Nixon

Over the past few weeks the Dorset Safety Camera Partnership have been stepping up a gear on the war against the speeding motorist, as a result of them now placing cameras in dangerous/hazerdous locations with there vans stradeling double white lines and dual carridgeway in a effort to prosecute drivers I decided to invest in a Snooper S6-RLD (combined GPS, laser & radar detector) at the weekend.

So fits to car over the course of Saturday, mounting the detector behind the front grille etc and the display mounted centre of the dashboard.... driving into work this morning it displays 'mobile safety camera', a moment later as I turn a long left hand sweeping bend there he is sat on an island, slowed from about 78 tops down to 65 and cruised thru' - had a chuckle to myslef thinking that I just saved my bacon just for the camera operator to pull a 35mm of digital camera out his pocket and take a picture of the back of my motor???

What the heck is that all about, surely even if he did see me slow from 78, they can't do knowt without evidance, i.e. more than a polaroid?

theotherphil

Maybe he liked the look of your car but needed to convince the missus with some pics

pbee

if you belive all the hype

he may of seen your detector and taken a picture as evidence so when they make them illegal to carry in your car they will come and arrest you for having one fitted.

G00ner

"Dorset Safety Camera Partnership"

They make me sick, they nick all the honest drivers making their way to and from work and yet are nowhere to be seen at night when the chavs are racing around in Nova's etc.

I must see their 'safety' vans about once or twice a week and yet have never seen one outside a school/nursery/hospital/playground etc.

I jumped out of my car once to 'have a word' with an unattended camera, walked up to it, pick axe handle in hand, only to see the filth parked around the corner out of sight...! I made a quick exit.

Leslie

The Dorset bunch did say that they were going to have a purge on speeders, and obviously they are doing what they said they would.

My friend got done for 79 in a 70 recently in Dorset, so I suppose that the only defence is to be pretty careful driving in that county.

Les

Cupramax

Yes, another one here sick of the slimey tatics used by DSCP. I have noticed that after a complaint to our MP they've stopped hiding the camera van now. I regularly see them on the Holes Bay road on my way into Poole every day. This months roads to watch are...

A338 Spur Road, Bournemouth

A31 Ringwood Road, St Leonnards

B3073 Christchurch Road, West Parley

Petersfield Road, Bournemouth

Poole Road, Upton

Old Wareham Road, Poole

A35 Whole length

A37 Whole length

A30 Babylon Hill

A354 Dorchester Road, Whole Length



Community concern/speed complaint areas:



B3081 Verwood

B3347 Winkton

A3049 Bournemouth

A35 Tolpuddle Bypass

A352 Owermoigne

A352 Charminster

A352 Longburton

A354 Winterborne Whitechurch

Parkstone, Poole

Kinson, Poole

Branksome Park, Poole

Gillingham

DBY

I have no problem with Cameras outside schools hospitals ect and in built up areas, However the DSP are a devious bunch and not to be trusted with some of their locations and positioning. Still you can make your voice heard as they have a web site where you can fill in an on line questionaire about your views to their activity. The only people to give there views on this site are from the courts and local coucil & police, a very one sided point of view, shame they don't give us motorists are chance to put our concerns across about their activities.

John

pslewis

If you stuck to the Speed Limit then no-one would have to worry - the difference between 30 and 36 is minimal ...... so, why bother speeding?

I am CONVINCED now that the speeders on here see it as a challenge to beat the cameras ..... its got NOWT to do with speed has it??!!

The picture was taken as he saw your detector - ready to visit you from 1st April 2005 when they are illegal!

Pete

Jerome

How the **** can Dorset have a purge?!!! About 10 years ago, Dorset were leading a purge on speeders - they said they wanted to make speeding as anti-social as drink driving and pioneer an Nationwide anti-speeding campaign. They even put up signs boasting that they were getting 500 drivers a week. I'm amazed anyone in Dorset still has a licence.

They are already one of the worst places in the UK for speed cameras and snidely placed speed traps. When I lived in Corfe Mullen and Wimborne, I used to save people points every day, because I knew where the speed traps were. I also experienced some atrocious driving/road rage because impatient drivers couldn't understand why I was crawling along.

