M20 Scamera, Kents finest at it again
03 October 2008, 08:41 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
M20 Scamera, Kents finest at it again
If you use the M20 around Maidstone J4 to j7 both ways you will have noticed that there are some new cash machines installed on the gantries.
In theory they are only in use when a temporary speed limit is in place, however, those lovely and totally uncorrupt public servants in Zimbabwe (sorry Kent) have come up with a new wheeze.
It works like this, they stick a 50 limit on the digital signs for no reason when the road is quiet and hey presto the cash machines are activated.
All in the name of road safety of course and as the road is empty you can be tanking along at a totally safe 65 mph on an empty road and kerching, thats £60 and points thank you and good night.
In theory they are only in use when a temporary speed limit is in place, however, those lovely and totally uncorrupt public servants in Zimbabwe (sorry Kent) have come up with a new wheeze.
It works like this, they stick a 50 limit on the digital signs for no reason when the road is quiet and hey presto the cash machines are activated.
All in the name of road safety of course and as the road is empty you can be tanking along at a totally safe 65 mph on an empty road and kerching, thats £60 and points thank you and good night.
03 October 2008, 09:49 PM
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GREAT IDEA !!
Then all the barrack room lawyers can tell us all about Police procedure and how Police do their everyday job because they all seem to be experts!!!
And don't forget, all this money that they make out of fines goes towards the christmas party etc etc etc etc etc.
I love these threads sooooooooooo much
03 October 2008, 09:51 PM
#6
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you use the M20 around Maidstone J4 to j7 both ways you will have noticed that there are some new cash machines installed on the gantries.
In theory they are only in use when a temporary speed limit is in place, however, those lovely and totally uncorrupt public servants in Zimbabwe (sorry Kent) have come up with a new wheeze.
It works like this, they stick a 50 limit on the digital signs for no reason when the road is quiet and hey presto the cash machines are activated.
All in the name of road safety of course and as the road is empty you can be tanking along at a totally safe 65 mph on an empty road and kerching, thats £60 and points thank you and good night.
In theory they are only in use when a temporary speed limit is in place, however, those lovely and totally uncorrupt public servants in Zimbabwe (sorry Kent) have come up with a new wheeze.
It works like this, they stick a 50 limit on the digital signs for no reason when the road is quiet and hey presto the cash machines are activated.
All in the name of road safety of course and as the road is empty you can be tanking along at a totally safe 65 mph on an empty road and kerching, thats £60 and points thank you and good night.
That's good then. At least you wont be disappointed when your NIP comes through the post then as you seem to have it all sussed out !!!!!!!!!!!
well done!!
Last edited by Geoteds2002; 03 October 2008 at 09:55 PM.
Trending Topics
03 October 2008, 10:01 PM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But that wouldnt make good reading would it!!
They have to do something stupid, get caught and then winge and moan about it and blame everything else especially the Police who apparently only persecute the poor motorist rather than catch REAL criminals so that they can fund the christmas party and justify their existence and have bad attitudes, are corrupt, collude with the courts, they were bullied at school, Pi$$ed with power etc etc etc.....
04 October 2008, 08:35 AM
#10
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Deepest Darkest Kernow
Posts: 4,404
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I agree with the above:
1) These are just cash cows.
2) The police should be out catching criminals
3) The police are (in general) arseholes (from my recent experiences)
Infract away if you feel fit - for me putting arseholes and police in the same sentence
and having an opinion.
1) These are just cash cows.
2) The police should be out catching criminals
3) The police are (in general) arseholes (from my recent experiences)
Infract away if you feel fit - for me putting arseholes and police in the same sentence
and having an opinion.
04 October 2008, 08:59 AM
#11
Surely if they can police the roads using cameras, there will be more free time for the police to catch real criminals
And since they are arseholes, you will not have to deal with them if they catch you using cameras, so that must be a good thing as well.
And since they are arseholes, you will not have to deal with them if they catch you using cameras, so that must be a good thing as well.
Last edited by cster; 04 October 2008 at 10:25 AM.
