Flashing Lights to Warn of Speed Traps
Vložit
- čas přidán 18. 03. 2021
- What can be the consequences if you flash your lights to other drivers to warn of Speed Traps up ahead?
Dash Camera Affiliate Links.
Car - Viofo - viofouk.co.uk/ashleyv10f01621...
Motorcycle - Innov - innovv.co.uk/ashley1nn0v1370307/
Motorcycle, Bicycle and Equestrian - Techalogic - techalogic.co.uk/ashleyt3ck41...
Social Media
www.ashleyneal.com
/ ashleynealdrivinginstr...
ashleysanalysis@gmail.com
Amazon Links
Sony a6400 Camera - amzn.to/2xVCrn0
Sony A7C Camera - amzn.to/3JUvUIa
Tascam DR-10L Microphone - amzn.to/3M8P0fd
Sony FDR X3000 Action Camera - amzn.to/2YVoPDh
#learningpoint #dashcam #education
"Resists or wilfully obstructs an officer in the execution of his duty ..." Surely, if I warn oncoming drivers of a speed camera ahead, I am ASSISTING an officer in the execution of his duty.
Spot on
@@jayjay378378 Yeah but pigs want people to speed so the can hand out fines.
Agree on the same principle that there are signs on the road to warn you of speed cameras.
I thought they already failed to use that offence in court and had to rely on improper use of headlights instead?
Presumably it's a bit difficult to obstruct a police officer in a high visibility van by pointing out that there is a policeman inside a high visibility van.
Well you're neither obstructing nor assisting them, are you? The officer will have as much difficulty/ease in carrying out their duty of operating the mobile speed camera whether you go flashing your lights or not.
It's funny how most drivers spend most of their time on the road beeping and insulting other drivers, however, if the police are trying to catch speeding motorists, there's a sudden camaradarie and they're all mates.
Beautiful how we can all come together to face a common enemy lol
@Orion watch crimebodge
@Mister Jorrox As much as I don't like corruption of the Police. I would rather have them around. It would be total anarchy without them. They need to change self defence laws to encourage people to defend against criminals.
The police are regarded in such a low light that it brings together even the most disparate people.
Says something about the institutionally corrupt gang we call 'the police'.
Course, ya coppers don’t go cutting each other’s throats to get the best jobs and promotions, and then conveniently losing the paperwork when one gets caught speeding or something, huh !!
Around here we'll flash to warn of a hazard ahead, a deer or horse for example, and I suppose that might include a police car. I'm always grateful for any warnings from fellow road users.
I would say that anything that by its presence could result in erratic driving behaviour would qualify there and given that people can and do over brake far more than necessary for these at times they would qualify as such.
How does society benefit is you warn a driver who is using their phone and they avoid prosecution?
"No officer, incorrect assumption officer.
I flashed my lights to warn the other drivers of the large dog I saw wondering around alone in the road ."
Brilliant !
Here in Australia we just say that a big kangaroo was beside the road. Or you can use the legal defence that the Police themselves use, 'unintentional error'.
Couple of pigs wandering round I’d say
You're so clever - I'm sure you'll find a great excuse like that when you mow down a child too, and be absolved of all guilt...
@@edwardcoe7293 , people accused of offences do have the right to defend themselves against those allegations, unless of course you have a problem with the presumption of innocence. And always good to see someone use an emotional argument when discussing a legal matter.
I work on a military base and a few years ago the commanding officer asked for a mobile camera van to set up on the approach road to the base. here's the irony, he was the first one to get caught lol.
talk about an own goal
You'll find the ones who shout the loudest are normally the biggest culprits. Same in most do-gooder senarios.
It takes leadership to know you may get caught, while also hoping a road safety message gets through to arrogant people. Kudos to the commanding officer if they stood up and admit they were part of the problem.
@@dominicr4740 You absolute pratt, it takes stupidity to get caught in the trap that you set yourself.
@@dominicr4740 that's quite an unsettling logic. especially as you see it as an admirable trait.
My barracks used to put a sign out in Germany as you left camp to tell you where they were 😆🤣
Not a problem, but if someone flashes you, look out for all hazards, not just speed camera vans - I've had people flash me for various different hazards.
I flashed a white van because a young lad was walking up the to the brow of the hill without a pavement heading towards oncoming traffic. I saw the white van slow down and driving around the lad. Possibly saved his life.
Great advice, last time I was flashed there was a low flying hot air balloon that hit a pub. Happened about a month ago in Nottingham near Eastwood :-/
Really couldn’t care less about the rules, I’ll flash my lights and let people know there’s a piggy bank coming up. Most of these cameras are placed in places that are just out to make money.
This argument doesn't really stand up to scrutiny. They put them in places people are breaking the law by speeding. Only those breaking the law have to pay a fine. If you're not breaking the speed limit then you'll not have to pay anything?
@@deg262 Disagree! Cameras are supposed to be situated in high risk areas to deter speeding. They are actually placed in sneaky areas to create revenue
@@paulanderton9424 you can't create revenue from motorists who aren't breaking the speed limit. It's a limit that's set essentially to keep pedestrians and car drivers ourselves safe for the conditions hence anywhere can be deemed a risk
@@deg262 if it’s to protect pedestrians, then why are 90% of these cameras on dual carriageways, where there isn’t a pedestrian in sight? Also normally situated in a spot ideally where the speed limit just changes. I’ve never seen one of these outside a school, they’re never near any people.
Unsure where you're getting your 90% statistic but the truth still stands firm. If your not speeding, you won't get fined.
If a speed trap is there for road safety measures and drivers are slowing down because of it, why would it matter if that's because road users warn other road users of its presence? If a speed trap is there to generate income, however...
Wow I so agree 100%
Drivers will temporarily slow down to avoid being caught then speed again. They should be hidden and random or they won't be effective.
@@phantasmaleye3879put decent speed limits in place then maybe I would agree.
But as it is speed limits get lower every year (even though car designs supposedly get safer and safer) whilst the number of speed cameras increase every year.
But tell me again how it's not blatant revenue raising.
@@marcusporciuscato6404 "But as it is speed limits get lower every year" Do they? I must have missed that. What did they all go down to?
if it really was about safety, they would have more stretches of average speed cameras instead of these catch-you-at-a-point-in-time monstrosities
When I was caught, on a Sunday morning, speeding, coming out of an industrial estate doing 30, down a hill, where my speed increased to 36 at the bottom then to look up the hill and to see a camera van in front of a National Speed limit sign, I was reassured that these Van's are really for money making and not for safety!!!
