View Full Version : Govt. approve MORE speed cameras. Impressed?
Money raiser or safety aid?
How many of these new safety cameras will be placed outside schools and how many on National Speed limit straight dual carriageway, that's what I want to know?
What is this fcuking government playing at. Everything they do now seems to be designed to piss off the average voter :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
I can understand it when a camera is put at an accident blackspot as a safety measure but most cameras seem to be positioned based purely on the amount of speeders they will catch.
Originally posted by Blue
most cameras seem to be positioned based purely on the amount of speeders they will catch.
And the point you're trying to make is ?
Originally posted by JB
And the point you're trying to make is ?
What I mean is that most cameras are positioned purely for financial gain rather than for safety reasons
Respect for speed limits falls even further down the pan.......
I'm sure there will be extra resources available to enforce this:rolleyes:
Was talking to Jim Potter about St Andrews Avenue in Colchester yesterday. He mentioned something about them turning it into a dual carriageway. First thing I said was ....
"They'll make it a 40 limit and put cameras in both directions"
They won't put them there to stop accidents, it'll be because they KNOW people will speed and they can raise some more cash! :mad:
Dave
Coming to work yesterday morning a copper was just setting up a speed trap - excuse me, a mobile safety camera, on the B4100.
Quick quiz. Was he :
A) setting it up on a straight bit of road, with good visibility where there has never been a crash ( AFAIK ) in around 6 years. Some people ( not me, never, honest ) do 70 - 80 mph in relative safety ( assuming safe conditions etc ).
B) setting it up near to M40 J12 where there is a crash about every 2 weeks because of people being 'king stupid ( not always speeding though )
And now the government claim that speed cameras have reduced crashes by 35% where they're installed. FFS - they only have in place where people don't crash ( DC's, straight's on A roads etc ). I guess 35% of feck-all is still feck-all.
"Lies, damn lies & statistics"
Rant over
Iain
Martin T
11-02-2003, 07:01
I think some of the cameras before this 14k speed cameras bollox stealkth tax was thought up by the gov't were actually to improve road safety. There's one where a lot of kids collect when school finishes in lexden road, and one on southway (which imho is for safety) but then there's another 5 revenue raisers around town. This government and the people that decide where to put them are all total to$$ers.
Just looking at the news on teletext where it mentions that on one Camera pilot scheme in Essex, deaths and serious injury within a 500m range of the camera's actually rose by 15%
Originally posted by Blue
What I mean is that most cameras are positioned purely for financial gain rather than for safety reasons
No, surely not.
This is the kind of cynical attitude that has unfairly brought the govenment and police into disrepute with the motorist. Cameras are only ever used where absolutely necessary to ensure that the majority of law abiding drivers who NEVER exceeed the speed limit are protected from you others who regularly speed on deserted country roads and motorways and put our lives at risk.
It's about time we took these speeding issues seriously. Speeding is a criminal act and those caught speeding (whether they are doing 90mph through a busy town centre on market day, or 71 mph on a empty dry motorway) should be locked up to protect the rest of us.
A minimum sentence of 5 years (without possiblilty of parole) should be imposed here. To those who argue that our gaols are already overcrowded I say this. Don't be so negative, space can always be found by releasing rapists, muggers, drunk drivers etc (ie, those who do no real harm to society) to make way for the vicious speeder.
Originally posted by Blue
Just looking at the news on teletext where it mentions that on one Camera pilot scheme in Essex, deaths and serious injury within a 500m range of the camera's actually rose by 15%
Yeah, this is Essex, that was prolly the camera installation men getting the sh!t kicked out of them :D
Dave
Originally posted by JB
No, surely not.
This is the kind of cynical attitude that has unfairly brought the govenment and police into disrepute with the motorist. Cameras are only ever used where absolutely necessary to ensure that the majority of law abiding drivers who NEVER exceeed the speed limit are protected from you others who regularly speed on deserted country roads and motorways and put our lives at risk.
It's about time we took these speeding issues seriously. Speeding is a criminal act and those caught speeding (whether they are doing 90mph through a busy town centre on market day, or 71 mph on a empty dry motorway) should be locked up to protect the rest of us.
A minimum sentence of 5 years (without possiblilty of parole) should be imposed here. To those who argue that our gaols are already overcrowded I say this. Don't be so negative, space can always be found by releasing rapists, muggers, drunk drivers etc (ie, those who do no real harm to society) to make way for the vicious speeder.
LMAO :D :D :D :D :D :D
Best bit, is that you managed to post this without any ";)" smilies or anything :D
Dave
SteveCarter200
11-02-2003, 11:32
Originally posted by Dave_S
Was talking to Jim Potter about St Andrews Avenue in Colchester yesterday. He mentioned something about them turning it into a dual carriageway. First thing I said was ....
