Wurzel

iTrader: (1)

Come on then SN Lynch mob lets have a debate on this then.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3532465.stm

I was under the impression they had already decided that most of the existing cameras are incorectly sighted and would be scrapped.

Steve

hybwrx2002

Cash generators.

SCOOBYD00

Should go out in groups with a petrol grinder & cut em down....

markwild

hmm - what sort of excuse is 'There have been concerns at the siting of cameras, with some motorists complaining they are placed at the foot of steep hills, where it is difficult to keep to the speed limit. '

Are these people having to get a run up ?

I'm not a camera fan, but I don't think that you can 'speed, cos its a hill !'

Mark

OllyK

Hmmm, government writes to the SCAMERA partnerships, "Are you happy with the placement of your cameras?", SCAMERA partnerships reply "Yup, we are making loads of cash by siting them in inappropriate places so we aer happy. Any chance we can change the speed limits on the roads on a weekly basis to really confuse people?"

APJ

All cameras correctly sited???? Its farcical! They just want to keep the revenue stream.

Now, if only I had a JCB . . .

OllyK

WTF is this woman on?? You have to look at the big picture. To say there were 5 accidents at this spot last year, and now we have a camera there there were only 3 this year is ridiculous. That doesn't take account of regression to the mean for a start. Cameras are placed where there were higher than average accidents the year before, which means that even if you do nothing the number of accidents will reduce the following year anyway

And why is she only concerned about speed related fatalities, if you are killed by a drunk driver that's OK is it?? All tis because she has swallowed the government claptrap that 70%+ of accidents are caused by excessive speed. This is a misnoma in its own right anway. 60 mph on a derestricted windy road covered in ice is perfectly legal and not "excessive" speed as the drive is not speeding, however, it is bloody unsafe, and yet they are not worried about these people! However, 75 mph on a deserted motorway in the middle of the night in perfect weather conditions and they would throw away the key. But which one is more likely to have an accident, fatal or otherwise?? It is inappropriate speed that is the problem, when will these muppets learn???

mart360

OLLY K

hip hoo bloody ray

at last some one who can see the bigger picture

speed does not kill FACT


its the innapropriate use / application of speed balanced against prevalant the road conditions that causes accidents.


Have you noticed that people slow to well below the limit where cameras are placed.....


why??????


because :

A) you do not know what speed the camera is set to trigger

B) you do not know how accurate your speedo is


this results in bunching which does not aid traffic movement or road saftey..


what will happen when someone gets blinded a camera flash going off and has an accident......

small country lane, car approaching camera on the opposite side of the road!!!!


flash flash (blinded / startled) crash


revenue making machines bah


we need to form a uk chapter of the tuf tuf club!!!



Mart

Rewolf

If you want loads of the real facts behind the speed camera debate look at the Association of British Drivers web site (and others linked from it) - they appear to be the most vocal group objecting to these stupid machines. How anybody can believe that they improve safety is beyond me, the only purpose is to make driving more unpleasent.

Lets face it, the following nightmares on our roads cannot ever be caught by a camera: Drunk/Drugged drivers (might be on the wrong side of the road or half on the pavement), Joyriders (its not their car), Thieves of all types (Bank Robbers, etc - still not their car), Unlicenced drivers (no licence what chance the car is registered with DVLA), Uninsured drivers (ditto), tailgaters etc.

In fact the only people that can be caught are those that are otherwise totally law abiding, tax paying model citizens, who might occasionally take their eyes off their speedo to make sure that the proverbial child is not running out in front of them.

And the laws introduced for speed cameras are the only ones that force somebody to incriminate themselves - something that is otherwise illegal in all countries.

Look at the web site to find loads of examples of dirty tricks, incompetance, bulls**t etc from those running the things.

http://www.abd.org.uk

One of the best is the guy they tried to prosecute for doing 55mph in a 30 limit where due to "reflections" the gatso recorded the wrong speed (he was really doing 14 mph). The two photos are a secondary mechanism for verifying the speed, but despite knowing that the radar gets it wrong, the verification is not done by the camera safety partnerships. Or even better the case where the camera was left set to a temporary speed limit after the limit was removed; over 4000 drivers caught for exceeding the non existant speed limit, and they will not appologise, or notify the people affected for the mistake.

It really makes my blood boil

Ray_li

The speed camera company that i used to work for built the cams for 12k and sold them for 50k plus