04 October 2008, 10:23 AM
#12
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with the above:
1) These are just cash cows.
2) The police should be out catching criminals
3) The police are (in general) arseholes (from my recent experiences)
Infract away if you feel fit - for me putting arseholes and police in the same sentence and having an opinion.
1) These are just cash cows.
2) The police should be out catching criminals
3) The police are (in general) arseholes (from my recent experiences)
Infract away if you feel fit - for me putting arseholes and police in the same sentence
and having an opinion.I'm guessing anybody who loses a loved one through an accident caused by a speeding driver would want THAT 'criminal' prosecuted soon enough...
I've got a heavy right foot and have been caught on camera but I know that's the game I play.
The choices are simple:
1) Stick to the speed limits and never have to worry about the police
or
2) Put your foot down and take your punishment on the chin
It kinda reminds me of the kid who'd take his ball home if he started losing...
04 October 2008, 10:52 AM
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Northamptonshire
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1) Speed cameras do mean more Police out "catching criminals".
2) Servicing, maintenance and all the prosecution procedure in relation to speed cameras is carried out by civilian workers not police officers.
3) If people stuck to the traffic laws it would mean Police officers wouldn't be caught up dealing with motorists and could be out looking for "real criminals".
I do not like speed cameras and i do see them as a way of grabbing cash from us all.
However it is a goverment and local council issue nothing to do with the Police,
All these people who winge about the Police are the first ones to call them when their pizza is late delivered, their neighbour is talking loudly at night or they have left their sat nav on full display in their car and some opportunist chav has nicked it.
I have never had a bad experiance with a Police officer. I always speak to them with respect just as i always speak to everyone with respect. Manners cost nothing and can go a long way to helping the situation.
I am sick of reading these i hate the Police posts, they are always totally one sided and we all assume these people have done "nothing to deserve their treatment".
If those people who really think the Police are no good then DON'T CALL THEM, leave their services for those that appreciate and need the help.
Sorry, thats my rant over ;-)
Sorry everyone, thats my rant over
2) Servicing, maintenance and all the prosecution procedure in relation to speed cameras is carried out by civilian workers not police officers.
3) If people stuck to the traffic laws it would mean Police officers wouldn't be caught up dealing with motorists and could be out looking for "real criminals".
I do not like speed cameras and i do see them as a way of grabbing cash from us all.
However it is a goverment and local council issue nothing to do with the Police,
All these people who winge about the Police are the first ones to call them when their pizza is late delivered, their neighbour is talking loudly at night or they have left their sat nav on full display in their car and some opportunist chav has nicked it.
I have never had a bad experiance with a Police officer. I always speak to them with respect just as i always speak to everyone with respect. Manners cost nothing and can go a long way to helping the situation.
I am sick of reading these i hate the Police posts, they are always totally one sided and we all assume these people have done "nothing to deserve their treatment".
If those people who really think the Police are no good then DON'T CALL THEM, leave their services for those that appreciate and need the help.
Sorry, thats my rant over ;-)
Sorry everyone, thats my rant over
04 October 2008, 11:38 AM
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you use the M20 around Maidstone J4 to j7 both ways you will have noticed that there are some new cash machines installed on the gantries.
In theory they are only in use when a temporary speed limit is in place, however, those lovely and totally uncorrupt public servants in Zimbabwe (sorry Kent) have come up with a new wheeze.
It works like this, they stick a 50 limit on the digital signs for no reason when the road is quiet and hey presto the cash machines are activated.
All in the name of road safety of course and as the road is empty you can be tanking along at a totally safe 65 mph on an empty road and kerching, thats £60 and points thank you and good night.
In theory they are only in use when a temporary speed limit is in place, however, those lovely and totally uncorrupt public servants in Zimbabwe (sorry Kent) have come up with a new wheeze.
It works like this, they stick a 50 limit on the digital signs for no reason when the road is quiet and hey presto the cash machines are activated.
All in the name of road safety of course and as the road is empty you can be tanking along at a totally safe 65 mph on an empty road and kerching, thats £60 and points thank you and good night.