"They'll make it a 40 limit and put cameras in both directions"
They won't put them there to stop accidents, it'll be because they KNOW people will speed and they can raise some more cash! :mad:
Dave
Are they really making it a dual carriageway? WTF for? Theres never traffic jams and its only a mile long. Fukcin idiotic council.
By the way, its a 40 limit now, apparently.;)
I would really like to invest in a 12" disc cutter and go to work on these poxy bastid cameras.:mad:
LOL, yeah I know it's a 40 limit moment at the moment (for most of us ;) ) but I mean they'll keep it as a 40.
I don't know whether this is definate. It does seem a bit daft. That road isnt the problem, it's the fcuking roundabouts at either end that jam up!!!!
Dave
mambastu
11-02-2003, 11:44
Originally posted by SteveCarter200
I would really like to invest in a 12" disc cutter and go to work on these poxy bastid cameras.:mad:
Yes its about time people started destroying them, I'm surprised theres not an underground movement dealing with these things.
Outside schools fair enough, 70mph dual carriageways - ridiculous.
On the BBC website they've got a story about a motorist in South Wales being sucessfully prosecuted for having a laser jammer on their car :rolleyes:
These cameras cost >£2k to install, (i think...) so why would they put them in accident prone areas?
E.G. a tight bend near me, where people have loads of accidents, 99.9% of the drivers who go round it crawl round, the 0.01% that dont usually crash. We are talking about 4 crashes a year.....so about 4 speeding tickets........see where this goes.
WHEREAS...........
Put a camera on a nice sraight piece of road, like the nice one at the top of the bath bypass, on a duel carrage way, on a hill, in a 50, and you get lots of tickets, never been an accident, but shead loads of fast people! - pays for the camera! (notice there arn't any cameras going up the hill!)
So, putting them in accident spots is not economical.....and as everything in this country to do with government/police is money dependent......they wont do it!
Thats what i rekon anyway.:D :mad:
ps, there is an underground movement against these things! cant remember the name, but there really is an anti-camera sociaty type thing!
(land of the free - bet iraq doesnt have speed cameras!)
Originally posted by mambastu
Yes its about time people started destroying them, I'm surprised theres not an underground movement dealing with these things.
Looks like i will have to get my can of underseal spray out again then....
David_S14
11-02-2003, 16:00
Originally posted by Clong
Looks like i will have to get my can of underseal spray out again then....
I've got a couple of old tyres and a can of expanding foam ;) :D
amcluesent
11-02-2003, 17:51
>but there really is an anti-camera sociaty type thing<
"A £2,000 reward has been offered after a bomb destroyed a speed camera. "
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2747707.stm
Hope it's not just Al Qaeda practicing:(
Papa Lazarou
12-02-2003, 01:13
Originally posted by amcluesent
>but there really is an anti-camera sociaty type thing<
"A £2,000 reward has been offered after a bomb destroyed a speed camera. "
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2747707.stm
Hope it's not just Al Qaeda practicing:(
Perhaps a bit excessive. Whoever did it probably risks being arrested under the prevention of terrorism act, however well meaning they were.
Someone did torch one locally though, allegedly. Apparently chucking a tyre over them then dousing them in petrol does the job as it gets hot enough to melt the innards '^.^'/^
"In a recent poll 100% of nissan 200SX owners thought that new cameras will be used exclusively for revenue generation."
I think th epetrol powered angle grinder is the best bet, albeit somewhat noisy!
Covering the lens, either paint/underseal, or by sanding it so it's opaque would all be just as good - only nobody would be able to tell if it was still fooked!
Can't someone just find out who fixes/repairs the damn things.. and we could sent the boys round to realign their thinking???
If you ask me the damn things are a menace - not safe at all if you crash into them! And the mobile vans are NOT for safety... OR THEY WOULD LET YOU KNOW THEY WERE F*CKING WELL THERE, SO YOU COULD SLOW DOWN !!!! :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
Where's the 'safety' in catching speeders, rather than making them slow down?
Originally posted by JackaL
If you ask me the damn things are a menace - not safe at all if you crash into them! And the mobile vans are NOT for safety... OR THEY WOULD LET YOU KNOW THEY WERE F*CKING WELL THERE, SO YOU COULD SLOW DOWN !!!! :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
Where's the 'safety' in catching speeders, rather than making them slow down?
Well, what a negative attitude to have!
Are you suggesting tha this is one big con? I'm shocked.......:rolleyes:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.9 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.