Speed camera placement rules to be eased....
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3564128.stm

Seems theyre relaxing the criteria on exactly where they can place the revenue generators now, so in short more of them on totally safe stretches of road where they'll make the most cash :mad:

F*cking government really know how to pi$s everyone off dont they :mad:

Just proves how TOTALLY out of touch they are. :mad:

Awful that - getting fined for breaking the law - what will they think of next? ;)

Point is Mooseracer, they don't give a stuff about being in touch with what the electorate wants anyway. They do what they like with no reference to the rest of Parliament and screw the maximum cash out of us all however they can.

What surorises me is that we used to get far more return in the way of public services etc. when taxes of all kinds were far lower. Where does it all go?

Les :rolleyes:

This development is being hailed as a "victory for police."

How is it a victory to turn even more people against the force that attempts for enforce law and order in the country? Fact is this is nothing like a victory for anyone and is merely a precursor to more extreme methods of limiting your personal mobility.

As to those who take the view that cameras are just there to enforce the law. Well, perhaps so. However we have seen people in this, and other, countries stand up against bad law in the past and usually part of this stand has involved breaking laws of some type. Had this not have been the case women would not be allowed to vote and we'd still be keeping slaves. Don't ever forget that as you express support for the cameras (unless of course you are one of the police officers making £7000 per year in overtime from manning a camera van) the long term goal of all this is to limit your personal mobility and the measures being put in place to achieve this are frightening.

This is the part that really irks me:

This to me says "cameras aren't working, lets have more cameras".

Bring back real policemen and real policing.

Not to worry,I'm safe,I can have a couple of beers,a few spliffs and an E ,then drive home safely in the knowledge that I"ll not get stopped !!!!
MORE REAL POLICE,LESS STEALTH TAX PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!
And did they ever find my stolen car,no!!!!!!
I need my car for work,I have over 100kg of tools I need to do my job.I can't use the train or a bus...............so TONY.........leave me the feck alone.........no more money for bombs/arms trade from me son..........oh......and no vote either.

Go for it my94, just be sure to tell them on the doorstep exactly WHY you are not voting for them. If they don't know it doesn't have any impact at all. Get your message across loud and clear to your local and national politicians and let them know you will vote for someone who says they will protect the motorist.

This worries them at the local level as it is just possible they could lose a seat locally on issues just like this. A seat here or there could mean a lot and politicians are nothing but a pack of money grabbing ego junkies so no seat means no job and no ego trip for them.

There should be less distance to accident spots for camea placements. Less people would mind if cameras were close to the most dangerous places on the roads.
It seems the government are more interested in obedience than safety.

the rac are out of touch too. how many times do they sook up to the police moves?
aa here i come...

Placing cameras where there has just been an accident isn't a logical argument as, in statistical terms, that spot is probably the least likely place for there to be another accident.

Unless, of course, there is something fundamentally wrong with the road design in which case the road should be redesigned rather than just using bad road design as an excuse for extracting some money from motorists. Usually when you hear police justifying excessive speed enforcement by saying "there have been 8 accidents at this junction in 1 year" what this means is that the junction needs redesigned. There are perfectly good junctions on motorways for example where traffic speeds are in and around 70mph and where accidents are rare so speed, even at junctions, does not in itself cause accidents.

The other problem with placing cameras at points on the road where drivers need to concentrate on traffic conditions is that research has shown that where a camera is placed at a junction the average motorist spends 5 out of the 8 seconds it takes to cross the junction looking at the speedo. Think about that for a while and consider the calls for cameras to be placed outside schools. Would you like your child going to a school where half the motorists passing were blindfolded?

There is a correct place for good management and education of motorists but there is never a correct place for a camera.

The Safespeed site has some data on this:
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/speedo.html