Today's most viewed
| ECHO NEWS | |  | | | | | | | | FEATURES | | | | | | | SOUTHEND UNITED | | | | HEALTH | | | | | | | COMING UP IN YOUR ECHO | |
|
|
|
Now you see the hidden speed camera... now you don't!
 |
| The speed trap , tucked away behind a big white van |
ANGRY motorists claim police are deliberately hiding a mobile speed trap behind large vans in order to catch more people out.
This picture was taken in Kings Road, Westcliff, and shows the speed camera van clearly tucked behind another van.
Timothy Burr, who lives in Chalkwell, said he had seen the police van parked in a similar position twice last week.
Mr Burr, who works at Hair & Son estate agents, in London Road, Southend, took these pictures on Tuesday morning.
He said: "I always thought the idea of speed cameras was to work as a deterrent. That's why they painted them yellow - not to make money, but to slow people down. What's the point if people can't see the camera?"
But police have denied hiding mobile speed traps.
A statement issued by Essex Police spokesman Nishan Wijeratne read: "Kings Road is particularly congested with parked cars, especially with Chalkwell and Westcliff railway stations being nearby.
"Mobile safety camera units have to be able to park appropriately and safely.
"Not withstanding this fact, motorists are fully aware of where safety cameras are, with publicity in the Echo and on local radio. There are also numerous road signs which indicate the existence of the cameras.
"There's nothing further we can do to highlight their immediate presence. Ultimately the safety of people is at the heart of what we do."
12:58pm Wednesday 21st May 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: No asbo, Southend on Sea on 1:03pm Wed 21 May 08
GOOD!
IF YOU DON'T SPEED YOU WON'T GET CAUGHT WILL YOU !!!
All the whingers are obviously the speeders.
To act as a deterrent is absolute bulls-it because once people have passed it, they speed up and carry on as if nothing has happened.
There should be more hidden speed cameras anyway, it serves people right.
If they break the law, they deserve to be caught.
End of story.
GOOD!
IF YOU DON'T SPEED YOU WON'T GET CAUGHT WILL YOU !!!
All the whingers are obviously the speeders.
To act as a deterrent is absolute bulls-it because once people have passed it, they speed up and carry on as if nothing has happened.
There should be more hidden speed cameras anyway, it serves people right.
If they break the law, they deserve to be caught.
End of story.
Posted by: smee, somewhere out there on 1:12pm Wed 21 May 08
[quote][bold]No asbo[/bold] wrote:
GOOD! IF YOU DON'T SPEED YOU WON'T GET CAUGHT WILL YOU !!! All the whingers are obviously the speeders. To act as a deterrent is absolute bulls-it because once people have passed it, they speed up and carry on as if nothing has happened. There should be more hidden speed cameras anyway, it serves people right. If they break the law, they deserve to be caught. End of story.[/quote] I couldn't agree more!
No asbo wrote:
GOOD! IF YOU DON'T SPEED YOU WON'T GET CAUGHT WILL YOU !!! All the whingers are obviously the speeders. To act as a deterrent is absolute bulls-it because once people have passed it, they speed up and carry on as if nothing has happened. There should be more hidden speed cameras anyway, it serves people right. If they break the law, they deserve to be caught. End of story.
I couldn't agree more!
Posted by: Dave H, Southend on 1:22pm Wed 21 May 08
No one would complain if the police hid to catch other types of criminal would they?
Speeding, espcially in a residential road like Kings Road, can kill.
Sure there times when the road is empty and you may be able to drive faster, but it's right that the law errs on the side of caution.
No one would complain if the police hid to catch other types of criminal would they?
Speeding, espcially in a residential road like Kings Road, can kill.
Sure there times when the road is empty and you may be able to drive faster, but it's right that the law errs on the side of caution.
Posted by: hop, stanford on 1:28pm Wed 21 May 08
This has nothing to do with if your a speeder you will whinge as in our case we are not speeding but the fact that the police do hide the speed cameras this is done frequently on Dunton Road. Unmarked cars often try to trap people on Southend Road in Stanford too.
