The Trooper 1815

iTrader: (31)

According to this months What Car? the impending end to Radar and laser detectors is about to come, possibly the summer. They say new legislation will outlaw the said device. Sat nav devices systems that warn motorists of static camera sites will be unaffected. Loads of retailers are still selling them but they are not warning you! Page 42 new May 2005 issue.

jods

Blair is a ****.

hedgehog

Naw, this isn't true, it's just a rumour being spread by a few paranoid people on here.

The Trooper 1815

iTrader: (31)

Hah! Who said that?

unclebuck

Gary.

They might also be insane, apparently.

powerman1

I think its true ive heard it elsewhere, and its also not going to be a legal requirement to make speed cameras visible with yellow paint...dont you just hate this vendeter against motorists it makes you feel like a bluddy criminal powerman

hedgehog

It isn't a vendetta against motorists, it is for your own safety. For example the latest figures released by the Scottish Executive show that in 2003 they issued 61% more speeding fines than in 2002. This is excellent for safety.

jonc

Speed cameras aren't for safety but revenue generators, everyone knows that. Although the number of speed cameras have increased over the years, there has been no significant reduction in the number of road deaths. Its not speed that kills but the drivers inability to make appropriate judgements to the conditions of the road and traffic arround them.

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/cameras.html
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/pr110.html
http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/art...218811,00.html
http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/269.htm

powerman1

Eh and dont forget it makes the insurance companys a little bit betteroff as well and they are surely putting the extra revenue generated back towards road safety..oh its a beautiful world...I think ill go downstairs now and sink a few to make it seem even better powermana

kayeabl

Sorry to say but this is not a rumour, this was passed by the commons and will become law in the next few months. The Government white paper on transport is available to read if you search around for it.

Anyway, the result is anything like the snoopers which detect laser will become illegal, although i suspect like using mobile phones it will be hard to enforce.

Sat Nav systems and those which only show location of fixed cameras by use of GPS will still be legal to buy and own.

At present its not illegal to buy these devices and so retailers are still stocking them.

There is also a company jumping on this called Talex who are producing a unit that will be legal for around £200

Cheers

Ash

scoobynutta555

Think my laser jammer has been illegal for a while, if it ever was legal

WRX_Rich

iTrader: (5)

spent today moving the lazer detector beside the numberplate so now all I have is the gps system on the dash

these snooper sr-6 's are going to get more popular i guess

hedgehog

I was extracting some urine, you may not have seen my previous posts on this subject and so are a bit left out of that joke (it isn't a very funny one) but, of course, you are correct in what you say. Many will be aware that I have been charting the progress of this bill for some time. Many will also be aware that there were a lot of people who believed it would ever happen and even when presented with documentary evidence asserted that it would be years and years before it came into law.

The reason that GPS based systems are not being made illegal is that such systems will be used to enforce tracking of your car, the application of ISA and road charging. Once those arrive there will be no need for laser and radar detectors anyhow so for most people it will only be a short time between the banning of the detectors and them having their car fitted with a government controlled speed limiting device.

r32

Whats the Tory's stance on all this? Will it still go ahead if Howard gets in?

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

I suspect that actually the reason the GPS units are remaining legal is nothing so sinister - it's that sat nav systems can include camera location so easily that in order to ban the camera detection, they'd have to ban all satellite navigation devices too.

For just the same reason as they measure danger in mph, and allow mobile phones with a hands-free kit, it's just down to practicality of enforcement. You can't measure danger with a machine so they measure speed instead, you can't easily differentiate between someone talking on a hands-free phone and someone talking to a passenger or singing along to the radio, and there's no distinction between sat nav and GPS camera detectors.

Leslie

The Conservatives have said they they will have a study of Speedcam installations and remove those they deem to be unecessary. They have said nothing about ISA etc as yet.

Les

hedgehog

You might be correct Andy, but either way ISA, road charging and tracking are going to come and they have to be very careful that they don't make the devices to implement this illegal. They also need to "encourage" people to want to fit GPS based devices in their vehicles to reduce opposition to the scheme. This is certainly a logical, and simple, step in that direction. It must be considered that they have been very cunning in the past, for example removing the laybys for buses to pull into in order to cause congestion and then charging motorists for it, and there is big money at stake in the area of GPS tracking and charging so you will find that their cunning knows no bounds.

