Sonic_Danny

standing on a Motorway bridge holding what looks like a speed camera, could i have been done for speeding???

urban

iTrader: (1)

If you were travelling faster than 70 Mph, then Yes, you probably will

Shaun

Sonic_Danny

Any idea how close i would have to have been?

ie i slammed on the anchors as soon as i spotted them!

Richard Askew

..on a motorway? clever!

Sonic_Danny

Any empty one!

Richard Askew

An empty motorway? Quick show me where!! Do they exisit

Sonic_Danny

Trust me nothing was anywhere near me - I mean what car would keep up with the P1 on boost

Cider boy

You have 14 days for the Police to send you an NIP, if you have not received one after this period (14 days plus a day or two for the post) then you have got away with it!

Cheers,

Matt.

Sonic_Danny

Thanks Matt, so 14 days of sweating!

Sonic_Danny

Never heard of someone being done by a hand held camera, and the ones that i know have was pulled over their and then!

BexTait

There have been some on the M6 in Lancashire (around Preston IIRC) where they park a van on a bridge and get the cars from there, they are the ones that take pics so you only know when you get the letter through the post.
Bex

Jay_bee

iTrader: (1)

Eh???? Handheld camera... do you mean a Max Spielmann disposeable?

Otherwise, where have you been living for the past decade or so... never heard of speedtraps? Strange How long you been driving??


I doubt they would have been able to bunnyhop off the bridge in the van/car tho....

Id wait and see what does/doesnt arrive in the post.

BTW... dont take it serious, its Friday so Im just being giddy

J

cactus jim

what a really stupid thread, i bet the owners of this site are so glad that they invest time and money so people can post **** like this......

will there be a barrage of the holier than thou brigade slating this guy for speeding? is it any wonder?

judgejules

Could you be a bit more descriptive mate?

A speed "camera" is a chuffin large yellow box, so I doubt there was a copper standing there holding one of these up as they're usually on a pole somewhere hidden

Was it infact a lone copper standing on a bridge with a speed "gun" and no vehicles in sight? or was it a copper in a van/car looking out at you?

Depending on how you describe it helps us figure out what technology they were using, and wether they've got something that will take your picture or wether they were just checking the speed of people to inform a hidden car further down the road.

J

Sonic_Danny

Sonic_Danny

It was a copper standing on a bridge holding what looked like a speed gun and the only vehicle in sight was his police car next to him

judgejules

Then you "should" be fine. There are speed guns that record all things viewed to tape for later use (probably not if they're outside the car). But I would think they're just radioing ahead, calibrating (waiting for a colleague to follow up behind you) or having a laugh

Good luck

Jules

Sonic_Danny

Fingers crossed then!

reno

I have been told that handheld speed gun cannot be used prove u were speeding.
It has to be on a tripod or fixed as hand movement can invalidate the reading.
so i would say you will be o.k.
BUT DON'T QUOTE ME ON THAT!
good luck
Reno

hedgehog

Many modern tax collecting devices are connected to a video system of some sort and the video evidence may be processed later to produce the NIP. Ranges of up to 1km are claimed and i've seen video evidence that has certainly been shot at extremely long range, if not perhaps 1km.

The police have 14 days to issue the NIP. You do not have to receive it within 14 days as an allowance is made for the time taken in the post. Escapes due to the 14 day rule are very, very rare indeed as there are other allowances to cover mistakes etc.

You can not claim you didn't get the NIP as the law states that if the police said they posted it then you got it. No matter that 14 million items of mail go missing every year. Fact it that it is someones job to say that they posted your NIP on time, there is no way they are going to make themselves redundant by standing up in court and saying that they didn't bother.

The unsigned loophole has been closed but there seem to be several options still open to those wanting to defend their case. the pepipoo web site is a good place to start as their demands for complete disclosure of the evidence seem to be making many police forces very unhappy and many are just withdrawing charges.

cdco

Sonic,

cdco

Sonic, could ahve some bad news for u... there is regularly a copper on one of the bridges on the M61 near chorley with a portable hand held laser and camera unit... sort of a hand held version of the units that put in the vans and galaxies. If it is the laser unit he probably saw u and measured u before u hit the anchors. Hope your nails are long cos its going to be a difficult few days.. Sorry for the bad news.

Carl

D Noble

a couple of weeks ago i clocked a total of 5 camera vans between ayr and newcastle and back(all were in englandshire), 3 of them were on bridges,and you couldnt see what they were untill the last minute as they were using the side door,with the door open obscuring any "safety camera" logos, sneaky or what!

regards
dave

hedgehog

Ah yes, "safety cameras." Great name. Lie and a fabrication. Essex is currently the county with the most "safety cameras" and has seen deaths rise from 87 to 116 from 2002 to 2003. Interesingly their local camera partnership are claiming that the cameras are a huge success and have resulted in a 21% reduction in accidents at camera sites.

The reason they can make such claims for the cameras is a statistical event called "regression to the mean." Basically this means that you find a quiet road that rarely has seen an accident but where, in a freak event, a bus drove off the road killing 12 people last week. You put a camera up at this site and wait for a year. During this year the chances of another bus going off the road at this exact spot are next to zero. You then appear in the press claiming that your camera is an amazing device that is saving lives. In truth placing a garden gnome by the road would have exactly the same local statistical effect, accidents would plumet to zero, but it would have the advantage of not increasing deaths at 200 yards from it's location.

The fact that deaths over the whole area are on the increase, mostly because idiot drivers now believe that if they are within the speed limit they are safe, is something the partnerships never mention. There is also some interesting research which shows that when a camera is placed at a junction in the 8 seconds it takes an average driver to pass through the junction they may spend up to 5 seconds examining their speedo. That's like going on a 30 mile journey but keeping your eyes shut for 15 miles.

Hardly any surprise then that safety cameras are killing people on the roads. With this in mind be sure to make your feelings known to any politician who might drop by your door in the run up to the elections. Remember local councilors, magistrates and the police actually benefit financially from the cash they extract from you while they increase your chances of being killed on the roads. They are literally taking cash to kill you.

Petem95

Thats exactly why its so dangerous having speed traps on motorways - one of the main causes of motorway accidents is sudden braking, and what does everyone do when they spot a revenue camera van on a bridge?.. Carry on at 90 or slam on the brakes? I'll go for the latter.

Glenn_R

QUOTE - You have 14 days for the Police to send you an NIP, if you have not received one after this period (14 days plus a day or two for the post) then you have got away with it!


Does that mean we got away with the drive back from Hunstanton then

Alan C

Hedgehog.. Nice piece mate..

One extra thing...it is also becoming knowledge that out of built up areas with no cameras, people now tend to speed more because they feel that there won't be a copper with a mobile unit ready to get them, especially with the pre-conception that there are less coppers around to do traffic duty as they are relying on fixed cameras so much... fixed cameras are leading drivers into a false sense of security..

So you are correct in some of your assumption.. Penalties raised from cameras are indeed prefarable to preventing them (and the related deaths) in a wider context..