Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Endinburgh Council
 
 
Monday, 7th December 2009 Change Date

Police shocked as hundreds fined in seatbelts crackdown

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
19 September 2007
NEARLY 400 drivers and passengers have been hit with £30 on-the-spot fines for failing to wear a seatbelt in a police crackdown.
Dozens of officers across the Lothians were ordered to watch out for anyone caught breaking the law during last week's campaign.

On the first day of the blitz, a father caught without a seatbelt in Liberton as he took his daughter to primary school was also found to be over the drink-drive limit.

Police chiefs today said they were "shocked" by the number of people still travelling in cars, vans and taxis without seatbelts.

They said they hoped the volume of fines would help to get the safety message across.

In all, 346 drivers were caught in the force area in the fortnight up until last Friday, along with 38 passengers.

People travelling in cars made up 226 of those caught, while those in vans, lorries and taxis made up the remaining 158.

Two passengers under 14 were also spotted, and the drivers hit with the £30 charge.

The crackdown saw around three times as many people fined as in a regular week.

More than a third of the 31 people killed in crashes in the Lothians and Borders in the last 18 months were not wearing seatbelts. Police say two thirds of these deaths were preventable.

Inspector David Milne, who is leading the safety campaign, said: "I did not expect the figures to be so high - I'm shocked. As a policeman, I'm pleased in a way that these 400 people will go out and spread the word that we'll fine those breaking the law. But as someone seeking to make roads safer, it's worrying that so many people are still willing to take the unnecessary risk.

"The reason for not wearing a seatbelt basically comes down to laziness and thinking that an accident will never happen to them. It's disturbing and it means we'll have to continue with these kind of operations and handing out more fines."

Every frontline officer on patrol was asked to look for anyone failing to belt up as they went about their regular duties.

Van drivers, who are typically amongst the worst offenders, made up the majority of non-car users caught. Only "a few" taxi passengers were fined. The campaign also saw the police display two badly-damaged cars outside Fort Kinnaird Shopping Park and Ikea at Straiton.

Neil Greig, Scottish policy manager for the Institute of Advanced Motorists, said: "If someone does not wear a seatbelt they are undermining every safety feature in the vehicle. Airbags and everything else are designed around the assumption that you have belted up. If you fail to do so, these features are useless."

Drivers and passengers face a maximum £500 fine for not wearing a seatbelt, although usually they are given the option of a £30 fixed penalty.

It is the driver's responsibility to ensure that children under 14 wear belts, and under-threes must use a child restraint.

Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 19 September 2007 11:49 AM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Brendan,

19/09/2007 11:17:06

For regular road users this does not really come as a shock - surprised the police chiefs found it to be.

Pity they didn't kill two birds with one stone and also looking out for drivers using their mobile phones.
I've personally never noticed a great reduction in those using their phones.

2

Continental,

19/09/2007 11:27:36

#1 - I agree, it isn't to me either and the mobile phone use is still very high.

3

mv,

19/09/2007 11:29:26

"...Dozens of officers across the Lothians were ordered to watch out for anyone caught breaking the law...."

Brilliant quote, just shows where the priorities lie these days, all that paperwork and making targets!

It will come as no great shock to those people to actually use the roads that people are breaking the law all over the place (illegal modified cars, jumping red lights, driving on the phone, stitting in box junctions etc...) leaving enforcement to a couple of cameras to save some money and generate revenue does not work.........

4

Douglas,

Bathgate 19/09/2007 11:30:55

There's only one word for it........shocking.
The overworked officers could have phoned me and I could have broken it to them in a gentler, more caring fashion. Has counselling been arranged to offset psychological trauma?

5

Mr Crisps,

Haddington 19/09/2007 11:33:09

#3, it wasn't a quote, it was something a journalist wrote.

6

mv,

19/09/2007 11:37:51

#5, thanks for the correction (?) it was a quote because I quoted it! You mean I cannot believe everything the EN Crime Reporter says is true!

7

abracadabra,

19/09/2007 11:55:53

When did david Milne become a Policeman?
I thought he was just another Fettes 9 till 5'er

8

GD,

I've heard it all now 19/09/2007 12:03:31

The only shock is that our police forces are out concentrating on this sort of garbage instead of tackling the real criminals in our midst.
All we have now are traffic wardens, there's no real cops anymore.