This has nothing to do with if your a speeder you will whinge as in our case we are not speeding but the fact that the police do hide the speed cameras this is done frequently on Dunton Road. Unmarked cars often try to trap people on Southend Road in Stanford too.
Posted by: No asbo, Southend on Sea on 1:41pm Wed 21 May 08
[quote][bold]hop[/bold] wrote:
This has nothing to do with if your a speeder you will whinge as in our case we are not speeding but the fact that the police do hide the speed cameras this is done frequently on Dunton Road. Unmarked cars often try to trap people on Southend Road in Stanford too.[/quote] Well, if you're not speeding, you've got nothing to worry about, have you !
hop wrote:
This has nothing to do with if your a speeder you will whinge as in our case we are not speeding but the fact that the police do hide the speed cameras this is done frequently on Dunton Road. Unmarked cars often try to trap people on Southend Road in Stanford too.
Well, if you're not speeding, you've got nothing to worry about, have you !
Posted by: Ben, Westcliff on 1:45pm Wed 21 May 08
I don't have an issue with this at all.
However, I take issue with a couple of other tactics employed by the police:
1. Unmarked police cars, headlights off, tailgating drivers at night - surely this is illegal, not to mention bloody frightening?
2. It's all well and good having police speed camera vans (like that shown above) out in broad daylight down B roads like Southbourne Grove, but what about at night? i.e. when there are actually dangerous drivers on the road? Case in point: during the week, and especially at weekends, we regularly see boy racers drive at incredibly dangerous speeds (i.e. 50mph+) all the way down from the London Road to the A127. How about actualy catching some of them eh?
I don't have an issue with this at all.
However, I take issue with a couple of other tactics employed by the police:
1. Unmarked police cars, headlights off, tailgating drivers at night - surely this is illegal, not to mention bloody frightening?
2. It's all well and good having police speed camera vans (like that shown above) out in broad daylight down B roads like Southbourne Grove, but what about at night? i.e. when there are actually dangerous drivers on the road? Case in point: during the week, and especially at weekends, we regularly see boy racers drive at incredibly dangerous speeds (i.e. 50mph+) all the way down from the London Road to the A127. How about actualy catching some of them eh?
Posted by: balders, leigh on 1:49pm Wed 21 May 08
to "[bold]the view motorists got, approaching the speed trap[/bold] " - the echo should have added "[bold]if they happen to be driving more on the pavement than off it[/bold] " in which case they deserve more than a speeding ticket !
to "
the view motorists got, approaching the speed trap " - the echo should have added "
if they happen to be driving more on the pavement than off it " in which case they deserve more than a speeding ticket !
Posted by: Ethan, nr Dole farm on 1:50pm Wed 21 May 08
Yes I've seen this before many times in Southend. It's underhanded and does not help the poor image of the law that virtually all people have now. It does nothing for safety and simply confirms these sCamera's are solely for revenue matters.
The posters who will say well if your not speeding etc are simply not thinking the situation through completely.
They are of the ilk that will support Police tactics like the proposed recording of ALL Emails and Phone Calls and retention for 12 months by parroting 'well if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear'.
One day they will wake up and say 'Where's my country gone...why are we living in a Stalinist nightmare'. My response your too **** late. You didn't protest at the time this is the consequence.
Here's the news item about the state invasion of privacy that you the 'sheeple' will obviously be all in favour of.
http://www.guardian.
co.uk/technology/200
8/may/21/freedomofin
formation.civilliber
ties
Remember George Orwells 1984 was meant o be a novel not Gordon Browns handbook.
And to prevent the sheeple's obvious comments . I drive 20,000+ a year and have a clean licence for 25 years + and when it's appropriate I speed ie on M ways and dual carriageways when I deem it safe to do so. But NOT in towns.
See I believe in freedom of choice AND I believe in drivers being able to exercise discretion. If your dumb enough to believe speed kills then I must be dead several times over. Inappropriate speed may be dangerous but the concept of allowing drivers to use their brains is alien to stalinist control freaks isn't it.
