or does catching dangerous drivers only matter after the event when they have already killed or maimed fellow road users....and that includes pedestrians.

The question is:

Is it better to have Proactive Policing in regard to dangerous drivers, or Reactive "after the event" Policing.

This is not a dig at the Police on the front line, Policing stratergy is determined by Chief Constables.

You see people using the phone, texting, entering zebra crossing whilst pedestrians are in the middle of crossing, doing all manner of dangerous things, why do they take the risk?

Simple answer is, the chances of being caught are minimal. Now if the powers that be harnessed the collective evidence captured on dash cams every day .... just imagine

They reckon dash cams will be the must have motoring gadget of 2014, sales are up 28% on last year I believe.

Only been doing camera positioning test drives lasting no more than 15 minutes tops per test drive around town and on the local bypass.

Day 2 white van man pulled out of side road narrowly missing my front end, had plenty of time to see me. Was laughing as he crossed my path giving me the V sign as he drew level with my drivers window. Van was already missing it's off side wing mirror cover....do you wonder.

Day 5 setting up the one camera I currently have on a home made bracket covering the rear view this time. Was nearly tail swipped by an obviously inexperianced young driver as he made a hasty right turn onto a main road in the face of oncoming traffic. He was inches off hitting my offside rear which would have spun my front end into oncoming traffic. Which was an SUV who at the time was braking to avoid said idiot coming out of the side road immediately in front of him.

Incidently I would not have know how close I had come to being tail swiped and then spun into either a head on crash or front passenger side impact with the oncoming SUV. The seat where my wife would normally have been sitting, if it was not for the fact I actually reviewed the video footage in regard to check camera position.

Yesterday early evening whilst doing a test run on a new front bracket [ for positing purposes] I saw two small hatch backs [obviously together] doing U TURNS on a Pelican Crossing [lights were on green] but to actually do U TURNS!

I dont think I caught that incident because I was further back up the road positioned to do a right turn at a Y junction. Oh hang on I actually had to wait to do the turn as those two idiots came back up the road and made a left turn into the road I was waiting to enter. That said I wont have caught the U Turns on my camera.

As the White van man cut across me I did not have a clear video view of his registration, now if I had had my rear view camera in place I would have had an excellent view of his reg.

Now a "cough" freind of mine went on line and came back with a Rover 25, or possibly a Nissan Micra S or a Merc C class, funny that as it was a small white Pug I reckon, with a roof rack.

Comments welcome.

I hope not as I'll be banned in a week for life.

The idea of sending video clipe to the police is a good one, I have thought about it myself. But.

I asked a retired chief police inspector whether it was worth driving around with a camera on then sending any clips regarding driving offences in to the police.

He said in theory it would be a good idea, but in practice, the amount of video evidence they would get in including people just taking a dislike to other road users for no reason would be enormous. The police have so much on their plate nowadays due cutbacks in staff and all the paper work they have to do, they probably wouldn't bother with it all.

Oh and Active is always better than reactive in every circumstance.

Depends on the severity of the incident. For instance a woman in Jersey, Channel Islands recently ran a red light and nearly hit a woman pushing a pram. It was uploaded onto youtube, local police got wind of it and then shortly after it was taken down (from YT) as they began their investigation.

Of course Jersey is a small place (9x5 miles) so the local police may not be as up to their eyeballs as some UK police forces.

This guy was 'approached' by police after he effectively stitched himself up by uploading his own dodgy driving and crash to YouTube.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-28856485

Proactive Policing is effective and every force would love to do so however the sheer numbers of Officers required and the resultant costs would be unsubstainable.

A 'Copper on every street corner' is just not practical.

Remember that we are funded directly by your Council Tax, would you happily pay much more out of your hard earned wages?

How many people get pulled for seatbelts, phones etc and promptly turn around and say 'haven't you got anything better to do?'

The answer is a firm yes, however while the general public continue to commit 'silly' offences we are still duty bound to deal with them.

I spend roughly 50% of a duty period dealing with minor things and the resulting paperwork.

The last thing we need is s Big Brother culture, (think Stasi/SS/KGB etc,) I certainly would not relish living in such a totalitarian state.

How many people get pulled for seatbelts, phones etc and promptly turn around and say 'haven't you got anything better to do?'

The answer is a firm yes, however while the general public continue to commit 'silly' offences we are still duty bound to deal with them.