9

Jimmy Jam Tart,

19/09/2007 12:19:02

Back in 1999 I was caught not wearing a seatbelt and was given an on the spot fine. 2 months later I was involved in a high speed road crash on the A1 (as a passenger).

Without doubt the fine and subsequent enforcement of wearing a seatbelt saved my life.

It's not worth the risk, it onlt takes seconds to buckle up.

10

Freddy,

Edinburgh 19/09/2007 12:29:52

#8 - this is not garbage they are concentrating on. People who tend to disregard 'minor' aspects of the law are also those who are more likely to be involved in more serious crimes. We should have a ZERO tolerance of all crime and the police should be out and about more not shuffling forms.

11

Big G,

19/09/2007 12:35:32

"The police shocked" - they really should get out more.

12

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

Newington Family Advice Bureau 19/09/2007 12:47:56

We recommend that families don't clutter up their cars with child-restraints. Just put the kids in the boot, it's much tidier. It also promotes traffic safety because you can't hear them ask whether you're nearly there yet.

13

JG,

Fife 19/09/2007 12:50:36

#8 GD
This actually is not garbage. Have you ever seen a person's face after it's been through a car windscreen? I have and it's not pretty. And you don't even have to have a collision for it to be dangerous. You're driving down the road (observing the 30 m.p.h. limit) and a small child steps off the pavement. You hit the barkes and manage to stop before you hit the child - however, your front seat passenger (who didn't bother to belt up) keeps travelling at 30 m.p.h. and hits the front windscreen. NOW do you get it?

14

,

19/09/2007 12:52:06
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 978551, Article id was mapped to record!
15

Billy,

Germany 19/09/2007 12:54:52

If the police got out from behind their desks and on
to the streets they are supposed to keep safe, then
maybe they would not have been so shocked.

Headline : Police declare themselves shocked at how many drunks are on Scotland's streets on a
Saturday night.

16

GD,

I've heard it all now 19/09/2007 13:20:08

#10 Are you honestly trying to say that people guilty of traffic offences are the same ones causing major crimes in this country?
Don't get me wrong, I also believe in zero tolerance but let's get things in perspective here, the police should be out solving real crimes and arresting people whose pose a threat to the public instead of those who forget to indicate at a junction.
#12 Take a walk through Glasgow and you'll see more faces scarred by blades than car windscreens. What does that tell you?
Talk about rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic!

17

JG,

Fife 19/09/2007 14:03:25

#16 GD
Dinnae go to Glasgow?

18

Findlay Thompson,

19/09/2007 14:05:37

Whoooo is that so, so desirable female in the photo???

19

Cynical,

19/09/2007 14:20:30

More and more the police are trying to run the country instead of just letting the government and people get on with it.

It won't be long before we are a recognised police state instead of just an actual one.

20

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 19/09/2007 14:45:51

Seat belt laws?

Just another stick for plod to beat the public with and for the PC brigade to show who's boss.

These regulations weren't introduced to save lifes, just costs to the NHS. What a load of ballocks these laws are.

21

S153,

19/09/2007 14:47:42

#19,

Aye, its a wonder she can get the seatlbelt fastened roond her chest and muffin top, yum yum!!

22

rover,

19/09/2007 15:05:09

Mobile phone use has a higher rate of users than no-seat belt drivers.

23

Grumpy,

19/09/2007 15:58:33

How come taxi drivers are exempt? Let's face it, the taxi drivers are protected by a solid perspex shield - whereas "Private Hire" cars offer the drivers no protection at all.

Time the government made a simple rule - every driver and passenger must wear a seatbelt. No excuses - not even for the police who have vans in which to transport violent prisoners.

24

Dave From Barra,

Western Isles 19/09/2007 16:22:11

Correct me if I'm wrong but arn't you exempt from wearing a seat belt if your journey is less the 50m nowadays (used to 100m I think but changed this year).

25

GorgieRepublic,

19/09/2007 16:23:24

Great, could we have a crackdown on the dangerous numpties who talk on a handheld phone while driving through busy city streets too, please?

26

Hunky Dorey,

Glasgow 19/09/2007 16:38:31

#9 Why did you risk your own life by allowing yourself to be carried in a vehicle which was clearly breaking the speed limit? Have you heard of the words SLOW DOWN, OR LET ME OUT OF THIS CAR?