Exact same in my experience. I know of one that hides behind a bush meters before a 40-to-national change.
While they could be positioned somewhere and catch actual dangerous speeders, they find their time more productive in catching people increasing their speed safely as they pass a national speed limit change onto a part of the road which is safe to do so!
Disgraceful!
@@winstonmohammed3261
I was caught speeding coming out of a quiet industrial estate where there was no danger to other drivers or pedestrians.
The camera van was setup for maximum revenue and not for road safety!!!
I passed a car, yesterday, who was slow from the lights and was dawdling and did 25mph. Was he safe!!!!
No he was on his phone texting!!
I know a spot just like that except its a single carriageway which is 40 and the speed van parks right behind a 30 mph sign
@@winstonmohammed3261
The point we're making is that these Van's are placed not necessarily in a place to reduce speed in a place which is unsafe to speed. They're placed in places where it's easy to make money.
Tell me the last time you've seen a camera van near a school??
Speed isn't just the cause of accidents!
Drivers on their phones, playing with the touchscreen in their cars, driving to close to the car in front etc
Certainly excess speed is a contributory factor to accidents but stopping people who speed won't prevent the majority of accidents!!
@@winstonmohammed3261
I have driven for 29 years and it's been 25years since my last accident but I have never been a saint when it comes to speed. But I'm constantly thinking about my driving keeping my alertness levels very high.
I see so much bad driving from people carelessly who are sticking to the speed limit!!
Don’t see a problem with this whatsoever, someone did this past me once and gave them a thumbs up for letting us know
@@Unchained_Alice static camera would achieve this better the mobile van often parks causing an obstruction on grass verges and causes sudden braking even by those not speeding
@@stevehayes6661 people would only slow down for that short stretch where the static camera was, with mobile cameras they could be anywhere in a village and people would get to know either by seeing them or by getting caught and because you never know when they'll be there you'll learn to always drive slower through that area.
You don't see a problem with condoning speeding then, says it all.
@@matr1724 If I make them aware of a speed camera van I will slow them down, making the roads safer.
@@ollieg4169 for all of 100m then they will speed again? Not really the point of enforcement is it, needs to be a belief that you could be caught anytime, anyplace. You might say it's a bit big brother but it poses probably one of the greatest risks in everyday life for most people, particularly vulnerable road users.
As a serving officer, I question the rule behind this.
The rule about obstructing a constable, or someone assisting a constable is correct, yes. However, these mobile speed camera vans are staffed by civilian staff, who in terms of police powers have no more powers than any normal member of staff, i.e control room operators, they're essentially considered on par with PCSO's, although PCSO's have limited powers to detain people. If it's being used by a civilian member of staff, then I'm not sure how under that legislation anyone can argue that by warning other road users, they are obstructing a constable, because no constable is present.
Oh, and contrary to some of the other comments on here, no, we don't just go out to fine people for speeding. The only time you'll get a fine for speeding from an officer, is if you are unlucky enough to be stopped by a traffic officer.
I've been in several years and never fined anyone for anything. Speeding motorists just get told to slow down at worst thus far.
Do the operators count as ‘a person assisting a police officer’?
No, those in the vans have the same legal status as warranted officers due to changes to the Police Reform Act.
Beat officers issue notices for speeding as well as RPU.
Tbf most times I’ve been stopped for speeding by an officer... I never argue except it’s a fair cop and been given a warning . One officer just closed his folder and said “oh ....well I have nothing more to say... I’m not used to honesty” laughed wished me a good day and got back in his car.
@@unleashthedragonwithin2057 Not in the force I’m in they don’t. They cannot issue them as they have not been trained in the use of speed guns, and therefore cannot accurately give a speed on any process book or traffic offence report for the court to determine a punishment.
Some PCSO’s are trained in their use, but they cannot report people for offences in the same way that I can. Very few PC’s I know, (and I know plenty who have been in for 10 years or more) can actually report them for speeding. Of course we can report someone for careless or dangerous driving instead but these are harder to prove and convict on than speeding is. Speeding is easy to prove; exactly that, you were going faster than a posted limit on a public road whilst operating a motor or mechanically propelled vehicle.
Dangerous or careless becomes a bit more of a grey area, what is “careless” or “dangerous” to one driver might not be considered so by another. There’s no hard and fast rule about exactly what is and what isn’t “careless or dangerous driving”. With speeding the rule is hard and clear, 31 in a 30 is speeding. But most forces won’t prosecute at that low level of exceeding the limit, following advice from Chief of police officers association.
@@thefiestaguy8831 I was not suggesting that every warranted officer in every constabulary carries out sanctioned speed enforcement, just those authorised to do so.
You aren't taking in to account the National Scheme course criteria and every participating constabulary who is a member (last count 39 out of 43 UK constabularies. This is why notices don't start until a minimum of 10%+2, it's nothing to do with ACPO guidance.
I've been gratefull of people warning me of speed cameras as it has always been in areas that i've never been before.
@@SourceHades I have to physically look down away from the road just to see my speedo so trying to look at maps to see what is around would be even more dangerous
I don’t see how warning drivers to slow down is obstructing an officer in their duty. Surely that’s actually assisting them?
You drive slower if you see someone flashing there lights as that means there is something a head. Could even be an acident. I feel better know there is a camera van around a corner than nothing knowing. Becasue of my anxity I panic when I see then even if I'm doing 20 in a 30 or 50 in a 60
A lot of those vans are civilian operated
Yes but those vans are less about safety and more about £££
... yes the flashing does make people slow down. But that means that the camera isn't making money and they don't like that.
@@katherinemulrooney1926 they just want the camera to make a shit load of money right?
It used to be the absence of a salute from the AA patrol that served as a speed trap warning. They couldn't be prosecuted for not doing something.
That's a very simplified explanation. The early AA (the Motorists Mutual Association) were a group of motorists who were formed specifically to warn of speed traps, not a breakdown group and tended to use volunteers like newspaper boys at the weekend. They were largely rendered irrelevant by the removal of the 20mph limit in 1930 and the saluting ended in 1962
That's very interesting. I'd never heard of this.
I have to be honest and say that I have be caught out with camera's in the past. But, in most cases I do think that these cameras are in the wrong place and should be installed on busy housing estates that are treated like race tracks.
Probably wouldn't bring in as much revenue if they did that! 😉
It’s not obstructing an officer, there is a good chance that a law hasn’t been broken yet. To paraphrase John Prescott on Top Gear, ‘speed cameras aren’t a problem, we tell you where they are!’
