However, since it is estimated that on any day 1 in 5 cars is driven without insurance,MOT or RoadTax and often by a driver without a licence and that adds up to over 2 million cars a day, catching 100,000 in an entire year isn't what you might call spectacularly successful.
I agree it is better than catching none at all, but the police really aren't worried about stamping out this crime.
One reason is that the published figures are always very politically friendly, the police point to 'falling' crime figures. The British Crime Survey only reports 'domestic crime' so all the criminals one sees talking on their mobiles, all the vehicles that adon't have full documentation just don't appear in any statistic.
So, if your crime figures are headed downwards, if your job is getting easier, why would you assume something is wrong, why would you dig up trouble.
Particularly when vehicles and driving are very emotive subjects. People get disproportionately angry when they are inconvenienced by the police pointing out that they are breaking the law, evn though they are quick to complain that the police haven't stopped other people breaking the law.
You are however right in as much as cameras are a tool, not a panacea, and all tools need to be used correctly.
Though as at least one policeman has pointed out, people who tend to speed are often lax about other aspects of the legal code. Removing them from the sreets for speeding removes them from the streets for other things as well. Even the US governmnet was forcced to use income tax evasion to put Al Capone behind bars, no matter what other crimes they knew he'd done.
|
|