27

JG,

Fife 19/09/2007 16:49:23

#25 Dave
That's only if you are making deliveries. Not much point in fastening the seat belt if you're the parcel postie in a van stopping at most of the shops in the High Street, for example. The only time memebers of the public can drive without wearing a seat belt is if their manoeuvre involves reversing.

28

The Fly Fifer,

Fife 19/09/2007 16:59:21

#21 good news you are right ........... if you dont wear a seat belt your face will be stopped by the windscreen (even with deployment of the baggie) if you are really lucky the windscreen will break and your face will be distributed obver several feet of tarmac .............. more good news means your nearest and dearest cannot have an open casket funeral; ................... way man get real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

29

The Fly Fifer,

Fife 19/09/2007 17:03:23

As for the guy who was without seat belt and OVER THE LIMIT his child should be taken from him forever, he shows absolutely that he is an unfit person to be careing for a child. The childs mother should be held EQUALLY responsible, duty of care ......................

30

George F,

Michigan 19/09/2007 17:19:55

I've come to the conclusion some people are just dumb, over here every two or three months it's announced on television, radio and in the newspapers that Police Statewide will be cracking down on people not wearing seatbelts or drunk drivers. Despite the warning the always catch lots of people. The last crackdown was drunk drivers, I saw in the local paper last night they caught over 1100 Statewide in a week. Like it or not it's the law, break it and you take the consequences.

31

Toast,

19/09/2007 17:38:31

#1 totally agree I still see dozens of drivers everyday several driving 30ton lorries whilst using mobile phones.

32

wattie>x 1,

19/09/2007 20:00:56

Full marks to our police for their quick observance in catching these individuals who after all, only care about themselves.
I agree with many of those who demand the same fast detection of the mobile phone louts who can be seen everywhere, from the motorways to ordinary back street roads. More power and support to our police. Show these reckless idiots no mercy when nabbed.

33

Jock MacSprog,

19/09/2007 20:18:08

its called personal freedom. I challenge anyone to tell me how me not wearing a seatbelt effects anyone else ? Its just another way to raise revenue. The police always prefer to go after easy targets and avoid confrontation. They would much rather be ticketing housewives who dont wear seatbelts than confronting neds, junkies and drunks who do ruin the quality of OTHER peoples lives. The regularly decide to ignore the enforcing of other laws, ie Prostitution and pot smoking so why not seatbelt wearing ? Its victimless.

34

Isabel,

19/09/2007 20:23:18

All driving without seat belts fastened needs to be discouraged in whatever way is most effective. Same with the use of mobile phones - however did some of you live without them? All actions that could be responsible for causing danger must be stamped out.

35

is it me?,

Edinburgh 19/09/2007 20:52:07

#37
Your comment is not worth commenting on.

But I will anyway,

What about your passengers ?
What about the people who have to pick up the fragments of your tiny brain from the windscreen ?
What about the person who has to tell your next of kin you're mince ? ( not that they didn't know that already ).
Or the people who have to look after you for the rest of your life if you survive in a vegetative state ?

I'm no apologist for the Police, but they'd have more time to concentrate on the other issues you raise if it wasn't for your self centred irresponsible claim to your right to "personal freedom"
It's not "personal". It impinges on us all.
"No man is an island".

36

read the story,

around and about 19/09/2007 21:02:18

I thought it was kind of clear from the story that the whole purpose of the exercise was to re-educate drivers into wearing their seatbelts, thereby saving both the lives of not only the driver but the vehicle occupants.

But as usual everyone is an expert in other peoples field of experience.

Wear your seatbelt and you are covered by your insurance, don't and your payout is cut, wear it you get a few bruises , don't you die....mmmm now which shall we choose????

Figures figures and more figures are the driving force behind such campaigns, the main driving force being a reduction in casualties, each to their own...............

Does anyone have the address for fettes so that I may send in some Camomile tea to calm the poor dears?

37

ward,

...new soviet republic of scotland 19/09/2007 21:07:49

Lets make the uk more of a police state,does everyone need the plod to keep them in line.

38

Culandun,

USA 19/09/2007 21:16:15

As someone who in the late 1960's had to pick up the pieces (literally) after road traffic accidents I heartily endorse the police view. Too many lives have been cut tragically short or damaged by failure to take what is a very basic safety measure. Here in the US they're very much more lenient with accordingly higher death rates. The supreme stupidity I see over here is that motor cyclists are not required to wear crash helmets; or for that matter any other protective clothing, and though it may be great to ride your Harley with the wind blowing through your hair, having the wind distibute your brains after you've hit something hard is surely to be avoided.