Speed cameras "should" be used as a road safety device, but they aren't. If they were, then alerting others to the presence of a camera in the vicinity would arguably be assisting an officer in their duty (broadening the area where people are behaving more responsibly due to that knowledge) rather than obstructing that duty.
And also by encouraging another driver to slow down you are also assisting road safety .
Nobody "should" exceed the limit but they do. Don't speed, can't be fined.
You are not properly taking into account what police controls seek to achieve. If its only use should be to increase safety only when and where they are used, indeed they are kind of pointless. It is human psychology when you can''t predict something and there is certain risk with that uncertainty that people become more cautious. Where constant monitoring isn't an option their only tool is catching people off guard.
@@Woppettier I am taking into account what Police controls seek to achieve, it just doesn't include the use of pop up cameras as a road safety device.
@@sparkycalledmarky Ok you are one of the guys that doesn't trust what their gov puts out and knows everything better? 😂 I see through you man 😂
My thoughts seeing flashing headlights like this I would have thought they was a hazard ahead, so would have slowed.
I'm exactly the same. It could be an accident or a lorry that had shed its load, but whatever the reason I'd have read the flashing of lights on an otherwise open road to mean "slow down, trouble ahead".
Exactly that, there is a hazrd ahead. In the early days of this lazy policing system, I saw collisions happen as a result of a camera on the roadside. These incidents were usually minor rear end shunts, although some got it both ends. The camera wasn't the cause of the collisions, that was due to people driving too close to the car in front but if the camera wasn't there, there would've been no incident. Similar things happened in the early days with fixed cameras before they were painted yellow.
The driver who sees the camera first is taken by surprise and may not even be speeding, but their first reaction is to brake because they can't be certain unless they have just checked their speedo. The car behind, who may even be a good distance behind is also taken by surprise & also brakes, probably harder than they need to as they don't know what they're slowing for, then the chain reaction kicks in & everyone is now over reacting to the sudden braking in front of them, 5 or 6 cars back, tyres are beggining to squeal as the over reaction gets bigger, then crunch - crunch - crunch - skid - crunch - skid - smash etc, etc. Then the road is closed, maybe for an hour, maybe all day, resulting in thousands, possibly tens of thousands of people being late or missing appointments, the cost to the local economy & to individuals involved is impossible to calculate. The first car to brake goes on with their journey, they may, or may not get a fine through the post. The mobile camera driver, realising they won't catch anyone else for quite some time moves on to creat chaos elsewhere.
You've probably worked out that I don't like these sneaky traps, and you'd be right. I also don't like speeding, particlarly in built up areas. I have driven for a living since the day after I passed my driving test in 1988, so I've seen a lot of nasty stuff on our roads, a lot of it involved people driving too fast for the conditons & their skill level. Speed traps, fixed or mobile are a menace and I'm very happy to see people flashing a warning about them or any other hazard, if it stops a collision or reduces the severity of one, I'm all for it. I also believe that anyone who gets fined or banned for speeding offences deserves it.
Drive carefully.
Exactly, which makes the flashing all the more pointless because I would have slowed down for no reason (obviously I don't speed and if I did I deserve to get caught)
There is a hazard.
@@VespaT5 I remember those days lol. My aunt drove into the back of a van as she was shouting at the "useless F-ing camera c**t" :)
Some people are so scared of these cameras that they ram on their brakes when they see them even if they are driving at or below the limit. That is of course an issue for them, but I've seen lorries jackknife behind these morons. So how safe is a "safety camer"?
Lorries only jackknife due to the jackass behind the wheel. If a trained HGV driver loses control, it is nothing whatsoever to do something parked by the side of the carriageway.
I try my best to warn people to slow down. I wouldn’t mind if they were for safety, but the majority of the time, it seems as though the mobile camera vans are placed in areas where people will be caught out unfairly. Unfortunately not placed where speed would cause a safety hazard like they should be! And for that reason I do warn people with lights
That sums it all up. Great point.
Spot on! You never see them where there are real hazards, normally in long straights with no need for such low speed limits. The same applies to road markings. Double white lines along straight bits and overtaking dashes on corners!
My understanding is that mobile units are setup where there has been a history of incidents I.e. data driven or local community issues have prevailed. Of interest is that each position must be authorised and permanent road signs warn drivers of camera zones. Do not approach the unit on foot - you will see lots of cctv cameras. Simple rule is don’t speed and enter a speed zone at the correct speed. The sign is not there to inform the driver to now slow down. Drive safe, think safe and be safe.
If it’s that unsafe there should be a permanent camera.
@@ianross225 spot on!!
Surely their duty is monitoring the speed of the traffic coming towards them. By flashing your lights, you are in no way obstructing them from doing that. If, on the other hand, their duty is making as much money as possible in the shortest time possible, they may have a case.
'Speed cameras' save lives therefore if you're not over the limit, you have nothing to worry about. So. The 80% of drivers who constantly represent the latter, take heed.
@@paulhebblethwaite7168 I'm not sure they do. I've seen them cause more issues tbh, with people excessively breaking for them when speed limits are not obvious. Police want people to be caught for figures for the Gov to crowe about. They have quotas to meet. It's not all about safety unfortunately.
@@sixonesix9429 they definitely don't, they only catch peopple speeding and only oblivious speeding at that (they are easy to spot)
they don't catch any other, arguably more dangerous offences.
@AS No, that wouldn't apply here.
@AS At that point, it isn't. It's like telling somebody not to steal in Tesco's because there is a security guard waiting to pounce.
except speed cameras aren't used as road safety devices are they 😂
the van alone doesn't deter people from speeding, the knowledge of its presence does. therefore if no one told anyone about it ppl would speed regardless. The speed vans that no one knows about are simply cash grabs.
You know the speed limit in the area and you know it’s illegal to speed. So how exactly is it a cash grab? The easy method to prevent having to pay a fine from a speed camera is NOT to speed. There easy!
How else would the pigs get their fat hands on loads of cash
@@rosswheeldon9292 do you drive?
Exactly. People can be dangerous drivers whilst not speeding. More traffic police patrols is what is needed. The cameras are only revenue raisers and a method of providing a raw statistic they can use to claim they are reducing accidents
Most constables I've spoken to around this topic share the same opinion: their job is to enforce the speed limits and keep the speed down in a specific area. If people are being warned that there's a speed trap nearby and they're keeping the speed down as a result, then the speed trap is doing its job. Of course, if someone is driving and reporting these speed cameras on an app like Google Maps or Waze then they're breaking the law in doing so.