I couldn't wait to move away from Dorset. Tourists to the area should boycott the place. Maybe then the rabid powers that be will see sense.

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

You won't be arrested. Currently, you are perfectly entitled to have it- you've done nothing wrong. As for the picture, I don't thing a photo from a conventional camera is admissable as evidence. When they introduce the new law it is highly probable that there will be time for manufactures of GPS systems with integrated lazer/radar detection to produce a downloadable patch which will disable the detection facility, but retain the GPS based warnings (which will remain perfectly legal). Whether you choose to download it will be up to you of course.....but I'm guessing that they'll devise some on-road test to establish whether whether de-activation has occurred. The situation wil probably end up being very similar to the target LC100 lazer jammer. They're illegal (at leasr if you don't have an automated garage door), but thanks to the proliferation of Gatsos etc.. there are less patrols to enforce this aspect of the law (own goal anyone?)

Regards.

Jap2Scrap

You miss the point every time don't you.

If there's minimal difference between 30 and 36 why is it so dangerous to be doing 36 or even 32 for that point? Who here watches their speedo all the time to ensure they are doing 30 and not 32? I do when I'm nearing camera sites. I might only have to trim off 1 or 2 mph to be certain I'm safe but if the camera was hidden I wouldn't have a chance to do that and those 1 or 2 mph would make me a menace on the roads

You're either deliberately trying to get a rise out of people or you really are as **** as you come across. Either way you're a sad act and one big advertisement for involuntary euthanasia.

pslewis

Tourists will flock to Dorset .... why? well, (in the future) everyone drives at sensible speeds, are courteous and the **** have been removed from the road ......

What a pleasant county to live in!

Pete

pslewis

The FACT remains that the limit is 30 in your example ...... just stick to it (you say you 'only' have to shave 1 or 2 MPH off your speed) - so, just drive 2 MPH slower all the time.

We can debate whether the speed limits are correct .... but thats a DIFFERENT argument

Now, I am saying stick to the speed limits - you, on the other hand, are saying that its unfair to fine speeders ............. I would ask you to reflect and then come back and say who is actually in control of their faculties

I would suggest that I am the voice of reason in a sea of speed fuelled madness ......... hardly a troll!

Its simple isn't it?? Don't speed - Don't get a fine!! What part of that is your mind struggling with??

Pete

Jerome

Trouble is Pete, tourists - even doddery old ones - are the people most likely to be caught now, because they don't know where the traps are. Even the blue rinse brigade are accumulating points now. I knew of one old lady in her 70's that had accumulated 6 points for speeding in her 1.0 Metro. Hardly one of the "****" you had in mind...

And since when did sensible speeds mean within the speed limit?

pslewis

Theres no need to know where the cameras are if you stick to the limit is all I'm saying!

And the woman in her 70s has probably been speeding ALL her life!! about time she was caught and done!

Are you suggesting that us oldies can speed because it 'really' doesn't matter!!??

I would say that a 70 year old speeder is more dangerous than a younger speeder!?

Pete

Jerome

I'm certainly not suggesting that oldies should have impunity to speed. All I'm saying is the traps are not getting just boy racers anymore. They are getting everyone - even those traditionally thought to be amongst the safest groups of drivers.

At least one of the times this 70 year old was caught was on the road between Corfe Mullen and Parkstone. It has a very steep valley and it is difficult to maintain the 30 limit (at the time recently reduced from 50). A local copper justified the trap because of the nearby school. Thing was, the school was at the top of one side of the valley and most people had slowed right down by the time they got there. Where was the trap placed? At the bottom of the valley, haf a mile away from the school, of course. Incidently, the pavement was up a steep bank behind a row of trees - so no chance of careering off the road and into a pedestrian.

I agree with you that an elderly speeder is potentially more dangerous than a younger speeder though. But only at speeds well in excess of the limit, not 1 or 2 mph over.

jono300

iTrader: (8)

***********


Just wonder mate how your detector managed to pick up the scatter from the laser camera if the car was as you say around a long sweeping bend, thought that laser cameras output being so sharp would have had very little chance off being detected by your laser sensor at that range ??

and if the camera op had the laser gun set on your car enough for your detector to have picked the signal up well enough, has he possibly caught you before you had a chance to slow down ???

just a thought ??!!