Again, you may be correct, but they haven't let me down yet :-)

As for the Tories, it will pretty much be business as usual when they arrive unless YOU do something about it. When they arrive on your doorstep looking for your vote ask them what their view is on ISA and road charging. If they don't know the answer then make sure they do know before they leave you. If they give any answer other than an emphatic "We'll ditch it" then put the pressure on. The next month is the biggest chance you will have to put pressure on a politician so make the best of it.

unclebuck

^^^^

Indeed the next month represents the last drink at the last chance saloon to prevent ISA and whole load of other 'control' and restrictive legislation becoming law in this country.

Iain Young

Whilst ISA etc is worrying and I suspect could lead to even more accidents happening, I don't see any problem with banning laser detectors. If you are not breaking the law, you don't need one.

They are already banned in several countries across Europe. It's illegal in France to just have one in the car (even if it's not plugged in). Big fines if you're caught with one...

Jap2Scrap

I've never owned one myself. Not that I haven't been tempted mind you. I'm not sure banning them is a great loss in itself but the sneakiness of allowing them to become legal and then banning them again when it doesn't suit anymore grips me a bit.

Totally agree with hedgehog on the ISA issues related to GPS detectors being unaffected.

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

If the press ads for radar and laser detectors are to be believed - and their figures are no better or worse justified than those bandied about by the camera partnerships - then users of such devices actually have fewer accidents than non-users.

That's the problem - the figures don't support 'speed kills', so they're ignored in favour of a law that makes intuitive sense in the absence of the facts.

Iain Young

Trouble is that with a bit of clever juggling, you can make the figures support practically any argument you want to make, either for or against.

There are far too many variables involved for the quoted figures to make any sense. For example, laser detector owners may have fewer accidents, but is that because of the detector, or is it because they tend to drive cars with better braking systems than average cars and so can avoid problems easier?

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

More than likely. They probably also have a greater interest in motoring and actually pay more attention than average, whatever speed they choose to drive at.

On the other hand, if we believe that cameras are located at accident black spots, and we have a device that warns us to slow down at accident black spots, surely that's a benefit either way?

Jap2Scrap: there was no 'sneakiness', only incompetence. The devices were declared 'legal' when the judge in a court case ruled that the radar from a speed camera was not a 'police transmission' under the meaning of the Wireless Telegraphy Act, and that a radar detector was not, therefore, illegally intercepting a police transmission. Previous to that, it had always been unclear whether or not the Wireless Telegraphy Act made them illegal.

Following the court ruling which clarified the situation, it's taken this long to pass another law that specifically bans detectors.

Iain Young

In theory, but this also encourages people to speed or drive dangerously in areas which are not currently designated as black spots (because the detector isn't informing them as such). Any system like this is open to abuse. It's a tricky problem, and I'm not sure there is a definite solution...

hedgehog

I couldn't agree more. The figures I quoted previously for Scotland show that the number of speeding fines issued went up by 61% from 2002 to 2003. These are the last years for which we have figures.

No one really posed the important question, though jonc saw the point, which is "how did their fatality figures improve over that time?"

The truth of the matter is that their fatalities increased by 9% over the same period! So, the more tickets they issue the more people die on the roads.

The frightening thing about this is that the increasing deaths on Scotland's roads are now being used as justification for calling for more cameras, more fines, more casualty reduction civil servants in suits and more control over motorists. When you reflect on this it is possible to conclude that the administration get more "power" as the number of people who die on the roads increases, so it suits them that their control measures kill drivers. In the mean time the electorate fall for the intuitive "speed kills" line and the administration give substantial grants to groups such as BRAKE to indoctrinate children and adults with their "intuitive lie."

The big problem is that in order to restore past trends in road safety, which have given the UK very safe roads indeed, we need to escape from the loop in which we are trapped. This loop depends upon people believing that the administration are doing the right thing for safety when in truth the administration only want control for themselves and cash for the private enterprises who are helping them to achieve this.

Increasing road deaths also work to the political agenda of the far left who are, by and large, in control of transport policy. They need to paint the roads as nasty and dangerous places in order to try and drive the private motorist from their car.

So, by and large it suits the administration for lots of people to die on the roads. The only people standing up and shouting about this are motorists who know that our roads can be made safer by continuing the policies that we in place before the arrival of automated enforcement.

unclebuck

If I watch the same film over and over again it will make all this go away.

The Trooper 1815

iTrader: (31)

Started something here didn't I!

Leslie

As UB says!

Les

^Qwerty^

I was about to, but thought I'd read to the end of the thread before doing so.......

9% is a lot of dead people

hedgehog

It is an extra 27 dead people in Scotland alone.

My approximate calculations show that the administration made an extra £153,155.56 in fines per extra person they killed. I am sure that some civil servant, somewhere, is proud of that extra revenue stream and is probably getting a pay bonus for excellent performance.