I've noticed someone comment saying that speed traps usually aren't run/managed by constables ("just 'civvies'" to quote): this is the case in the majority of circumstances nowadays - especially with the police having to be everywhere else enforcing the lockdown rules. However, these 'civvies' are covered by the same Police Act of 1996 that was outlined in the video as they're "assisting a constable in the execution of his duty": so whilst they can't pull anyone over there and then, they can report the vehicle for the offence and provide the footage from the onboard cameras.
Except that the police are required to publish the locations of their speed cameras in advance. Are they breaking the law in doing so? No, of course not.
@@clickrick Isn't this the meaning of the speed camera signs in areas with open roads and convenient laybys but no fixed speed cameras?
Rubbish, how does warning those that would benefit from prosecution constitute 'doing its job'? They slow, speed up afterwards and nothing changes. Think it through.
@@taIlboyandy23 Exactly! So many plonkers in this comments section.
As seen as these Revenue Collection Vans are only ever located at “accident blackspots”, and not where they will collect the largest revenue, then surely by flashing your headlights you are advising oncoming drivers of a dangerous section of road ahead ?
Not sure the argument "don't tell people and let them speed and get caught" really contributes to road safety...
I thought the whole idea is cameras are meant to be visible and their presence known, anyway, as how else do they act as a deterrent?
Agreed
The deterrent is never speeding because you can never be certain where a mobile speed cameras is. I think it's less about slowing speeds on a particular road and more deterring drivers from ever speeding because the risk (and consequences) of being caught is always present.
You could make the same argument about the position of the UK's Trident armed submarines. We want other nations to know we've got them, but they aren't an effective deterrent it's known exactly where they are.
If you thought you could be identified as speeding any time, any place would that be more or less of a deterrent to you speeding than knowing that you were only likely to be caught in particular well known places?
I'm not sure about that. If you warn them, it stops them from being punished for speeding. And thus they will continue speeding in the future.
I think it should be expected from motorists that if they go over the speed limit they will get fined period. No matter if they were warned by signs or other drivers or not.
I never alert other road users of cameras as a speeding BMW wrote my car off
Surely it's crime prevention. If you flash oncoming traffic to warn them and they slow down, they won't be speeding. If you see someone about to walk out of a shop without paying and ask them to put the item back, you're preventing an offence.
Exactly. Because I thought the purpose of cameras/vans were to slow people down? To reduce accidents? People flashing to let others know achieve exactly this. But PC plod can't make any monies so it's against the law 😂
You're not preventing a crime tho. If someone is speeding, the offence has already occurred, you're preventing the detection & prosecution of said crime.
If you see a man run out of a bank with a balaclava on and a sack full of cash, you wouldn't warn him there's cold around the corner so take off the balaclava.
@@RichO1701e fixed speed cameras achieve the same thing. Everyone slows down for the camera then speeds back up. But speed cameras are placed at known accident hotspots (theoretically anyway) so they prevent accidents at that spot.
This is more or less the same
@@RichO1701e "If someone is speeding..." but they're not speeding if no speed limit is posted where the 'flashing' takes place, so no offence could have occurred.
@@RichO1701e how do you know they are speeding Rich? pure conjecture. the only time this can be proven is if they are caught speeding therefore any obstruction is purely hypothetical. ;-)
Something that I've always felt should be in the highway code is the driver should be able to flash oncoming traffic to warn of a hazard. What do you think Ashley?
If google or flashing lights slow you down then that’s mission accomplished isn’t it?
My father is an officer and I spoke to him about this before
He’d never pull someone up for it as if it gets them to slow down, happy days
Theres no law which states you cannot tell someone to slow down. If you dont know theres a police officer, you can not be held accountable. Its the standing in front of the cam vans which makes it obvious your targeting the cops job which is against the law.
In the United States, although the legality of headlight flashing varies from state to state, a federal court ruled that flashing headlights was a constitutionally protected form of speech, issuing an injunction prohibiting a police department from citing or prosecuting drivers who flash their lights to warn of radar .
@@lm1314 i think a law like this is abit poorly written, and good police officers interpret the intent of laws which is to keep people safe. Some people do obstruct the cams with vans ect to prevent them working, and the law to stop such things is over extended by poor officers who are only interested in beurocrocy and personal score points for another criminal off the streets..
@@lm1314 That's interesting. Genuine question : which state and when? Wouldn't mind reading more about that. 👍
You got to love America and their freedom of speech.
The cameras locations have to be posted on the police website for your area
Agreed - I thought they had to
That's what I thought! So why then would it be illegal to post the same information yourself on social media? That's ludicrous if someone has been fined for that! There's a FB page in my area called "speed camera watch" or something like that
That’s a good point 🤔
They have to be listed, but not when they will be operating.
@@problemchild1976 but it doesn't tell you when and where they will be, just lists the possible locations for the whole region
Hi Ashley, what is the best way to warn someone on the motorway who doesn't have their lights on when it is getting dark? Thanks
So what's the difference between that and warning signs notifying drivers of camera ahead?
Must admit I always warn others of speed camera vans, they're almost always placed on stretches of road where the speed limit is set too low for the conditions. There is a spot in my town just leaving where the 30 limit stretches from the top of the hill even though there's no pavement or houses around. The police van sits behind a railway bridge where you can't see them, so I think it's only right to give the road users a fair chance :P
Yh my brother got a ticket doing 51 in a 30 because he thouth it was a 60 but it was a 30 even though it wasn't built up so no reason for it to be 30 they always do it in places that are easy to catch people out and places where the speed limits is stupidly low for the road they should put them near schools where its 20 where it would make it safer for pedestrian and kids
@@Ethankeenan02 I agree, still don't like the light flashing thing
@@Ethankeenan02 they don't put them outside school cos there is often congestion and start and finishing time . Therefore no speeding tickets could be issued. They may catch some mobile phone offenders though . But it's not a highly profitable location unlike a bridge over a motorway.
'
@@emilylouise1979 yh through they just do it for the money not the safety but I do hate people that drive along texting thats my pet peeve annoys the shit out of me thats more dangerous than speed abit look at Germany autobahns thats rarely a crash on them because they have better lane discipline and better tests so morons can't pass my grandad haa been 140mph in hos a4 on the autobahn and said it feels very safe and people never lane hog and always keep right the problem with the UK is they don't do motorway driving on tests witch they should
If I'm flashed then I slow down thinking it's either the police, an accident or horse in the road. I do the same for others too. Doesn't always work at night tho. I once flashed a van driver warning them of a police speed trap and got the full beams in my eyes for my trouble.
