Luminous

iTrader: (3)

They need OUR help now!!

Please don't allow one of the few pro motorist voices to disappear into obscurity. All the pro scamera lobbies are really well funded, yet this little organisation has managed to cause them considerable embarrassment.

I have already made my additional contribution, please will you consider doing the same.

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/appeal.html

OllyK

Or you could have bumped this thread from this morning

Luminous

iTrader: (3)

Yes, I believe that I have now bumped your well written and much more timely thread

Abdabz

Is there an alternative website to allow those who wish to offer our funds to the Pro camera lobby (but without getting a NIP) to thereby give a balanced view as I would like to donate to that cause...
Doubt I'll get many supporters on a fast car forum where the "I can judge safe speeds for myself, who is the law to tell me" majority will want to support speed cameras so I guess I'll have to look around on the interweb on me own then Oh well
It's a lonely place this pro speed camera place, but I like it and I wont leave

Luminous

iTrader: (3)

Yes, there area few sites that fit your plan abdadz. They have been taking donations for some time.

Although I'm sure not going to tell you who they are

pslewis

The BEST way to end the cameras is simply NOT to speed .............. it really IS that painfully simple!!

If everyone travelled at the posted speed limit, or below, then the cameras would be removed and scrapped!!! RESULT!!

As above, I do NOT agree that the safe speed for a stretch of road should be decided by the driver!!

Stop speeding and end the Cameras!!!

Pete

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

LOL gotta love it Pete!!

Ns04

Chris L

That is NOT Paul Smith's point. His argument is based around the fact that the use of automatic speed detection devices is harming road safety and not improving it. Read the site and he explains in great detail that he does not advocate speeding or dangerous driving. He advocates a return to the policies that lead this country to have just about the best road safety record in world - one based on people (i.e. a decent number of traffic cops) and not machines. Problem is this cost money. Not for a minute am I suggesting that huge reduction in budgets for traffic police and the massive increase in the number of speed cameras have any connection whatsoever......

Abdabz there are plenty of sites and groups who are 'pro': TfL and Transport 2000 come to mind. Paul Smith's site was set up to do exactly what you want - give a balanced, well researched, and reasonable argument.

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

Oh Chris, you should know better than to contradict uncle Pete when he's off on one!

I'll give em a few quid, since at least they have the decency to ask for my money...unlike T2000 etc.... I wonder where they get their -no doubt substantial- funds from?

Answers on a postcard!

NS04

pslewis

OK, so lets get rid of them then!!

How can we do that VERY effectively I wonder???

**PING** LightBulb Idea **PING**

Lets all stop speeding!!!!

I would give it 3 months and the cameras will be removed and scrapped ... end of dangerous speed detection devices!!!

Its so simple its actually painful!!

Pete

ps. I hope you will agree that my money going to CHILDLINE is better spent than going to a speeding site??

Chris L

I give up - it's not a speeding site

Pete take half an hour out of your day and actually read his site - you never know you might learn something

unclebuck

SJ_Skyline

OllyK

PSL - no when the revenues drop they just drop the speed limit, that's what has been happening round Nottingham, we now have 2 lane dual carriages ways reduced from 70mph to 40mph.

And the cameras were placed on the dual carriage way because a drunk ran over a child, something which the protestors seem to have forgotten is not enforceable by cameras anyway.

Abdabz

Ahh this is more like it.... Luminous matey its OK I did on my lonely lonesome... May safespeed rot as this is much more mature and logical...

http://www.slower-speeds.org.uk/

Or alternatively simply dont speed - thus making cameras a financial drain and thus they will be removed... See how easy it is?
The concept Safespeed documents in comical... But then Jesus had and STILL has followers and he didnt even exist - the human race is a strange thing

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

Indeed! No way will they loose out on the revenue generated by the scameras.

What would also happen is that when people no longer speed and all the problems caused by drink driving, careless and reckless driving remain, the government will simply decide it's time for those little black boxes and your NIP would be in the post as soon as you fancied giving the car a bit of a blast on a national speed limit road!

Also, who pays to remove the cameras!??? I'm guessing that won't come from the revenue they've generated in the past.

NS04

carl

I'm somewhat confused as to the relationship between Paul Smith and Safespeed. Is Safespeed a separate entity (e.g. a limited company)? The site talks about "their offices". Does it pay Paul Smith a salary? I'd like to find out a bit more about where the money is going before contributing -- after all, they're not a recognized charity.

Luminous

iTrader: (3)

Afaik Paul Smith is paid some form of salary from Safespeed. I am unsure if that is entrirely true, so it may be worth you checking that out.

pslewis

Is it paying the national average wage of £36,000 a year I wonder??

Pete

Luminous

iTrader: (3)

I somehow doubt that Pete, although you could ask him nicely