Yes I've seen this before many times in Southend. It's underhanded and does not help the poor image of the law that virtually all people have now. It does nothing for safety and simply confirms these sCamera's are solely for revenue matters.
The posters who will say well if your not speeding etc are simply not thinking the situation through completely.
They are of the ilk that will support Police tactics like the proposed recording of ALL Emails and Phone Calls and retention for 12 months by parroting 'well if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear'.
One day they will wake up and say 'Where's my country gone...why are we living in a Stalinist nightmare'. My response your too **** late. You didn't protest at the time this is the consequence.
Here's the news item about the state invasion of privacy that you the 'sheeple' will obviously be all in favour of.
http://www.guardian.
co.uk/technology/200
8/may/21/freedomofin
formation.civilliber
ties
Remember George Orwells 1984 was meant o be a novel not Gordon Browns handbook.
And to prevent the sheeple's obvious comments . I drive 20,000+ a year and have a clean licence for 25 years + and when it's appropriate I speed ie on M ways and dual carriageways when I deem it safe to do so. But NOT in towns.
See I believe in freedom of choice AND I believe in drivers being able to exercise discretion. If your dumb enough to believe speed kills then I must be dead several times over. Inappropriate speed may be dangerous but the concept of allowing drivers to use their brains is alien to stalinist control freaks isn't it.
Posted by: Dave H, Southend on 2:20pm Wed 21 May 08
[quote][bold]Ethan[/bold] wrote:
Yes I've seen this before many times in Southend. It's underhanded and does not help the poor image of the law that virtually all people have now. It does nothing for safety and simply confirms these sCamera's are solely for revenue matters.
The posters who will say well if your not speeding etc are simply not thinking the situation through completely.
They are of the ilk that will support Police tactics like the proposed recording of ALL Emails and Phone Calls and retention for 12 months by parroting 'well if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear'.
One day they will wake up and say 'Where's my country gone...why are we living in a Stalinist nightmare'. My response your too **** late. You didn't protest at the time this is the consequence.
Here's the news item about the state invasion of privacy that you the 'sheeple' will obviously be all in favour of.
http://www.guardian.
co.uk/technology/200
8/may/21/freedomofin
formation.civilliber
ties
Remember George Orwells 1984 was meant o be a novel not Gordon Browns handbook.
And to prevent the sheeple's obvious comments . I drive 20,000+ a year and have a clean licence for 25 years + and when it's appropriate I speed ie on M ways and dual carriageways when I deem it safe to do so. But NOT in towns.
See I believe in freedom of choice AND I believe in drivers being able to exercise discretion. If your dumb enough to believe speed kills then I must be dead several times over. Inappropriate speed may be dangerous but the concept of allowing drivers to use their brains is alien to stalinist control freaks isn't it.[/quote] Rubbish. The difference is in the scenario you paint (which I don't think will actually happen by the way) you'll have your emails and whatnot collected without having committed any crime whatsoever.
If you speed, you are committing a crime.
A natural extension to your argument is that we shouldn't have laws at all, and that everything should be left to the judgement of individuals.
I bet a lot of drivers who've killed people thought that they were driving at an 'appropriate' speed.
Do we really have to wait one of these drivers kills a child before taking action against them?
Ethan wrote:
Yes I've seen this before many times in Southend. It's underhanded and does not help the poor image of the law that virtually all people have now. It does nothing for safety and simply confirms these sCamera's are solely for revenue matters.
The posters who will say well if your not speeding etc are simply not thinking the situation through completely.
They are of the ilk that will support Police tactics like the proposed recording of ALL Emails and Phone Calls and retention for 12 months by parroting 'well if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear'.
One day they will wake up and say 'Where's my country gone...why are we living in a Stalinist nightmare'. My response your too **** late. You didn't protest at the time this is the consequence.
Here's the news item about the state invasion of privacy that you the 'sheeple' will obviously be all in favour of.
http://www.guardian.
co.uk/technology/200
8/may/21/freedomofin
formation.civilliber
ties
Remember George Orwells 1984 was meant o be a novel not Gordon Browns handbook.