Bet the van driver felt bad when he saw the piggy bank trap.
And deservedly so.
Bet he got the double beams in his mirror!
When I drive I absolutely hate everyone on the road unless I see a speed trap, then I’ll go out of my way to inform other drivers.
Are you okay with emailing me? I want to talk about something privately, but if you’re uncomfortable with emailing, I have one NON-email option you can consider.
Speed camera vans are money making devices. I appreciate each and every driver that has flashed the lights to warn me of speed vans over the years.
Money is not their incentive as police make no profit from speed enforcement, most mobile sites are community concern areas where local communities request their presence due to problems with speeding.
As long as they can illegally park their mobile speed cameras everyone should be allowed to warn people about it.
They aren’t illegally parked though.
@@CymruEmergencyResponder They are blocking access either someone's driveway or dirt road and thats not legal.
@@CymruEmergencyResponder they are sometimes . I've seen them parked on grass verge between a slip road and dual carriageway . Totally illegal in a clearway zone . We are supposed to all be governed by the same laws .
@@emilylouise1979 Why is that illegal in a clearway zone?
@@mmaus688 can't they just move though? How are you blocking access if you're at the wheel and can move? If that is the law then it's a really dumb one.
They won’t breaching section 89. They were just signalling their presence.
And they are not even police officers usually.
So no. That part of the analysis is wrong. Do Google get prosecuted. Of course they don't.
I call hogwash.
What I do agree with Ashley is that keeping to the speed limit is the safest way to avoid any trap.
@@faultychip More importantly, they need to prove an actual instruction of a constable’s duty took place. To do this they need to show a car was speeding and as a result of your action of flashing through then slowed down to x below the limit. That would need to measure sides before and after and interview the driver to see why they slowed down. Nobody gets prosecuted for those if they are prepared to hire a half decent lawyer.
@@faultychip It also applies to preventing anyone _assisting_ an officer. But good luck proving it though.
I never flash for the speed camera itself, but for the potential danger of someone abruptly slowing down because of one.
In some countries it is customary (if not legally required) that the police publishes general locations of mobile speed cameras in advance and radio stations and other media are encouraged to spread that information, because it actually helps slowing down traffic - which is their main goal.
In Lancashire the Police publish in the Lancashire Telegraph newspaper every week where mobile cameras will be located.
The camera van is staffed by a civilian not a police officer despite being in a police vehicle. It is impossible to achieve their identity to obtain evidence. The location of this camera van is on an open section of road still in a 30mph so it suggests that it could be for revenue not justice. To receive a flashed light signal could be for any warning of a problem and camera vans that do not put out static warning signs are against their own codes. To flash oncoming drivers depends on the location of the operator, if it is a deterrent because of eg. school signage and road paint I agree to it, if it looks like a money cow I will warn others to slow down.
I flash and I'm not ashamed to admit it. Speed alone shouldn't be the only factor in determining bad driving, not if just 5 Mph over the limit. This is just a cheap way of printing tickets.
Speed in itself is not dangerous if it was nobody would fly
It’s the misuse that kills
The law says if your doing say 35 on a 30 road you are breaking the law, so why can’t drivers stick the correct speed limit ? What if the driver you flash continues going over the speed limit and kills a child crossing the road ?
@@jamesinbradford5882 sometimes it is easy to drift above the speed limit. It doesn’t make you a bad driver, merely one that is looking at more than just the needle on the dashboard.
So in your opinion how many mph over the speed limit is not acceptable, 6, 10, 15 mph? A line has to be drawn, if the speed limit is 30 then stick to 30 and stop moaning about the people whose responsibility it is to enforce it, if you choose to speed and get caught it's your fault, not the police.
@@philipallen4230 both agree and disagree. Agree do not exceed the the limit. Disagree as sometimes (quite a lot of times) it is dangerous to drive to the limit. road surface conditions /narrow lanes /blind corners etc all contribute that is without considering the poor quality of some drivers allowed to pass tests these days
I always flash other drivers whenever I see a camera van parked up (usually sneakily) - mainly because it's got very little to do with road safety and EVERYTHING to do with raising revenue. I see plenty of them on A roads around my way where there hasn't been an accident in donkey's years. We all know why they're there; = £££££.
Here here
are the speed limit signs on either side of the road placed sneakily too?
@@Matthew-bu7fg Good for you Matthew - you absolute saint. Be honest now; have you EVER gone 36-37 mph in a 30 mph zone? Honestly?
@@glenncole7721 I never said I nor anyone else was a saint.
You intimated that its outrageous how "sneakily placed" the cameras are even though there are road signs dotted about the place telling you how fast you should be going.
It's not "you can go as fast as you like unless you see a camera" it's "if the maximum speed limit is 30 then you must not exceed 30"
This road used to be NSL. There is a crossroads where there has been multiple accidents, at least one fatal. It was reduced to 40 and now 30. It is part of the old A1 great North road. People still fly down and tailgate when you dare to stick to the limit and it's frankly annoying. To those who think you're doing a public service by flashing drivers when there's a speed camera ahead, do you flash them when there isn't but they're obviously speeding? Thought not.
I don't see how the 'camera technician' can a) be termed a 'constable' or b) be confirmed as assisting a 'constable' - as there are no 'constables' present in the vans at the time. They are operating alone in the van, so not a constable, and clearly not assisting one either.
I know a cop that also flashes his lights to warn drivers. He detests the money vans.
Is it about safety, or revenue gathering ?
Revenue lol. They couldn’t give a damn about safety 😂
This question could be applied to speed camera and the answer is simple stop warning other drivers and stop breaking the speed limit and there’s no way to raise revenue .....simples
If it was about safety they'd still have more traffic officers
@@CED99 If it was about safety, every set of traffic lights in the UK would have a red light camera. They don't, because they work too well: People would soon learn not to jump red lights and the revenue would stop.
But with speed cams, they can continue to stack the cards in their favour to maintain a steady income stream.
If it really was about safety they wouldnt say you’re “obstructing an officer” for flashing oncoming vehichles to slow down.
Yeah, always do this. Regardless of what busy bodies say it’s always best to stop people getting in trouble.
Yeah that's right . Is it an offence to prevent let's say a theft ?? Buy doing so are you obstructing the police??
If these camera were there to make you slow down they would use signage but most of the time they don't because they are money makers and have absolutely nothing to do with road safety .
@@emilylouise1979 there's no police officer in the vans! They work for a private company and are not police.