Very well said. It does amuse me with that "haven't you got anything better to do?" line, there is also the "why don't you catch real criminals!" line... I often wonder, lets say all the worlds (or UK's) minor offences stopped getting committed, wouldn't the armed robbery offences etc become the new 'minor offences' (when compared to murder etc) so I wonder if they'd become the crimes relating to the "haven't you got anything better to do?" lines..

I definitely have something better to do, there's a good book I've been trying to get around to reading for ages ;)

A 'Copper on every street corner' is just not practical.

I certainly did not suggest that, why bring it to the debate?

How many people get pulled for seatbelts, phones etc and promptly turn around and say 'haven't you got anything better to do?'

The answer is a firm yes, however while the general public continue to commit 'silly' offences we are still duty bound to deal with them.

What else would you expect to hear from morons who have no regard for their own safey let alone other road users. The "silly offence" as you discribe it of not wearing a seat belt costs 200 lives a year in the UK

In 2012, there was just shy of 25,000 killed or seriously injured on UK roads. For a break down of the stats read this on the ROSPA website The word "Accident" is misleading as the stats show that most of these casualties are caused by people showing a blatent disregard for the traffic regulations in that they drive in a manner that endangers lives.

The Valuation of Road Accidents and Casualties in Great Britain in 2011 reported to the police is costed out at £15.6 billion. How ever the document makes another estimate that including accidents that are not reported to the police the cost rises to £34.8 billion. That's ball park a third of the cost of running the NHS, could find a bit of brass out of those savings to set up a department viewing evidence of road traffic offences likerly to cause such casualties.

The last thing we need is s Big Brother culture, (think Stasi/SS/KGB etc,) I certainly would not relish living in such a totalitarian state.

I'd would not consider providing evidence of drivers that drive in a manner that puts other road users at the risk of losing life and limb, and destroying families in the process, as living in a totalitarian state!

There are estimated to be one CCTV camera for every 11 people in the UK. I personally don't object to that as they are used to safeguard the public.

quote the article:

"Effective CCTV schemes are an invaluable source of crime detection and evidence for the police. For example, in 2009 95 per cent of Scotland Yard murder cases used CCTV footage as evidence.”

My vision of a "Totaliterian State " would be one where "Servants of the State " can get away with murder, where the State harvests all spoken, written, and visual conversations on a population wide basis.

quote the article:

We have become the most spied on nation in the world. Virtually everything we do online, email communications, the websites we visit, is secretly being monitored and stored by the security services. Telephone calls are logged en masse by these agencies and sometimes recorded, while computers of law abiding citizens have been hacked and infested with malware. In 2013 our MPs rightly decided not to proceed with the snoopers charter. But since 2011 or earlier the spies have been doing it anyway, and with virtually no accountability for their actions. GCHQ and NSA are spying on millions of innocent citizens every day of the week. An estimated 850,000 employees and contractors worldwide have access to the secret material.

Big Brother is here Clive, but some how I suspect you knew that already.

I think you misconstrued what I meant by 'silly'.

By that comment I was referring to the perception and viewpoint of some motorists.

What the public could consider as such, We must take seriously.

Non compliant motorists have it within their power to reduce motoring offences but still choose to do dumb things that put themselves and others at severe risk.

It was not my intention to debate Policing in general or to quote policy.

Leave the job of policing to the duly appointed Warranted Crown Servants, 'bubbling' a fellow driver is merely inviting an escalation of the problem.

Monitoring equiptment, whether CCTV, ANPR, speed enforcement systems or the Mk1 Coppers eyes are plenty enough tools to carry out the task, being bombarded with dash footage from 'Joe Public' would merely cause an avalanche of footage that any Police Force would be unable and unfunded to utilise.

At a time where Forces are hard pushed to cover current commitments and provide a visible presence on the street further burdens would bog down the level of service We currently strive to supply.

Of course if everybody stopped committing offences I'd be unemployed pretty quickly :d

I hear what your saying Clive,

But the truth is the police are under resourced in the area of bringing to book the vast majority of the idiots on the road.

Yes you personally witness some violations of the traffic regulations and deal with them accordingly. You turn up and help deal with the carnage this idiots create on our roads.

But the simple fact is the odds of being caught and punished for dangerous driving be it intentional of just simply plain stupidity, is nigh on no existant in relation to the actual number of violations commited by these idiots.