And to prevent the sheeple's obvious comments . I drive 20,000+ a year and have a clean licence for 25 years + and when it's appropriate I speed ie on M ways and dual carriageways when I deem it safe to do so. But NOT in towns.
See I believe in freedom of choice AND I believe in drivers being able to exercise discretion. If your dumb enough to believe speed kills then I must be dead several times over. Inappropriate speed may be dangerous but the concept of allowing drivers to use their brains is alien to stalinist control freaks isn't it.
Rubbish. The difference is in the scenario you paint (which I don't think will actually happen by the way) you'll have your emails and whatnot collected without having committed any crime whatsoever.
If you speed, you are committing a crime.
A natural extension to your argument is that we shouldn't have laws at all, and that everything should be left to the judgement of individuals.
I bet a lot of drivers who've killed people thought that they were driving at an 'appropriate' speed.
Do we really have to wait one of these drivers kills a child before taking action against them?
Posted by: Peter Pantsless, Southend-on-Sea on 2:26pm Wed 21 May 08
Ethan, oh what a fool you have just made of yourself.
Ethan, oh what a fool you have just made of yourself.
Posted by: Gonzales, Kings Road on 2:35pm Wed 21 May 08
It does not matter how many times they take your picture when you have false number plates, do not have the vehicle registered to you or have the vehicle registered under a false name or address.
These are the people who are most likely to be offenders!
The police need to stop them at the time not issue pictures and fines to some non existant address.
It does not matter how many times they take your picture when you have false number plates, do not have the vehicle registered to you or have the vehicle registered under a false name or address.
These are the people who are most likely to be offenders!
The police need to stop them at the time not issue pictures and fines to some non existant address.
Posted by: Steve`, Leigh on 2:38pm Wed 21 May 08
What exactly do people want? The detector vans are painted so you can identify them, there are warning signs at the roadside telling you that speed traps may be in existance, so if you are still speeding and get caught you really do have to be brainless. Don't speed equates to clean license.
What exactly do people want? The detector vans are painted so you can identify them, there are warning signs at the roadside telling you that speed traps may be in existance, so if you are still speeding and get caught you really do have to be brainless. Don't speed equates to clean license.
Posted by: Jamie, South on 2:40pm Wed 21 May 08
I think that cameras shouldn't have to be obvious. All the time they are you give the speed demons a licence to do whatever speed they want, so long as they keep an eye on the road ahead for a bright yellow box or a marked van. If they were hidden, people would have to do the speed limit in case there was a trap rather than braking hard when they see one.
I think that cameras shouldn't have to be obvious. All the time they are you give the speed demons a licence to do whatever speed they want, so long as they keep an eye on the road ahead for a bright yellow box or a marked van. If they were hidden, people would have to do the speed limit in case there was a trap rather than braking hard when they see one.
Posted by: A Ratepayer on 2:58pm Wed 21 May 08
[quote][bold]Gonzales[/bold] wrote:
It does not matter how many times they take your picture when you have false number plates, do not have the vehicle registered to you or have the vehicle registered under a false name or address. These are the people who are most likely to be offenders! The police need to stop them at the time not issue pictures and fines to some non existant address.[/quote] Here here. All the owners of foreign registered Polish/Latvian cars who the Police admit they won't check for Insurance because it's too time consuming are also laughing their socks off.
If the Police dedicated as much time and effort into catching the Vandals/Muggers/Drug Dealers/Fraudsters/T
heives that pervade this town then people would be prepared to accept this type of road Policing.
But while they continue to chase soft targets and criminalise the general population, whilst not assisting the same people when they really need help with serious crime, they will get little support, assistance or respect.
As for the comment from the Police regarding having to park in that location, that is complete nonsense. The same van is often seen in Chalkwell Avenue and it is always deliberatly placed, semi hidden, just in front of other large vehicles when the rest of the road is clear and free from parked vehicles.
Gonzales wrote:
It does not matter how many times they take your picture when you have false number plates, do not have the vehicle registered to you or have the vehicle registered under a false name or address. These are the people who are most likely to be offenders! The police need to stop them at the time not issue pictures and fines to some non existant address.