@@powjj it varies across different police force areas. Down here they are police civilian staff although I'm aware of so called safety camera partnerships elsewhere to
@@emilylouise1979 police civilian staff are still not officers. You can park in front of them so preventing them from using the camera. They will call the police but they can't move you on no matter how hard they try as you aren't obstructing a police officer. Anyone who doesn't argue their case, if prosecuted, are silly.
@@powjj yes I thought that , but now the camera operators are complaining of feeling harassed alarmed or distressed and a lot now carry a bit of paper from the chief constable saying he authorised it . I think it's all very questionable tbh but tbh
Is it safe how some of them park though?
I've seen them parked up on the kerbside, on bends even on traffic islands at traffic lights ( A580)
Worked in criminal law for 22 years and breach of section 89 could never be conclusively proved here. " I flashed because i thought it was someone i knew" , " i flashed because i thought i saw a small animal run out in front of their vehicle" or " i accidently caught my light stalk when i meant to put my screen wash on"...... " Never even saw a mobile speed camera van"
Never heard of the thumbs down method.
I've heard from old timers it used to be used by truckers, to inform that the DOT were out and about checking trucks for defects, over weight , documents etc, now also used for speed traps.
I did spot what that ford focus did - and due to the way they flashed i knew immediately they are very kindly warning me of a money making trap ahead that may catch me for doing 1mph over the 'limit'.
Of course it could be a breach of the law to warn others, but that doesn't matter for the police as they will happily apply any law to you if they so choose, regardless of if it fits or not or if it even exists - so it's almost irrelevant really. The police unfortunately are generally not what they used to be - if you are ever pulled its best never to argue, always agree with them apologise and let them feel big....as otherwise, regardless if you are right or not, they will just pull something out of their ass to slap against you.
Saying that, don't agree with them if they caution you.
I got pulled over once because I attempted to overtake safely a car that was going 20 in a 30, when it accelerated as I was overtaking I aborted and pulled back in behind them. Even though it was totally safe and I had indicated and didn't speed or do anything illegal. When I got to some lights (even though there were at least 5 cars behind me waiting) a car with blues racing down the street pulled up next to me and told to me to pull over, they then proceeded to do everything they could to bully and scare me to get me to admit to a crime I didn't commit, saying they had to go 50mph to catch up to me (which by that token would have meant all the other cars behind me and the one in front had been speeding) and that I had been driving dangerously even though I had stuck to the letter of the law and done absolutely nothing wrong. If I had given in and agreed with them to placate them I would probably have had points on my license and a fine.
I was told by a traffic officer that the police would have to prove that the car being flashed at was speeding and slowed as a result of being flashed. Also regarding publishing details online, most forces publish where they are going to be during the week/month anyway. If flashing or sharing the location causes someone to slow down then that’s what the police want. A day without capturing any speeding vehicles is a good thing.
It comes down to this. Do we want people to stay below the speed limit or do we want to catch them exceeding the speed limit? Which is safer?
That is a good point, if you want people to slow down then you should be flashing people all the time not just when there is a camera van, and it could be argued that people that get caught will generally slow down over all to avoid further fines and points.
But tbh I doubt the police would charge people for the warning someone very often as it's going to be hard to prove the intent of the flash.
“Good drivers turn events into non events”
~ Ashley neal
😆
😂
I certainly do warn people of speed cameras, it's all too easy to go a little over somewhere the road may be safe for a 40 rather than a 30 imo, and as for the whole safety deal... If it was for safety and not money why not put average speed cameras in place instead of fixed ones, they are much more affective. Plus drivers spend more time looking at the road than their speedometer because if they go a little over they can go a little under.
What’s the problem? If you slow down for a mobile speed camera you’re safer, right? Thanks for the warning.
I was actually stopped for this years ago and there was nothing they could do about it, they asked me why I flashed and I said to warn the other driver of my presence, I said I thought he was going to swerve into my path, total bollocks of course but that is the proper use in the highway code. To warn others of your presence. Motorists are easy targets though. Speed doesn't kill bad driving does.
And if bad drivers are driving more slowly the consequences of a collision are reduced. Not rocket science.
It's the fact that mobile speed cameras are purely their to make money. It's almost an additional road tax, as they deliberately park these vehicles in places to catch all drivers out (good and bad, with no room for human error). If it was a simple "one point" on your licence only, then I'd actually be happier with that. But as for "safety" yeah right.. It's all about the wonga, safety is an after thought.
While I agree with you I wonder if, as most camera vans are operated by civilian and not police constables could this be argued as a defence. I did not obstruct a constable and there was no constable there for the civilian to assist.
The act states '...or a person assisting a constable..', so your defence would fail on the basis that the camera operator is clearly a person assisting a constable in the execution of his duty.
Not to forget that the civilian has power under the cheif constables warrant.
@@chrispop99 that is a valid point but i was wondering if the tickets are issued by the police or the local council because if it is a local council then are the civilian operators still assisting a constable .and im not trying to be awkward or such like more just curious if anything because i really dont know the awnser or even if im asking a real question if that makes any sense
@@joecroucher tickets are generally issued by the local safety camera partnership. local councils not involved at all.
@@gordon861 ok thanks for the reply that really goes to show that i know nothing about the issue concerned. but as i said was just a curiosity more than anything.
Not long after i passed my test, i was happily driving along this road when a chap came over the hill and flashed his lights. I had no idea what he was trying to tell me so i smiled and waved at him. I crested the hill to find a camera van about halfway down the other side. Luckily, i wasn't keen on going too fast so soon after passing!
When I just got my drivers license I wasn’t aware that people did this and, seeing I was driving an older car which had some trouble before, I really thought there was something wrong with my car. I pulled over to see if something was on fire, hanging under my car or if my headlights were blinding. Couldn’t find anything and drove off again.
Honestly it took me a few times more to actually understand I wasn’t at fault or on fire or something.
I will flash other road users to warn of hazards such as a vulnerable road user, a pool of standing water, an accident, etc, round the corner to the oncoming traffic. Not sure about flashing for camera vans; it's not really a hazard and with my luck, I'd probably get done for it. If the oncoming vehicle was driving excessively fast, I certainly wouldn't flash them.
Could be a hazard as if a fast stream of speeding cars suddenly approach one driving too fast the 1st one would naturally brake then the reaction times of all the others would come into play. That's my defense anyway
I read an article that said someone got fined for doing this on my local duel carriage way but they actually flashed at an unmarked police car
tomlinson by any chance? £400 fine? he pleaded guilty
If he pleaded guilty then he's an idiot.