Sure we are all guilty at some time in our driving lifetime of making a bad driving decisions. But usually the intellegent amoungst us learn from the experience. But serial offenders continue doing it until either they are caught or they kill somebody.

Having suffered a near death experiance at the hands of a lorry driver myself. Incidently a witness to the event made the comment " you must be the luckiest man alive in Bradford"

Having sat in hospital awaiting news of my Wifes and her aged Mother condition, after they were taken out head on by a young idiot in a Mini Cooper [driving on his Grans insurance] who could not stay on his side of the road. I thought I was going to loose them both. The mother-in-law was left with disabilitating injuries, and mental anguish the rest of her life.

Six weeks before she died, three years after the accident. We had occasion to take her and her husband to a funeral in Kent [driving down from Yorkshire] As we negotiated the slip road to join the AI, on her seeing the heavy goods vehicles dwarfing us as they barrelled down the road she let out a mutted scream of sheer terror. I had to reassure her that we would join the A1 at the same speed as the traffic using the road. When we got back the following day she stepped out of the car and flung her arms around me, thanking me for bring her home safe. Never in the 44 years that I had then known her had she expressed herself in such a manner.

The wife though suffering no physical scars, is addament she has not recovered fully her powers of recalling her memory due to the concusion she received amounst her other injuries. To this day has she has no recollection of the events just prior to the crash. She was discharged from hospital on 30th December and asked me what the cards bedecking the house were in aid off. She had no recollaction of Christmas, indeed what Christmas was. Was not aware she had children, indeed she had to be re taught her job.

What I'm trying to say is, I just wish these idiots I see day after day endangering the lives of others could suffer one single day of being in that position.

Clive regards your job, you have no need to worry, there will always be more idiots and or scum out there than you can handle mate.

Catch, I can see where you're coming from, but I think Clives earlier comment regarding a Policeman on every corner was his (and others) ways of saying that is the sort of optimal number (if not overstaffed!) - someone could offensively !Removed! at you and they'd be easily collared...

What you suggest about proactive policing in terms of accepting camera footage would require extra staff and then the big argument would come along in the forms of:

1. Who is going to pay for these extra staff considering the police are affected by cutbacks at the moment already?

2. If you're then going to employ people to make decisions on these videos as to whether a crime is committed or not, then wouldn't it be better to have them out on the street corners keeping a watch (or indeed in police cars look for road criminals)...which again is sort of back to part 1.

3. The paperwork.. IF you do employ these people to sit at desks and watch videos, there is going to be a heck of a lot of paper work to be done, probably more of a case of 1 hour of paperwork (if not more) to 1 video - which is going to be approx 5 mins at the most...

To guess the amount of useless drivers, In 2013 2.47million vehicles were registered...

1% of that is 24,700, so if we say 24,700 useless drivers that were actually caught on camera in 1 year (again I'm making this up)...

Now bear in mind that there is only 8,760 hours in 365 days (1 year)... If we again take up my made up figure of 1 hour paperwork per incident handed in - It doesn't fit into 1 year... so that's now a job for more than one person = more money spent..again back up to point 1.

It's all potentially possible but naturally it all = £££... and then once you actually locate that money you have to ask questions as to whether opening up a video viewing department is the highest priority?

Of course for yourself nearly losing loved ones, the answer may very well be yes! To myself, who has had loved ones saved from cancer, I could argue that if the government finds this spare cash maybe it's better spent in saving others from cancer. To everyone else on the forum, they might have loved ones killed in wars overseas who weren't provided with the latest body armour, so money should be spent there.

I still say the best bet is to try and create a big YT channel and have everyone join in uploading and highlighting these incidents. Social media is huge these days, if a video is so awful it'll get passed and shared from pillar to post until a bobby or someone in power will get it investigated...

EDIT: I read what you've written about pushing incidents beyond the policing stage and into the punishment/judgement stage... Again that is a matter for the law makers and the courts, unfortunately it's probably an extremely difficult thing for them to stamp out.

Watched Police Interceptors? They always pull someone over who has no licence, or has been banned, no insurance, no tax, stolen cars etc etc... Unless these people get locked up for life (or get rope round their necks) there is no way of stopping them... I mean I remember one episode (might of been another police camera show?) where a guy was pulled over for speeding and he was found to have something like 15 points on his licence...15??I thought 12 was max? you say!... indeed, but this poor chap NEEDED his licence for work, otherwise he'd be out of a job... I can't remember the outcome, something like another 3 points and a kick up the bum or something... but no licence lost!

