not be caught because the police cant be arsed to do real work. Typical! Speed does not kill. INAPPROPRIATE speed kills.You have defeated your own argument ending with INAPPROPRIATE speed kills. Thats why they will be stopping people who drive at INAPPROPRIATE speeds. Loose the chip from your shoulder.
TJH, York says...
12:23pm Wed 4 Jul 07
most people who commit traffic offences are decent people with jobs. Well, with 3100 people dying last year on UK roads (and all those deaths are avoidable) I'm not sure we can afford to be too picky about which bits of traffic law are enforced. The reality is most of those deaths don't involve
Those drivers who do things REALLY dangerousBM, they involve
decent people with jobsRS
Monkey, Newcastle says...
12:30pm Wed 4 Jul 07
TJH, York says...
12:40pm Wed 4 Jul 07
Monkey wrote:Couldn't agree more. I have a clause in my contract with 'Him upstairs' that I will die prematurely at the hands of a driver with a Merc/BMW less than 12 months old, with 6 undeserved points from speed cameras on his/her licence and who pays at least 40% tax. In return I won't get burgled/my car broken into. How happy am I?
Be fair though TJH. I don't know about you, but I'd much rather be knocked down and killed by a speeding driver than have some junkie rifling through my belongings
holipol, york says...
12:58pm Wed 4 Jul 07
Frx, York says...
1:11pm Wed 4 Jul 07
holipol, york says...
1:19pm Wed 4 Jul 07
SilverSurfer, Surfing says...
2:16pm Wed 4 Jul 07
they should be sat outside schools
A nice place to start would be Lord Deramores in Heslington - some of the toerags coming from Hull Road are still doing 60mph going past the school (from a 40mph limit)!
bouldermonkey, York says...
2:42pm Wed 4 Jul 07
XXX wrote:Wat ****... who says they cant prosecute 55 in a 50!
bouldermonkey wrote:There is no point going into this with you. Because your opinion is the only one allowed. They cant prosecute at 55 in a 50 anyway. You really are full of it. Look at the facts???? Look at them yourself. Stop and read your own comments. I need say no more......XXX wrote:You need to really open your eyes sunshine and look at the facts as they are. My argument hasnt been defeated at all, my argument is based entirely upon fact and experience. They say that speed is the cause of most deaths on the road... It isnt. Instead of targeting people doing 55 in a 50 zone and saying they're dangerous, how abouts targeting people who insist on doing the full 30mph in a residential zone when its **** it down with rain. Sure, they're doing the speed limit, but the conditions dictate that it's an inappropriate speed.bouldermonkey wrote: So basically, they're just going to park up with speed guns and target speeding drivers. Those drivers who do things REALLY dangerous wil;l not be caught because the police cant be arsed to do real work. Typical! Speed does not kill. INAPPROPRIATE speed kills.You have defeated your own argument ending with INAPPROPRIATE speed kills. Thats why they will be stopping people who drive at INAPPROPRIATE speeds. Loose the chip from your shoulder.
The speed limit is the limit, they can prosecute you for 1mph over if they wanted. I presume you're referring to the old 10%+2mph myth....
Mike, York says...
3:29pm Wed 4 Jul 07
It's a well known fact that people who buy 4x4's do so simple so they car bully others and go barging through the traffic. I hope these people get sent to prison when they are caught!
only human, york says...
3:32pm Wed 4 Jul 07
Mike, York says...
4:03pm Wed 4 Jul 07
Have to agree about the innapropriate speed as opposed to going above the speed limit which by todays atandards is rediculous
What is ridiculous about 30 and 20 mph speed limits in residential areas?
The speed limit on Motorways and dual carriageways is considered by some to be to slow, however, given the incredibly stupid manner of driving I witness I would be inclined to disagree.
P.Pitstop, York says...
4:12pm Wed 4 Jul 07
If people are stupid enough to drive whilst holding a mobile phone in their hand, shouldn't they be penalised???
Mike, York says...
4:35pm Wed 4 Jul 07
And it's not even as if people are in a rush. I saw some idiot drive down the A64 like a complete loon, giving the finger to other drivers, he eventually went to the designer outlet, I know I followed him, only to see him dawdle around the place like he had all the time in the world ..Unbelievable
.
If you see anyone driving like a ****, record his registration plate and try and get a good look at the driver. If you report it to the police they can be prosecuted!
X, At Work says...
4:41pm Wed 4 Jul 07
BUT
* I never tailgate
* My Indicators Work
* I don't use the phone (unless its in its cradle)
* I don't cut people up.
Its people like me that the police will be picking on. it is the " oh he's doing 80mph on the A64 when its nearly empty" brigade. sod the chap that has just gone past with no seatbelt on talking on his phone.
and to clarify a few points.
What is ridiculous about 30 and 20 mph speed limits in residential areas?
30mph in a built up area is too quick, all built up residential area's should be 20mph zones, especially with the amount of yuppie 4x4 drivers in York, if one of those hits your child (bumper & head height).... Enough said.
The speed limit on Motorways and dual carriageways is considered by some to be to slow,
the speed limit on a motorway is too slow, it was designed for cars that took 3 miles to stop from 60mph not modern cars, but i can see your argument. what we need is a minimum speed limit on the outside lane of MOTORWAYS (not dual)and variable speed limits that are altered for road/weather/traffic conditions.
I have been told many times by a friend who is a traffic cop that it isn't the speed that kills its the idiot behind the wheel, you can drive at speed safely but you have to assess the risks all the time and have the appropriate training.
something that most idiots on the road don't have.
andyb, york says...
4:57pm Wed 4 Jul 07
Me, Selby says...