@@powjj Yup. I would 100% come up with an excuse. "I thought it was a friends car so I flashed to say hello"
"I meant to set cruise control but I got the wrong stalk"
@@rsoss92js or "tell me what police officer I obstructed please" should suffice
@@powjj exactly
This happened to me in the late 90's. I waved a "slow down" hand signal at what i thought was a speeding motorcyclist. it turned out to be an unmarked Police bike. He turned around and pulled me over. He summoned me to court for the obstruction a police officer law. I used a lawyer who had heard of this before, dug through his books and got the case thrown out of court. The police officer was told off.
I dont flash or signal now, as if you're speeding then you deserve to be fined.
I have never in my very long life ever heard of anyone ever being prosecuted for this.
I have a suspicion that the attitude to speed cameras officially changed from "catch the speeding motorist in the act" to "make the speeding motorist slow down" some time around the year 2000. Fixed cameras used to be in surprising places to catch you out, but now you only see them sited where you can see them long in advance, if you're looking. I suspect the "prosecuted for warning others of a speed trap" stories are from the 90s!
The only time I flash my lights at oncoming vehicles is when warning them of an obstruction ahead such as a fallen tree/branch or a vehicle stopped / accident
Does "a vehicle stopped" cover a camera van in a layby? Asking for a friend....
@@stevewallis8197 Yes. Guilty breaking is a cause of accidents. If someone is kind enough to earn you if the likelihood of vehicles breaking suddenly for no discernible reason they are providing a valuable service
Will there be a HGV learner update? I have recently stumbled upon a video where you talked about it.
I regularly drive on main rural roads and I regularly see people flashing their lights. It always makes me think there is either a speed camera or a hazard ahead. I am aware that people shouldn't flash unless it's to warn of their presence.
Crazy how so many people are so quick to say you were speeding and show or speak their disapproval quite obviously in one hand, and then on the other, so many people flash to warn others when mobile cameras are out.
saw someone in front of me warn me of a speed camera coming up via tapping his breaks 2-3 times.
The issue I see with speed cameras is, once they caught you they caught you. what's deterring you from continuing to speed now. It's now like there is gonna be a second camera further down the road. So warning people is essentially making the roads safer, since now they're driving more cautious.
Dont see how they could get you twice for the same offence seen as there isnt an officer to warn you of speeding as you could have been thinking it was 40 when it was 30 🤷♂️it should be about education not fines
@@Digitox20 yh it should be a speed awareness course first time to educate people 👏
They are for money making, nothing else. Get you for creeping over the speed limit but don't get the idiots who drive dangerously. Most speed cameras are on straight long roads where an accident has never occurred.
They are manned by civilians are they not? So obstruction would not come into it as they are not constables?
I've seen this vans speeding around as well, the double standard is hilarious
For anyone wondering why it's an offence to post on social media, but not for Google, sat navs, or navigation apps, is because these are identified as public services which are given information by local Forces as to PROBABLE mobile camera locations. Like fixed camera location information, this ensures drivers are made aware and adhere to speed restrictions in areas they may not be familiar with.
However, members of the public posting pictures and/or stating locations of ACTUAL mobile speed traps is perceived the same way as someone who aids in preventing a police operation from catching a burglar, drug dealer, terrorist etc in the act of committing an offence. Like imagine telling a robber what properties do and don't have security systems in place, so they have less chance of being caught.
As far as the law and police are concerned, the public should be operating their vehicles within the restrictions in place as well as to the road conditions, like we all should be licensed to be able to do. Anyone who is not able to control their conduct and vehicle, whether deliberately, negligently, or recklessly, according to road traffic laws is liable to be prosecuted proportional to the severity of the offence.
I was on a course with school and it let us have a tour in one of these vans. The man who worked in it told me that he doesn't work for the police, but works alongside them. So therefore it isn't obstructing a "constable". He also told me they don't mind when people let others know he's there as it makes the whole vicinity more safe :).
You misunderstood what he ment, they work directly for the police alongside police officer they are employed by the police as policing support officers and they have designated powers and the same legal status as a regular police officer that's how the obstruction charge would apply it's all covered by section 38 of the Police Reform Act 2002.
Ooo, that’s a hot topic, Ashley. Let the games begin: “Gladiators are you ready?”🙏🇬🇧🚘🙏
Hi Ashley. Love your videos. Great informative content. I’ve learned many a thing watching these. Good job. 👍
If the speed camera is placed on the basis of safety (possibly a debatable statement) then slowing down other road users will surely have the effect that is wanted. The other driver slows down before an accident hotspot and the probability of an incident is reduced.....
I've often flashed drivers to warn them about police ahead. However, there is one exception. If the driver is obviously driving way above the speed limit then they deserve whatever is coming to them and I will not warn them.
I saw a US video recently where a cop stopped and gave a citation to a driver who was driving at 65 in a 70 zone. "In this neck of the woods only drunks and drug dealers drive below the speed limit. Everyone else drives at 80 or 90."
Honestly if i see some flashing me I typically think there may be a fault with my car such as a light out etc
If someone flashes from the oncoming lane it always means either a speed trap or to watch out for something in the road like a pedestrian. If the flash causes someone to slow down and drive more safely then what's the problem? I see it just as communicating with another driver. I don't have a problem with it because the police always set up their camera in the sneakiest places anyway.
By "sneakiest places" do you mean places where they're most likely to find people breaking the speed limit and thus endangering lives ... ?
@@Velodrone No I mean like 10 feet in front of or behind a change in the posted speed limit...like you don't need to control your speed to that fine a degree...especially since most towns have their 30 mph limit extended out to give them a nice safety buffer. They go where they think they can get the most fines, not areas where there's a problem with safety
@@johnny2hats330.... that's why there's signs to tell you where the speed limit changes ... and quite often, signs to warn you that a speed limit change is coming up.
No sympathy from me I'm afraid!!
@@johnny2hats330 there should be consequences for mistakes though shouldn't there? I wonder if people hold such liberal atiitudes to law enforcement for other crimes like vandalism or petty theft.
@@wabznasm9660 It's pedantic to enforce the limit that strictly while everyone's travelling safely. Whether I pass the sign at 30, or at 33 as I slow down to 30 doesn't make any difference n my opinion.
Shall we park in oposite direction of trafic? When van will be moved there is full lane as well so how van turn arround and do not cross full lane? By my understanding we can not park in oposite direction if we can not safetly turn arround to right lane.
It's only an offence to park against the flow of traffic at night, but that doesn't apply to police vehicles engaged in police operations (such as speed enforcement) as they have exemptions from the usual parking regulations.