Here here. All the owners of foreign registered Polish/Latvian cars who the Police admit they won't check for Insurance because it's too time consuming are also laughing their socks off.
If the Police dedicated as much time and effort into catching the Vandals/Muggers/Drug Dealers/Fraudsters/T
heives that pervade this town then people would be prepared to accept this type of road Policing.
But while they continue to chase soft targets and criminalise the general population, whilst not assisting the same people when they really need help with serious crime, they will get little support, assistance or respect.
As for the comment from the Police regarding having to park in that location, that is complete nonsense. The same van is often seen in Chalkwell Avenue and it is always deliberatly placed, semi hidden, just in front of other large vehicles when the rest of the road is clear and free from parked vehicles.
Posted by: Ethan, nr Dole Farm on 3:07pm Wed 21 May 08
[quote][bold]Peter Pantsless[/bold] wrote:
Ethan, oh what a fool you have just made of yourself.[/quote] Your opinion and we all have one don't we.
When it's too late and you have Police on every corner peering into every aspect of your life. Then you'll feel differently.
Sheeple.
Peter Pantsless wrote:
Ethan, oh what a fool you have just made of yourself.
Your opinion and we all have one don't we.
When it's too late and you have Police on every corner peering into every aspect of your life. Then you'll feel differently.
Sheeple.
Posted by: Tee Hee on 3:12pm Wed 21 May 08
[quote][bold]Ethan[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Peter Pantsless[/bold] wrote: Ethan, oh what a fool you have just made of yourself.[/quote] Your opinion and we all have one don't we. When it's too late and you have Police on every corner peering into every aspect of your life. Then you'll feel differently. Sheeple.[/quote] Now now children. Remember fighting on the internet is like competing in the disabled olympics. You may win but your still retarded ... !
Ethan wrote:
Peter Pantsless wrote: Ethan, oh what a fool you have just made of yourself.
Your opinion and we all have one don't we. When it's too late and you have Police on every corner peering into every aspect of your life. Then you'll feel differently. Sheeple.
Now now children. Remember fighting on the internet is like competing in the disabled olympics. You may win but your still retarded ... !
Posted by: Horace Wimpole, Little Futtock on 3:15pm Wed 21 May 08
[quote][bold]Ethan[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Peter Pantsless[/bold] wrote:
Ethan, oh what a fool you have just made of yourself.[/quote] Your opinion and we all have one don't we.
When it's too late and you have Police on every corner peering into every aspect of your life. Then you'll feel differently.
Sheeple.[/quote] Police on every corner? Highly unlikely me old fruit.
Now, CCTV cameras? That's more like it.
Ethan wrote:
Peter Pantsless wrote:
Ethan, oh what a fool you have just made of yourself.
Your opinion and we all have one don't we.
When it's too late and you have Police on every corner peering into every aspect of your life. Then you'll feel differently.
Sheeple.
Police on every corner? Highly unlikely me old fruit.
Now, CCTV cameras? That's more like it.
Posted by: Malcolm, Camera Central on 3:44pm Wed 21 May 08
Some many cameras, so little difference in casualty reduction.
Partnerships, your tired propaganda and lie machine has been exposed nationally and just like the government who spawned you, your days are numbered.
Some many cameras, so little difference in casualty reduction.
Partnerships, your tired propaganda and lie machine has been exposed nationally and just like the government who spawned you, your days are numbered.
Posted by: Malcolm, Camera Central on 3:44pm Wed 21 May 08
Some many cameras, so little difference in casualty reduction.
Partnerships, your tired propaganda and lie machine has been exposed nationally and just like the government who spawned you, your days are numbered.
Some many cameras, so little difference in casualty reduction.
Partnerships, your tired propaganda and lie machine has been exposed nationally and just like the government who spawned you, your days are numbered.