5:09pm Wed 4 Jul 07
The speed limit is the limit, they can prosecute you for 1mph over if they wanted. I presume you're referring to the old 10%+2mph myth
Bouldermonkey, wrong again. The guidelines are 10% + 2mph. I really wish you didn't think you know everything. But then again carry on, cos it shows everyone just how much an idiot you are.
bouldermonkey, York says...
5:47pm Wed 4 Jul 07
Me wrote:Perhaps you'd like to explain to me how i have 6 points on my drivers license for doing 52 in a 50 zone then.
The speed limit is the limit, they can prosecute you for 1mph over if they wanted. I presume you're referring to the old 10%+2mph mythBouldermonkey, wrong again. The guidelines are 10% + 2mph. I really wish you didn't think you know everything. But then again carry on, cos it shows everyone just how much an idiot you are.
I contested it in court, and lost.
So yes, they can quite obviously prosecute for above 50 in a 50zone.
The 10%+2 is a guideline, not the law. The law is the speed limit is 50... end of.
Mullarkian, York says...
5:51pm Wed 4 Jul 07
andyb, york says...
6:04pm Wed 4 Jul 07
Geoff, says...
6:15pm Wed 4 Jul 07
Vehicle construction and use regulations require a vehicle speedometer accuracy to be in the range of -0->+10% + 4kph. The implications are that it must never under-read - for obvious reasons - but may over-read.
In practise, manufacturers work to a limit of -0->+5 per cent plus 10 km/h
Please realise that your own speedo is indicating a much higher speed than you are actually doing.
Thus, there is NO excuse for speeding!
Me, Selby says...
7:17pm Wed 4 Jul 07
Perhaps you'd like to explain to me how i have 6 points on my drivers license for doing 52 in a 50 zone then.
I contested it in court, and lost.
So yes, they can quite obviously prosecute for above 50 in a 50zone.
Bet it was a camera? This story is about police officers using speed guns and not cameras, that is where the 10% + 2 comes in. Again, bouldermonkey, get the facts right. But now you will come back and say it was not a camera!
aunties, York says...
7:27pm Wed 4 Jul 07
yo30 DAN, clifton says...
8:48pm Wed 4 Jul 07
Gardener, York says...
9:27pm Wed 4 Jul 07
Mike, York says...
11:25pm Wed 4 Jul 07
bouldermonkey, York says...
2:50pm Thu 5 Jul 07
Me wrote:Nope. T5 using a Pro Lazer speed gun. Got me at a distance of 1068ft heading away from them.
Perhaps you'd like to explain to me how i have 6 points on my drivers license for doing 52 in a 50 zone then. I contested it in court, and lost. So yes, they can quite obviously prosecute for above 50 in a 50zone.Bet it was a camera? This story is about police officers using speed guns and not cameras, that is where the 10% + 2 comes in. Again, bouldermonkey, get the facts right. But now you will come back and say it was not a camera!
Have all the paperwork to prove it to you.
bouldermonkey, York says...
2:51pm Thu 5 Jul 07
Geoff, says...
2:59pm Thu 5 Jul 07
That seems a tad 'over the top'!
bouldermonkey, York says...
6:12pm Thu 5 Jul 07
Geoff wrote:Yup. 6 points, £50 costs and £200 fine.
BM, did you really ger 6 points for doing 52 in a 50 limit? That seems a tad 'over the top'!
July 2005.
Bemused, says...
1:21pm Sat 7 Jul 07
I think you will find that, in the indident you refer to, the police driver prevented a more serious accident as he managed to swerve as the other drive pulled out in front of him and so avoid a much bigger collision.
Must remember that defence. Shouldn't a driver always be at such a speed that he can safely stop in time whatever happens?
It is for this reason that he who collides with the rear of your vehicle is always in the wrong.
aunties, York says...
8:54pm Sun 8 Jul 07
Bemused wrote:Bemused, where did you get the info from that the police car collided with the rear of the vehicle? did you not look at the photos or read the article??? I really can't be bothered to put you right anymore, you have obviously made up your mind about this incident, even though you don't have the full facts. Very narrowminded of you!
I think you will find that, in the indident you refer to, the police driver prevented a more serious accident as he managed to swerve as the other drive pulled out in front of him and so avoid a much bigger collision.Must remember that defence. Shouldn't a driver always be at such a speed that he can safely stop in time whatever happens? It is for this reason that he who collides with the rear of your vehicle is always in the wrong.
Bemused, says...
11:16am Mon 9 Jul 07
Bemused, where did you get the info from that the police car collided with the rear of the vehicle? did you not look at the photos or read the article???
I made no such allegation. I was pointing it out as an example of the necessity of driving at such a speed that you can stop no matter what happens in front of you. You appear to have little knowledge of culpability in respect of vehicular collisions! Have you ever dealt with a road accident, and in particular a rear end shunt?
Chief Inspector Dave Hall
In this section
- Family of Lisette Dugmore in anniversary plea
- Motorcyclist killed and lorry driver seriously injured
- Huntington School caretaker breaks back in ladder fall
- MP Hugh Bayley: Burnholme Community College should remain open
- Elliot Minor wows Copmanthorpe Carnival crowd during an action-packed weekend of events in and around York
- Hundreds of fish dead in York river
- Faith helps Peter Lawrence to cope with disappearance of Claudia
- Grandfather starts not-for-profit wedding car business in aid of muscular dystrophy
- City of York Council in push for safer junctions
- Renaissance Project in Sherburn-in-Elmet set for go-ahead
Sponsored Links
Local Advertisers
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
SilverSurfer, Surfing says...
8:16am Wed 4 Jul 07
Scrotes all our plod resources are going to be chasing motorists from now until Xmas. Please feel free to mug, burgle and shoplift!