MJW

The S6-R will not have picked up the laser scatter - the location of the mobile camera site is in the GPS database. The detector would've bleeped had the van been there or not.
Speaking from personal experience, the laser detector on the S6-R is neither use nor ornament.

Nixon

Geeze, alot of pissed off folk about the DSCP! Crazy really, the other day there van was parked at the side of a road half on the kerb and accross double white lines! - thats double standards of the extreme.

It also happens that I come into work mostly before 7am and travel back after 7pm - I have not ONCE seen a camera in operation outwith these hours, however say 5 out of 10 times when I have been an hour earlier/later there has been a mobile trap or emissions test - happens to be within peak hours?

I don't want a lecture about speeding, but I do not have a pop at people driving at 80mph on dual carridgeway, there are far more dangerous things to concern ourselves with such us disqualified drivers, poor vehicle maintenance, no insurance, no Mot/Tax and those who blatently can't drive.

Nixon

Sorry forgot to mention, it was a tripod mounted mini Gatso, so rader operated not laser

DBY

Dorset is one of only two counties operating the road side mini gatso's, but as I understand help in dealing with these things is on the way. At present my front and rear LRC 100's and Snooper do not deal with these, driving in Dorset is a very stressfull experience now as those that live here no only to well.

Jap2Scrap

Once again you choose to ignore/misinterpret what is said to you and post something inflammatory instead. I simply state that the difference between a safe driver and a reckless driver isn't 2mph. I have no problem checking my speed and adjusting 1 or 2mph if necessary but I don't constantly check my speedo, that's ridiculous. In built up areas or areas where cameras are prevalent I may spend more time checking that I'm under the 30 rather than on it or 1mph over it but to suggest someone should drive at say 25mph to be on the safe side is daft. So my point is valid. If cameras are hidden or extremely discreet and in inappropriate positions then yes, they would catch people doing 32mph, myself included, but these people are hardly the menace to society and child killers you would paint them to be.

antera309

The way I understand it, Mini-GATSOs work in the same way as the GATSO, i.e. you drive past it and it takes a picture of the back of your car. They can't zap oncoming traffic from 2km away like laser traps can.

Since you have to be exceeding the limit while moving AWAY from a van that you should have already seen, there should be no excuse for a camera-aware driver to get caught by one of these.

pslewis, are you just playing devil's advocate, or do you really believe in what you say? Everyone knows that speed isn't the major causation factor in Road Traffic Accidents. If it were, then Motorways would be the most dangerous roads, when in fact they are the safest.

Even in accidents that do involve speeds above the limit, there are usually other factors involved.

We all want safer roads, but excessive use of speed cameras is not the way to get them. Recent accident statistics bear this out, with Dorset (whose Council has been speed camera barmy for years) actually suffering INCREASING accident rates at present:

http://www.abd.org.uk/local/dorset.htm

pslewis

I do play devils advocate on many occassions when a debate needs the opposing view for balance - but, I get fed up to the back teeth about people bleeting on about how their speeding is in some way, OK!!??

It is NOT OK, has NEVER been OK and will remain NOT OK for a long time in the future. Yes, I have broken the speed limits, yes, I have been in court many times for different things ......... one thing I have NEVER done is cry like a frigging baby when its been a 'Fair Cop'!!

If you speed and get caught, then take it like a man and not like some dummy spitting baby!!

And my central point remains intact, if you do NOT want a fine, then do NOT speed! Its so simple its painful, but the chavs on here just don't seem to get it into their Burberry covered skulls!!

Pete

Sith

Nobody is crying like a baby. Nixon admitted he was speeding but wanted to know why a personal camera was used to record his car.

Most people admit if they were speeding then do the time.

What most people here complain about is the over rigourous enforcement of speed when the are many vehicles on the roads with defects that are far more dangerous than going a few mph over the limit. Another thing thing that upsets people is when the limits are artificially low.

You prefer to inflame situations by babbling on about limits. In alot of situations limits are safe to exceed. Just in some places they're not. People don't have problems with that. It's where they are blatantly revenue raising.