Posted by: Peter Pantsless, Southend-on-Sea on 3:45pm Wed 21 May 08
[quote][bold]Ethan[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Peter Pantsless[/bold] wrote: Ethan, oh what a fool you have just made of yourself.[/quote] Your opinion and we all have one don't we. When it's too late and you have Police on every corner peering into every aspect of your life. Then you'll feel differently. Sheeple.[/quote] "Police on every corner"...
i'd be happy with that, wouldnt have to worry about getting mugged by immigrants, chave scum, drug, pushers, pimps and hoes then would we?
And if your a law abiding citizen then why would it bother you?
Maybe you aint and thats what your problem is, eh Ethan?
Ethan wrote:
Peter Pantsless wrote: Ethan, oh what a fool you have just made of yourself.
Your opinion and we all have one don't we. When it's too late and you have Police on every corner peering into every aspect of your life. Then you'll feel differently. Sheeple.
"Police on every corner"...
i'd be happy with that, wouldnt have to worry about getting mugged by immigrants, chave scum, drug, pushers, pimps and hoes then would we?
And if your a law abiding citizen then why would it bother you?
Maybe you aint and thats what your problem is, eh Ethan?
Posted by: Peter Pantsless, Southend-on-Sea on 3:47pm Wed 21 May 08
[quote][bold]Ethan[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Peter Pantsless[/bold] wrote: Ethan, oh what a fool you have just made of yourself.[/quote] Your opinion and we all have one don't we. When it's too late and you have Police on every corner peering into every aspect of your life. Then you'll feel differently. Sheeple.[/quote] "Police on every corner"...
i'd be happy with that, wouldnt have to worry about getting mugged by immigrants, chave scum, drug, pushers, pimps and hoes then would we?
And if your a law abiding citizen then why would it bother you?
Maybe you aint and thats what your problem is, eh Ethan?
Ethan wrote:
Peter Pantsless wrote: Ethan, oh what a fool you have just made of yourself.
Your opinion and we all have one don't we. When it's too late and you have Police on every corner peering into every aspect of your life. Then you'll feel differently. Sheeple.
"Police on every corner"...
i'd be happy with that, wouldnt have to worry about getting mugged by immigrants, chave scum, drug, pushers, pimps and hoes then would we?
And if your a law abiding citizen then why would it bother you?
Maybe you aint and thats what your problem is, eh Ethan?
Posted by: Horace Wimpole, Little Futtock on 4:02pm Wed 21 May 08
(Just in case any humour-impaired readers are here, my comment re CCTV vs. actual real police officers was sarcastic).
(Just in case any humour-impaired readers are here, my comment re CCTV vs. actual real police officers was sarcastic).
Posted by: Marshwalker, Shoeburyness on 4:14pm Wed 21 May 08
The speed limit is there for a purpose, If we all decied to only observe laws that we thought right. Regaurdless of any body else's Health & Safety. Then the whole country would descend into anarchy. Just think! it good be your child or wife/husband, or close friend crossing the road, when you decide to go faster.
I am in favour of unmarked speed cameras! you break the law at your peril.
The speed limit is there for a purpose, If we all decied to only observe laws that we thought right. Regaurdless of any body else's Health & Safety. Then the whole country would descend into anarchy. Just think! it good be your child or wife/husband, or close friend crossing the road, when you decide to go faster.
I am in favour of unmarked speed cameras! you break the law at your peril.
Posted by: Horace Wimpole, Little Futtock on 4:17pm Wed 21 May 08
(Just in case any humour-impaired readers are here, my comment re CCTV vs. actual real police officers was sarcastic).
(Just in case any humour-impaired readers are here, my comment re CCTV vs. actual real police officers was sarcastic).
Posted by: Freddy, Basildon on 4:17pm Wed 21 May 08
[quote][bold]Malcolm[/bold] wrote:
Some many cameras, so little difference in casualty reduction.
Partnerships, your tired propaganda and lie machine has been exposed nationally and just like the government who spawned you, your days are numbered.[/quote] Tell you what Malcolm, there's a real easy way to avoid getting fined and not having to pay any money to the nasty horrible government.
Slow the f*** down!
Malcolm wrote:
Some many cameras, so little difference in casualty reduction.
Partnerships, your tired propaganda and lie machine has been exposed nationally and just like the government who spawned you, your days are numbered.