I would of thought the ones on the M20 are set at 90ish mph as I have very rarely seen them go off by cars going in the opposite direction.
04 October 2008, 11:41 AM
#15
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1: The source is within Kent Police and is first hand so its likely it has some legs.
2: I agree that the "maidstone s's" is a dangerous stretch of road and that keeping speeds down there is a damn good idea, but the issue is that imposing a speed restriction on digital signs when its not needed (no roadworks, no congestion etc) and then cashing in isnt about public safety.
3: I havent been caught for the simple reason I knew about it but have watched others drive on through oblivious to the cameras (which arent exactly obvious either)
4: The govs own stats show that speed on its own accounts for less than 7% of all accident causes, its usually down to driving like a ***** and too much speed is just one factor.
2: I agree that the "maidstone s's" is a dangerous stretch of road and that keeping speeds down there is a damn good idea, but the issue is that imposing a speed restriction on digital signs when its not needed (no roadworks, no congestion etc) and then cashing in isnt about public safety.
3: I havent been caught for the simple reason I knew about it but have watched others drive on through oblivious to the cameras (which arent exactly obvious either)
4: The govs own stats show that speed on its own accounts for less than 7% of all accident causes, its usually down to driving like a ***** and too much speed is just one factor.
04 October 2008, 12:17 PM
#16
I think some of you are missing his point !
50mph speed limit for a reason is fair enough, but just turning on the 50, without a reason, Ie no fog, no queues not crashes.. is clearly being done to impose the speed camera fines !!
Ok, so regardless of the reason you should abide by the restrictions on a road ! but what gives someone the right to slow us down for no reason ?? 70 to 50 will cause a large increase in the time it takes you to get somewhere !
50mph speed limit for a reason is fair enough, but just turning on the 50, without a reason, Ie no fog, no queues not crashes.. is clearly being done to impose the speed camera fines !!
Ok, so regardless of the reason you should abide by the restrictions on a road ! but what gives someone the right to slow us down for no reason ?? 70 to 50 will cause a large increase in the time it takes you to get somewhere !
04 October 2008, 12:23 PM
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: South Bucks
Posts: 3,213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
04 October 2008, 01:17 PM
#18
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Northamptonshire
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
04 October 2008, 02:31 PM
#20
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think some of you are missing his point !
50mph speed limit for a reason is fair enough, but just turning on the 50, without a reason, Ie no fog, no queues not crashes.. is clearly being done to impose the speed camera fines !!
Ok, so regardless of the reason you should abide by the restrictions on a road ! but what gives someone the right to slow us down for no reason ?? 70 to 50 will cause a large increase in the time it takes you to get somewhere !
50mph speed limit for a reason is fair enough, but just turning on the 50, without a reason, Ie no fog, no queues not crashes.. is clearly being done to impose the speed camera fines !!
Ok, so regardless of the reason you should abide by the restrictions on a road ! but what gives someone the right to slow us down for no reason ?? 70 to 50 will cause a large increase in the time it takes you to get somewhere !
The other element is this, I slow down to 50 as I know the cameras are there and I know the risk, but to the majority of bods in foreign cars or lorries as well as many of the brits doing between 10 and 40 miles an hour faster I become a slow moving slalom pole and risk taking one in the *** from a dozy lorry driver just because some ***** of a civil servant in Kent thinks its a jolly wheeze to raise money.
Lets face it, when youve spanked 10.2 million quid on the monumental goat **** that is the Ashford ring road you have to get some money back somewhere.
04 October 2008, 02:35 PM
#21
The thing is though, a crash at a higher speed will surely have higher morbidity/mortality risk.
Does this need explaining?
04 October 2008, 02:51 PM
#22
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stats are a wonderful thing.
In terms of the government figures the 7% relates to excessive speed as a sole factor, in other words 93% of accidents involve other factors, not just speed.
Taking your argument and using the most recent high speed crash where Richard Hammond survived his 300 mph ding it could be argued that based on the available data (1 crash at 300mph and he survived) there is no risk of dying from driving at 300 mph!
