The new legislation banning the use of radar detectors seems to me another aspect of the Government’s growing dislike of vehicle users.
Once upon a time AA patrols indicated speed traps to members by not saluting. All they were doing was indictating that it was deemed unwise to go at over 20mph on the road ahead. If such a road went past a school or through a village, this was surely a good move, a double insurance that safety would be observed? Drivers so warned would drop below their normal open-road pace of perhaps 50mph (no 200mph supercars then) and proceed at around 15mph, as their speedos might be inaccurate. lean see nothing illegal in such preindications to reduce speed, whether by the one-time AA men, or by private signs, or by waving a signal to oncoming drivers. In times gone by there was an overall 20mph limit and speed traps were often imposed on country roads well outside populated areas. That this was futile was shown when this limit was abandoned for the sensible, if properly imposed, 30mph limit in built-up areas.
If cameras are set up before dangerous areas they might well be justified. But all too often they are obvious money-earners, especially now that police forces are being allowed to keep a proportion of the fines. In either case, why should a double-insurance against supposedly unsafe speed be illegal? A point for all heavily taxed vehicle users to question?