Tell you what Malcolm, there's a real easy way to avoid getting fined and not having to pay any money to the nasty horrible government.
Slow the f*** down!
Posted by: Horace Wimpole, Little Futtock on 4:33pm Wed 21 May 08
(Just in case any humour-impaired readers are here, my comment re CCTV vs. actual real police officers was sarcastic).
(Just in case any humour-impaired readers are here, my comment re CCTV vs. actual real police officers was sarcastic).
Posted by: Ali, Leigh on 4:35pm Wed 21 May 08
Please, please, come down to Olive Avenue in Leigh - constantly used as a speeding rat run by all manner of people. Hide the van and make a stack of money, just stop these bloody boy racers who use it as their own personal race track on a Friday/Saturday night and pretty much throughout the week!! It's only a matter of time before someone is killed down this road!
Please, please, come down to Olive Avenue in Leigh - constantly used as a speeding rat run by all manner of people. Hide the van and make a stack of money, just stop these bloody boy racers who use it as their own personal race track on a Friday/Saturday night and pretty much throughout the week!! It's only a matter of time before someone is killed down this road!
Posted by: Horace Wimpole, Little Futtock on 4:43pm Wed 21 May 08
(Just in case any humour-impaired readers are here, my comment re CCTV vs. actual real police officers was sarcastic).
(Just in case any humour-impaired readers are here, my comment re CCTV vs. actual real police officers was sarcastic).
Posted by: JuliaM, Essex on 4:46pm Wed 21 May 08
Perhaps the people of Denton Road, Newcastle might like to borrow the unmarked police speed trap van.
It might prove useful in stopping the [bold]POLICE[/bold] from speeding, and mowing down any more 16 year old girls....
Perhaps the people of Denton Road, Newcastle might like to borrow the unmarked police speed trap van.
It might prove useful in stopping the
POLICE from speeding, and mowing down any more 16 year old girls....
Posted by: Malcolm, Camera Central on 5:42pm Wed 21 May 08
I tell you what freddy, when the camera people actually start catching people driving dangerously and at speeds more than single figures over an arbitrary limit, relying on the few remaining, ever diminishing actual qualified traffic police officers on the road to catch the serious offenders.
Or there are no reports of employees of camera partnerships being found to be incompetant by the IPCC (Currently Kent and Lancashire)
or when the police are allowed to spend their road safety allowances on readily available superior methods of apprehension than cameras can ever hope to provide, the quango prefering to squander money on more twenty year old obsolete cameras.
I may actually take advice from a simple minded fool like you.
By the way, don't swear at me, as the spokesman for the partnership, it's very unbecoming.
I tell you what freddy, when the camera people actually start catching people driving dangerously and at speeds more than single figures over an arbitrary limit, relying on the few remaining, ever diminishing actual qualified traffic police officers on the road to catch the serious offenders.
Or there are no reports of employees of camera partnerships being found to be incompetant by the IPCC (Currently Kent and Lancashire)
or when the police are allowed to spend their road safety allowances on readily available superior methods of apprehension than cameras can ever hope to provide, the quango prefering to squander money on more twenty year old obsolete cameras.
I may actually take advice from a simple minded fool like you.
By the way, don't swear at me, as the spokesman for the partnership, it's very unbecoming.
Posted by: Malcolm, Camera Central on 5:50pm Wed 21 May 08
By the way Freddy, just in case you're not getting the message and you accuse me of speeding again.
I'm complaining that speed cameras aren't good enough when there is cheaper superior technology available to the force right that can actually tackle the real dangerous drivers, but the partnerships prefer to prop up a failing government with ill gotten revenue scameras, instead of concentrating on road safety.
By the way Freddy, just in case you're not getting the message and you accuse me of speeding again.
I'm complaining that speed cameras aren't good enough when there is cheaper superior technology available to the force right that can actually tackle the real dangerous drivers, but the partnerships prefer to prop up a failing government with ill gotten revenue scameras, instead of concentrating on road safety.