39

Smallgrey,

19/09/2007 21:30:42

#37 Jack
If you think doing traffic stops is non-confrontational you're mistaken. People are rude and take out their frustration for their wrongdoing on the officer rather than accept some personal responsibility.

40

Davemmmm,

Edinboorg 19/09/2007 21:40:28

#21 - 'wasn't introduced to save lives, just costs to the NHS' - so you're admitting that not wearing a seatbelt incurs greater injuries (if not necessarilly fatal) and you think an initiative to reduce that risk is a BAD thing? wow...
Besides, on the subject of catching criminals, one could easily argue that by acting in a neglient manner and placing excessive costs of a publicly (i.e. from the ever so hefty chunk that gets taken off my pay packet!) funded service, it is equally in the public interest in purely financial terms, as say, a burglary... I have no idea how much the cost of major surgery comes to, but it's got to be at least equal to the cost of a wide screen plasma TV plus a few DVD's...!

41

P.C Murdoch,

19/09/2007 22:00:50

#37.
Not wearing a seat belt effects more people than than you think; 1. The paramedic who has to scape you off the road to get you into the ambulance.
2. The A&E team who have to try and reassemle you and, if that fails..........

3. The copper who has to go round to your house and say "Mrs MacSprog I have some very sad news for you.

42

P.C Murdoch,

19/09/2007 22:09:01

#45.
Well said Davemmmm.
A fatal accident scene requires the presence of at least 5 police officers for around 6 hours.
So the argument that we should be spending our time catching "real" criminals is realy a non starter.

43

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 20/09/2007 09:30:05

#21 Moscow Central - Please go back to Russia as you are obviously a communist.

#31, #39 etc (Seat belt 'Supporters')

This 'law' should never have been passed, the wearing of seat belts should be optional. If I remember correctly, the plonker (Labour Party MP I think) who raised this as a private members bill just kept pushing it and pushing it until eventually it was accepted. There was never really any proper opposition in Westminster as the House of Lords kept rejecting it (so #21 et al, they must all be fools also).

Personally, I would wear a belt on motorways and would always secure my children, but I believe (as do many other posters) that we should be allowed to exercise our own discretion at other times.

Funny how unnecessarily offensive some of you can be if someone expresses a view opposite to yours.

Whilst we are on the subject of clampdowns, when is plod the magnificent going to conduct a blitz on pavement cyclists, a habit as dangerous and certainly as illegal as not choosing not to wear a seat belt.

By the way, I caught a taxi last night, didn't use a belt, neither did the driver (how sad and how nice to break this petty regulation!!).

44

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 20/09/2007 13:51:48

#51 Moscow "Why don't you take up base jumping?"

Do you need to wear a seat belt if you do that?

No, I'm about to start pavement cycling (just to boost the adrenalin don't you know). That'll be a real thrill and plod won't do anything about it (afterall, you don't need to belt-up for that).

45

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 20/09/2007 14:19:43

#51 (and all supporters of seat belts).

The really interesting fact from this article is that nearly 400 unfortunates were fined, which makes me wonder how many more weren't picked up. Basically this indicates that a very high proportion of drivers and passengers do not like (and indeed don't use) seat belts.

My own view is that the use of seat belts should have been left as an option. This is the kind of legislation which just gets many peoples' backs up and many just ignore it (as the report shows).

46

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 20/09/2007 18:47:30

#54 Moscow Meal

Your penchant for manners seems to match your penchant for democracy and freedom of choice (or more likely the lack of both).

Cheers

47

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 20/09/2007 18:55:34

#54 Moscow

When do you think we can expect to see a police clampdown on pavement cyclists?

The behaviour of these people is often highly dangerous. Or have they been given the green nod to carry on as they please?

48

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 21/09/2007 09:22:23

#57 Moscow

How predictable!! You haven't disappointed me.

I couldn't wait to see the quality and depth of your profound reply, unfortunately it was as suspected.

Never mind "further exchanges" back to the Kremlin. Stalin must have overlooked you during his last purge.

Keep wearing your seatbelt and continue with the tablets.

"an unrestrained human body is a potentially lethal weapon" Just like your mind it would seem.

Are you a retired/by-passed police person by the way?


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.