The hit a kid commercials highlight well that higher speeds are fatal to unprotected pedastrians but if we look at motorways and race tracks where speeds are higher but impacts are controlled by barriers etc then death rates compared to speed are much lower.
Regardless of speed what generally kills people is rapid deceleration when you hit something solid like a tree, get the angles right and a slow speed accident can cause horrific internal injuries.
04 October 2008, 03:27 PM
#23
Have you actually HAD any dealings with the police over, say, the last ten years? Those who post anti-police stuff on here have, and NOT just for speeding, so can justify their bitterness. Can you justify your stance?
Alcazar
Last edited by alcazar; 04 October 2008 at 03:32 PM.
04 October 2008, 03:49 PM
#24
Stats are a wonderful thing.
In terms of the government figures the 7% relates to excessive speed as a sole factor, in other words 93% of accidents involve other factors, not just speed.
Taking your argument and using the most recent high speed crash where Richard Hammond survived his 300 mph ding it could be argued that based on the available data (1 crash at 300mph and he survived) there is no risk of dying from driving at 300 mph!
The hit a kid commercials highlight well that higher speeds are fatal to unprotected pedastrians but if we look at motorways and race tracks where speeds are higher but impacts are controlled by barriers etc then death rates compared to speed are much lower.
Regardless of speed what generally kills people is rapid deceleration when you hit something solid like a tree, get the angles right and a slow speed accident can cause horrific internal injuries.
In terms of the government figures the 7% relates to excessive speed as a sole factor, in other words 93% of accidents involve other factors, not just speed.
Taking your argument and using the most recent high speed crash where Richard Hammond survived his 300 mph ding it could be argued that based on the available data (1 crash at 300mph and he survived) there is no risk of dying from driving at 300 mph!
The hit a kid commercials highlight well that higher speeds are fatal to unprotected pedastrians but if we look at motorways and race tracks where speeds are higher but impacts are controlled by barriers etc then death rates compared to speed are much lower.
Regardless of speed what generally kills people is rapid deceleration when you hit something solid like a tree, get the angles right and a slow speed accident can cause horrific internal injuries.
That's physics, not stats.
The speed may not cause the accident, but may well have a major bearing on the outcome.
TBH those kid adverts are obviously a pile of b*llocks.
I mean where would you obtain the information for a start
Last edited by cster; 04 October 2008 at 10:08 PM.
04 October 2008, 08:08 PM
#25
What was Geoteds2002 infracted for? He represents the opinions of many on here. Not allowing individuals the right of opinion is reminiscent of a small Austrian born chap with a moustache who was rather busy between 1939 and 1945. That coward shot himself. And some suggest the police are *****...............
Last edited by s70rjw; 04 October 2008 at 09:33 PM.
04 October 2008, 09:31 PM
#26
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Kent
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had to use the M20 3 times last week to go to the office.
I noticed the speed limit warnings on the gantries and duly slowed down.
I fully expected an incident further ahead but, no just a national speed limit sign and then carry on.
How can they expect us to take these speed warnings seriously when they issue them for no apparent reason, other than it appears to get some easy revenue.
Technology has given us many benefits but this is not one of them.
I noticed the speed limit warnings on the gantries and duly slowed down.
I fully expected an incident further ahead but, no just a national speed limit sign and then carry on.
How can they expect us to take these speed warnings seriously when they issue them for no apparent reason, other than it appears to get some easy revenue.
Technology has given us many benefits but this is not one of them.
04 October 2008, 11:46 PM
#27
I was on the M20 the other week to at 9'30pm on a sunday night when the 50mph came up, i slowed down for about 6 gantries and then back to national for no reason at all 
Most of the dodgy driving ive seen on this section has been by foreign lorries and drivers, ffs they even have signs in polish lol
Most of the dodgy driving ive seen on this section has been by foreign lorries and drivers, ffs they even have signs in polish lol
05 October 2008, 02:19 PM
#30
