Safe Speed Forums

YORKSHIRE POST
Move to bring fire engines into the fight against crimeExclusive
Paul Whitehouse
FIRE engines equipped with cameras could be used to catch motorists committing a wide range of minor traffic offences under a proposed partnership between police and a Yorkshire brigade, it has emerged.
The radical development would rely on high technology to link camera equipment carried on fire tenders into the police service's Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) system, which can identify vehicles in a fraction of a second.
Senior fire officers are planning the system as a development to help improve road safety, but the idea marks a change in the relationship between the two emergency services and could risk putting the brigade into conflict with the public.
The move has been condemned by the Fire Brigades' Union (FBU) as a development which would put staff in danger of attack from the public, while the RAC Foundation said it has "reservations" about the scheme.
South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service is expected to equip its fleet of more than 30 front-line vehicles with CCTV equipment in the next few months following a year of planning and trials.
It is initially to be used as a form of protection against those who stone fire engines or attack firefighters when they attend emergency incidents.
But a secondary plan is to use the equipment to help enforce road safety laws.
The move would be a further diversification of road law enforcement duties, which until recently were performed exclusively by police. Now civilian staff are used to operate mobile cameras for the South Yorkshire Safety Camera Partnership.
The cameras expected to go into fire tenders will be capable of recording images of a quality good enough to be used in court, and South Yorkshire Fire Service personnel have already examined the option of linking it into the ANPR, giving it a law-enforcement capacity.
Brigade spokesman Mark Shaw said the policy was still at the discussion stage, and details of how any scheme would operate still had to be worked out.
He told the Yorkshire Post: "When we look at partnership working with police, there is potential for us to pass information on to them. I don't see any problem with using it in that manner.
"There is potential for great benefit in road safety and detection of crime."
However he said there was "no question" of fire crews being expected to pull over drivers at the roadside or of them going out on patrol specifically to look for offenders on the roads.
FBU spokesman Gerry Pagan said: "That is something we would have an issue with. It is clearly a police remit and something we don't want our members linked with because it would lead to attacks on firefighters."
RAC Foundation spokesman Edmund King said: "Putting CCTV in fire engines will do noting to deter the really serious offenders and it may put pressure on staff who have an extremely good relationship with the public."

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

Why don't they just put out fires etc?

Or is there some financial incentive to them acting as proxy police?

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

How long will it be before a motorist safely moves across a junction against a red light to let the engine through and then gets a NIP in the post with the engine's CCTV providing the evidence?

_________________
Less Kodak, more Kojak.
In times of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

To be fair, why not?

The people ANPR is going to catch is those driving without tax, MOT or insurance, and these are the people we need off the road.

I fully appreciate the point that this may encourage attacks against fire crews though, and since the sort of pikeys that attack fire crews (only ever there to help people, save their lives, their stuff and their houses) are the same sort to drive vehicles without proper paperwork, perhaps this is a bad idea.

Bad idea..

If you had a fire engine hurtling up behind you and there was genuinely nowhere to go, would you speed up so as to not delay the engine until you could find somewhere to get out of it's way?

I would, but if they start putting cameras on the front of fire engines then I wouldn't. So sorry your kid burned to death in a fire, I can't risk losing my job getting a speeding ticket.


I agree that ANPR probably wont be used for this, but the point is that it COULD, once Fire Engines are put into the same group as police cars and HATOs in people's minds, no-one is going to risk committing any minor offence near them. This will only end with more innocent lives lost.

And next --police putting out fires ?????? ( oh well at least we've still got the ambulance crews attending to matters medical)

That depends on the risk assessment for the type of job, and whether the police assess the risk allowing them onto the accidents scene. It also depends on whether the ambulance crew have sufficiently trained personnel manning that particular ambulance.
In a no-win situation, you could have a trained crew available at the scene but the police will not allow them onto the scene because of the risk attached to that senario. It has happened. The same with fire crews. The "let it burn if no risk" scenario.

No it isn't, because the very people who drive without the relevant paperwork in order don't bother to register the vehicle in their name to start with.

Even on the very rare occasions these types are actually stopped at the roadside, they don't really care because the fine is cheaper than what it would have cost them to buy insurance, MOT, and tax to start with.

As for confiscating & crushing the vehicle, do you think for one minute they are bothered about losing a £200 shed?
All they do is go & buy another one and start over again safe in the knowledge that the chance of meeting a real life copper is minimal, because they have all been replaced with cameras.

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?

Aye, fair one!