I personally keep the camera for a real crime, much as I am in the process of now.

Bad driving is something that can get people in trouble, however, if a crime is committed, an act of dangerous driving is something that may turn to immediate endangering of life I make sure the camera is rolling and I get on the blower to either 101 (if its less serious, for example I did this when a guy was weaving all over the road, he may have been under the influence).

Or call 999 (did this when a guy was flyng between lanes, up peoples backsides, nearly taken me and 3 others out already).

Sadly the camera shots for those are lost, but I told the police they are here and ready if you need them. In the end both drivers pleaded guilty and no evidence was required. For the 999 call, I was patched through to the patrol car directly and navigating them to the point they were sat behind me with the lights on planning strategy and how they were going to "use" me :p

As for the 101, the police where waiting at the junction he was leaving at, but I was advised to proceed to my desitnation.

Either way, that is what I do day in, day out where necessary.

As for sending them footage, unfortunately, you need to have the following as a minimum:

1) Clear footage showing the vehicle, number plate and a means of tracking the location (either through quality of footage, local knowledge and / or GPS to validate).

2) Date and Time Stamp of the event

3) Preferably a means of identifying the driver in a way that they are unable to refute the allogation (face shot, or a means of capturing something that can ensure they cannot claim "wasnt me".

If all of the above is satisfied, its always worth calling 101, describing the incident and asking if they believe its worth a follow up. Often they will say yes if you have all that they need. My dashcam footage saved the officer "at least 3 weeks of going back and forth" over my car being TWOC'd. as such it makes his job of pursuing a conviction a lot easier and enabling him to take it on without a large impact to his tight role. But if you provide poor footage, that means they think a crime may have been commited, and have no other footage to argue, if they are going to get let off at the end, they wont bother.

Sadly for your scenario's that I have seen the footage for, I think neither would result in a police visit as clear as it is. They were clearly idiots, especially the van, but his gesture would result in the police struggling to pursue a section 5 let alone driving without due care :(

"Sadly for your scenario's that I have seen the footage for, I think neither would result in a police visit as clear as it is. They were clearly idiots, especially the van, but his gesture would result in the police struggling to pursue a section 5 let alone driving without due care"

I disagree James

In both cases the drivers could be charge under the offences of:

1. Failing to conform to a Traffic Sign.

In that they failed to give way to oncoming traffic. And that being the case they were also guilty of

2. Careless Driving:

I refer you to http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/road_traffic_offences/#P84_4838

You see my argument is [in the near 25,000 yearly instances of death or serious injury that happen on our roads] The only way you will get safer roads is by prosecuting those who commit traffic offences. There is no other interpitation for what took place in both those clips.

You either nip bad / aggresive driving in the bud or you pay the price later on down the line. Those 25,000 dead or seriously injured people, that £34.8 billion cost to the economy is in the main a result of bad / aggresive driving. Hence my referance to being either Proactive or Reactive in policing traffic violations.

And by policing I don't mean the existing policing structure need take the load in that regard. Think outside the box, people who can only tell me why something cannot be done, they "frustrate me" So much so I decided to stop "taking a wage" so to speak when I was 30 years old, and went into business on my own account [ and not in the area that I had previously earned my living from] I've had people say to me what do you know about a "certain" business it's not your area of expertise.I'd reply that might be the case, but knowing whats wrong with a businees is a good place to start turning it around. Anyway long story short three business later I was able to virtually retire from business when I was 49 years old. Thats what thinking out side the box can achieve.

Well that's wonderful catch.. Fact still remains, creating extra £ to pay people to sieve through videos isn't going to be easy...

I already gave you the answer - social media, upload it to youtube, if it gets a lot of attention because it's worse than someone making a genuine mistake then the police may look into it...

Its always worth mentioning it Tony that much is trye! and I would hope they do get a good ticking off for it :) I am just saying what I have seen based on experience, as I did the same thing when I first got my cam and the image wasnt overly clear. I got a letter saying thanks for reporting it but no action would be taken.

Well that's wonderful catch.. Fact still remains, creating extra £ to pay people to sieve through videos isn't going to be easy...

I already gave you the answer - social media, upload it to youtube, if it gets a lot of attention because it's worse than someone making a genuine mistake then the police may look into it...