Simple question. Do I obstruct their ability to conduct speed checks on other motorists by flashing my lights?
This video restores my hope in the British public temporarily haha
A few points here. You aren't preventing anybody doing their duty. That would be, say blocking the device or doing something to stop the person/device monitoring speed. Also, the majority aren't constables in those vans. Successfully argued doesn't mean it held up - do you have the case no for this? I would genuinely like to see it, I'm not using that question to prove a point. The only real way of preventing speeding as average speed cameras. Single stage monitoring will only help it that particular stretch,
I'm cool with it, although I'd normally assume there was some form of obstruction ahead and slow down... don't really get that many throughout the entire county.
In some countries, people actually call radio stations to inform other drivers of speed cameras, random police checks, accidents or any other road related issues.
Seems like it's more about making an extra few quid than safety.
My neighbour’s granddaughter (8) was killed by someone doing 32mph in a 30mph zone near where a speed camera usually parks. If only that van was there that day !
@@jamesinbradford5882 shut up no way on earth was him going 2mph faster the cause of her death
Your talking shite like
@@funtv8210 it was a woman taking her own children to school. I’ll tell the family of the girl that died that 2mph over wouldn’t make a difference.
Well, it isn't
I don’t flash to warn others about the mobile speed traps.. if you’re not speeding then there’s no issue..
not sure it’s the same for everywhere but I do know that mobile speed camera van locations have been publicised in the past by South Yorkshire police maybe a few days before they’re in place..
@@jwalker7567 did I say I NEVER exceed the speed limit????
First time I knew about this was in 1999. Bus drivers flashing their lights and giving the thumbs down to warn another driver that a bus inspector was waiting to jump you.
Then when I started driving HGVs we would do the same to warn each other of speed traps.
here a set distance you have to travel before you can be classed as speeding? many times you see the vans parked up on exits of blind corners, hills, long straights. surely drivers should be given some sort of correction allowance time to release accelerator and drift back down to speed limit instead of braking?
Ashley I totally agree with you about this ---- There's a speed limit for a reason --- However I do flash lights to warn other motorists of horses I've gone past on twisty narrow roads --- I do this for the horse and rider ----- is that wrong --- I don't know ???
There are many places where the posted speed limit has no reason at all, sometimes an oversight, sometimes "they won't go faster than 20 over the limit" either way there are many places where it makes no sense at all, and they prey in such spots cause they know nobody follows that limit, instead of cathing peopple speeding in school zones etc. where it could actually improve safety...
Flashing lights as warning. Perfectly correct. Horse on road ahead, sheep being moved, flood or mud washout on road. Fallen branch or debris from a lorry. Any hAzard really
Those mobile speed cameras are only there to generate revenue. Average speed cameras are more effective at making roads safer in my opinion
Correct. I've just made a comment that if the revenue from these vans lead to more permanent traffic calming measures: such as average speed cameras then fair enough but they don't.
It makes me laugh the amount of people who still don't realise how average speed cameras work
I saw an article from a Speed Camera Van operator. They said they have no problem with drivers doing this as it has the same effect which is it makes drivers slow down.
I always adjust my lights when I pass a police car to make so I’m legal. Apologies if this looks like a flash
I've been caught speeding in the past but it really annoys me when people flash to warn the BMW in front who just overtook 6 people at once driving like a knob. I used to flash but have now stopped, if you're not speeding then you have no need to worry.
I presume if he ended up in front of six vehicles it was a safe overtake, regardless of his vehicle badge.
No 'constables' in most of them - just civvies, and they have no power over you. I'd flash lights as a warning, unless the oncoming vehicle was a boy racer clearly belting it! Secondly as all the locations of the vans are pre-notified in the local press, that negates that argument sorry....
These speed traps aren't always vans, they can be motorcycles (so in which case, it'd be a police constable). These 'civvies' are covered by the same Police Act of 1996 that was outlined in the video as they're "assisting a constable in the execution of his duty": so whilst they can't pull anyone over there and then, they can report the vehicle for the offence and provide the footage from the onboard cameras.
so you have become a law enforcer then ? it's up to you if someone gets caught breaking the law ?
@@geoffreywilliams663 Yes. The person(s) operating that speed camera have the power to make the decision on who gets reported for whatever traffic offence that they are seen to commit. Obviously, within reason: if the speed detection equipment picks you up doing 45 in a 30 then it'll probably get sent off to the DVLA straight away. Other offences besides speeding, however, such as using your mobile phone are entirely down to the person(s) operating the van.
@@geoffreywilliams663 You've lost the plot - My point was about the people operating the equipment in the vans - the civvies are of course entitled to operate the speed camera equipment in the van, that's not in question - but they have NO power outside that role. They don't get out they just sit there on huge salaries until their stint is over. The other point was that the locations of the mobile camera locations are published, so technically they would be obstructing themselves by publishing the location of the mobile speed camera vans if one was to use that argument. Case closed.
@@defundbbc you said YOU would flash your lights, therefore warning people, but sometimes YOU would not. That means YOU are acting as judge, not the people in the van. A speed limit is a speed limit regardless of the presence of a speed camera.
I usually signal by hand a "slow down" gesture if a road hazard is imminent but not yet visible to the incoming traffic.
I would slow down immediately with the expectation of a hazard
Often the people operating those speed cameras are police staff NOT constables and I think obstruction is a hard argument to make if the police want people to slow down at a dangerous area then you are helping them with that task unless it's all about making money
Precisely, if anything you're helping.
'A person assisting a constable'
If pre warning road users results in them reducing their speed, you're not obstructing the officer in the execution of their duty, you're reminding people to obey the law.
I don't flash lights, but my arm goes out of the window with my thumb down, most people that see know what it means, those that don't were probably going too fast and maybe deserve to be caught...
In my 40 years of driving, I have never seen a thumbs down warning. What about bad weather?
Do they want drivers to slow down or not?
in my experience people tend to slow down rapidly when they see a speed camera, which in turn can be dangerouse at times as ive been behind vehicles who have gone from 60 to 30 for no reason other than there being a speed camera van. so when i see someone flashing i see it as someone warning me of slowing vehicles not warning me of a camera van. technically when the traffic is slowing considerably than the speed limit they should put on their hazard lights, so whats the differance between the lane im in having hazard lights on and the oncoming lane flashing me a warning? also i flash oncoming cars in many situations as i live in a rural area so i flash when theres trators or horses a cyclists on winding on roads etc anywhere traffic has to slow.