Instead of inflaming or being a critic, try giving some useful advice. People don't want you banging on or preaching.

antera309

Agreed with points made, pslewis. You have to have speed limits, and they have to be enforced otherwise they're pointless. If you choose to exceed speed limits (even unreasonable ones) then you have to accept the risks that go with it.

But the system used to set and enforce these limits has got into a terrible mess in recent years. All the current system seems to have achieved is a new-found contempt for the law.

Nixon, I'm a regular on various road policy forums, but this is the first time I've heard of a scamera operator pulling out a 35mm and photographing a car that way. I can only guess as to why he did this.

Assuming it was just a normal camera, there is no way that the picture could be used as evidence in a speeding conviction anyway. Gatsos take two photographs, .5 seconds apart, and the disance your car travels in that time (measured against fixed markers, usually lines painted on the road) is used to calculate your speed. The equipment is automated and precisely calibrated. There is no way this process could be duplicated with a normal camera, no matter how skilled the operator was.

Jerome

Something that many people forget, in the rush to condemn or condone speeding, is that every road has a 85 percentile speed, regardless of the posted limit. This is the speed that 85% of drivers go down a particular road at, in the prevaling conditions. It is normally the safe speed for the road in question in the prevaling conditions. At any given time, the 85 percentile speed may be above or below the posted limit. For example, most people slow down in thick fog, or when driving past a school at home time. Conversely, people speed up when the conditions allow.

In the good old days - before revenue generating cameras and speed traps - a traffic officer had the option of using discretion. Obviously that has all now changed.

I think most people on this board would agree that, when it comes to speeding, catching the people going above the 85 percentile limit should be the priority. Unfortunately, with the advent of revenue generating policies, this is no longer the case.

If a child is knocked down outside a school at home time by a driver going at 29mph (in a 30 limit), should the driver accept any responsibility, in the eyes of the law, for going too fast for the conditions?

r32

Sadly tourism in North Wales has drastically reduced and some people are finding it hard to make a living due to the persecution of motorists.

I am not saying that these motorists are not breaking the law or that its acceptable, but on one hand its affecting the life of people who rely on tourism for their livliehood and N Wales has the lowest crime resolution rate in the country...... highest percentage of people (home ownwers, tax payers)when asked fear burglary more than anything else.
It is said that if you are a burglar in N Wales and dont speed there is no chance of being caught. But the fact remains, this kind of activity reduces visitors rather than increases them.

Nixon

This certinaly has been a hot debate! Thinking more about it yesterday evening there was a good chance they had just set the trap up and he was recording it on film to file away with his paperwork, quite possible it was nothing to do with my car... furthermore, yes my spedo was indicating 80 but the GPS about 75 I find it very hard to beleave any camera operator can judge that sort of excessive speed amongst other road users in time to prep his camera for a snap!

I most certinaly don't have a problem with being caught for speeding, the one and only time was by cops parked up behind a row of trees with a Vascar system (point to point over 1/4 mile), in this particular instance it was a Sunday afternoon in Scotland (where I used to live) and I was driving the daily commute like I had for the past 4 years down 50 miles of A road into Edinburgh, mostly national speed limit. Now nowing the road I sat extremly patiently behind a group of motorists (safe ones at that) travelling at less than 40mph ready for the one and only safe stretch to overtake, which I did incidently accross a Vascar zone excellerating from 40 to about 85 and back to 60 before crossing the white spot and I still get busted for doing an average of 80mph!? Now I did accept it, as yes technicaly I had been speeding, but only whilst overtaking.... is the law no overtaking or only if you hang about in the opposing lane doing just under the limit, thus exposing your time/other drivers time to danger?

The whole system is flawed and as a 'fast' driver myself who does 40k a year I have done well to currently only have one SP30 on my licenece, but I've also caused 0 accidents and always drive a well kept/serviced car no more than 4 years old... there are far worse out there and the enforcement authorities should latch onto this and start directing their efforts elsewhere which I'm positive would have a greater effect in reducing road accidents than prosecuting the slightly over the limit motorist.... the only catch... far less revenue

antera309

That's one of the failings of the system - an experienced police officer would not pull over a motorist speeding up to overtake a slow-moving vehicle and reducing speed to within the limit afterwards, as long as the manoever was done safely. An automated camera can't use this kind of discretion.