Ah yet again Ian you miss the blindingly OBVIOUS, [ referance Son of Nod]

It's funded out of the savings you make by changing the mindset of the idiots you prosecute.

It's a simple methodology, you keep violating, you keep collecting the points and what do points get you ?

Well they certainly dont get you prizes, more than likely they get you a ban. So over time "re educating" those most likely by their atrocious driving habits to be the cause of "accidents" you progressivly cut the 34.5 billion loss to the economy. Hence more tax generated for the government, whilst at the same time slashing resources employed to attend accidents, Police, Fire Brigade and NHS better employed else where. Averting thousands of productive man hours lost as a result of lane closures due the accidents, oh and not only arn't the dead and seriously injured [lates figures 23,370 in total ] not turning up for work and contributing to the tax revenue, nor are a sizable portion of the other 183,670 injured in accidents turning up for work the next day.

It's whats known as a self financing solution. Of course if you fail to get your head around what £34.5 billion actually is, or are to busy stubbling around in the dark, then I dare say you will be incapable of finding the solution. Out of the box Ian thats the way to go.

As for the "social media" I'm of the generation who are not self obsessed, nore do I think others would be remotely interested in what I ate whilst out last night. Hence I'm managing to get through life not knowing what others ate last night ;) Though I dare say it has it's uses in getting a message across, I'll leave that to others thank you.

Find you quite rude catch, so I'll leave you with this:

You obviously have the solution, so why bother asking on here and shooting people down for clearly justified answers? Why don't you 'think outside the box' and take all your info/solutions to the powers that be rather than leaving them locked up on a 'Ford Forum'.

As I said before Who's going to fund a dedicated team to review thousands of video clips that 'could' be mis-represented, edited or viewed in tight isolation so as to not show circumstances that may have caused a situation?

Many people already complain about raised taxes, increased road fund licence costs, insurance, cost of living etc.

We would love every resource we can get and unlimited budgets but in the real world you know that isn't practical or even possible.

The regulations governing CCTV evidence is very specific and even this still results in many hours of footage being considered unsuitable or unlawful when trying to gain convictions, how can anyone expect a dash cam to be taken as gospel truth in a criminal case?

Joe Public rocking up with a home burned CD of someone driving in a manner He considers to be unlawful does not comply with data protection rules or satisfy a robust requirement for a chain of evidence.

CPS would be inclined to disregard the footage unless corroborated by multiple sources and satisfying PACE (1984) section 24 subsections 1, 2, 4 or 5. (I was a CCTV liaison Officer for 18 months so am 100% on my facts).

The law may be an a s s sometimes but it is Our law and we should all abide by it however it also protects offenders against unfair trials or a miscarriage of the law.

End of Chat!

Think this is close to what your looking for

http://policewitness.com/

As I said before Who's going to fund a dedicated team to review thousands of video clips that 'could' be mis-represented, edited or viewed in tight isolation so as to not show circumstances that may have caused a situation?

Many people already complain about raised taxes, increased road fund licence costs, insurance, cost of living etc

Unfortunately Clive I feel like this is part of the problem, we as society including the police chiefs etc don't do enough to prevent certain crimes or problem until it becomes a serious out of control issue then it's given its own department. For example trident. Gun crime was always a serious matter in london from when I was a young boy I can remember.

We don't plan our police force for the future, we only go on the current because of cost but to ignore technology such as video evidence recorded by ordinary people is a massive fail, social media, cameras and video are a core part of life today. We should be using it to benefit us.

It's like a known pedophile hanging around a school during school hours. As far as things go he's not a criminal therefore nothing can be done but when a child gets kidnapped thousands are spent on trying to fix the issue. And FYI I am aware pedos are banned from certain places.

My point is that this method of policing is letting people down, people who need the police the most, I don't blame the police or chiefs it's those mindless zombies at number 10.

It's sad because I have witnessed things where the police want to help but can't. The cuts on policing teaching and public services need to stop and cuts on politicians wages need to begin.

Can the police not introduce a voluntary service for recorded video by the public? Sort of like community service officers?

Just a question, similar to this..

If you were involved in an accident and you have a dash-cam with footage, how useful will it be if it wasn't your fault?

i.e. would the police/insurance actually use this or be able too?

It would be considered as evidence by both the police and your insurance company, and the other parties insurance company.