Posted by: devil's Advocate, boozledon on 6:40pm Wed 21 May 08
[quote][bold]Ethan[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Peter Pantsless[/bold] wrote:
Ethan, oh what a fool you have just made of yourself.[/quote] Your opinion and we all have one don\'t we.
When it\'s too late and you have Police on every corner peering into every aspect of your life. Then you\'ll feel differently.
Sheeple.[/quote] I think this conspiracy theory of yours may just lack credence. You probably aren't old enough to remember "the red flag in front of the motor car" but for over a century police have been speed trapping the motorist. In fact, the AA salute was spawned from this. If the patrolman did not salute you, you had to stop and ask him why not? He would mention in passing that policemen were catching unwary motorists further down the road! As this was on the turn of the 19th to 20th centuries, it must be the slowest conspiracy agoing!
On a more serious note, if you do not like a law in my country, as a citizen you have a right to lobby against it and try to get it changed. You do not have the right to break the laws you do not agree with (unlike the residents of the farm you mention!) Furthermore, if your lawbreaking ever brought injury to my family, I will use God's law's (which are in a higher court) to ensure you would never repeat the offence!
Ethan wrote:
Peter Pantsless wrote:
Ethan, oh what a fool you have just made of yourself.
Your opinion and we all have one don\'t we.
When it\'s too late and you have Police on every corner peering into every aspect of your life. Then you\'ll feel differently.
Sheeple.
I think this conspiracy theory of yours may just lack credence. You probably aren't old enough to remember "the red flag in front of the motor car" but for over a century police have been speed trapping the motorist. In fact, the AA salute was spawned from this. If the patrolman did not salute you, you had to stop and ask him why not? He would mention in passing that policemen were catching unwary motorists further down the road! As this was on the turn of the 19th to 20th centuries, it must be the slowest conspiracy agoing!
On a more serious note, if you do not like a law in my country, as a citizen you have a right to lobby against it and try to get it changed. You do not have the right to break the laws you do not agree with (unlike the residents of the farm you mention!) Furthermore, if your lawbreaking ever brought injury to my family, I will use God's law's (which are in a higher court) to ensure you would never repeat the offence!
Posted by: Andre, Bridge on 7:09pm Wed 21 May 08
It's indicative of speed camera faliure that they and colleages in Wales have opennly admitted to hiding them in an ever more desperate attempt to retain credibility while figures refuse to show any significant inroads into the mission statement on which they were initiated.
Speed cameras were supposed to be a highly visible road safety initiative designed to be a deterant and save lives.
The initial concept was wrong and ill advised, so it's little wonder they continue to fall into disrepute on a regular basis and drag down the government authorities who supported them.
To anyone who disagree's, why are their PR people so desperate to get them in the local papers every week, surely a successful project would stand up for itself and not need propaganda. The change in attitude to speed cameras isn't coming after all these years partnerships, give up and put real police back on the road.
It's indicative of speed camera faliure that they and colleages in Wales have opennly admitted to hiding them in an ever more desperate attempt to retain credibility while figures refuse to show any significant inroads into the mission statement on which they were initiated.
Speed cameras were supposed to be a highly visible road safety initiative designed to be a deterant and save lives.
The initial concept was wrong and ill advised, so it's little wonder they continue to fall into disrepute on a regular basis and drag down the government authorities who supported them.
To anyone who disagree's, why are their PR people so desperate to get them in the local papers every week, surely a successful project would stand up for itself and not need propaganda. The change in attitude to speed cameras isn't coming after all these years partnerships, give up and put real police back on the road.
Posted by: beth, hawkwell on 8:31pm Wed 21 May 08
basically if you dont speed you WONT get caught speeding, therefore wont get 3 points on license or a fine, so pray do tell me what the problem is. Why are people whinging about it. Speed limits are there for a reason, not to hinder your journey, but to make the roads safer for other people too. Its only the selfish and ignorant that speed on these roads. If you have to go fast because you are late, leave earlier, get out of bed earlier etc. Its really quite simple.
basically if you dont speed you WONT get caught speeding, therefore wont get 3 points on license or a fine, so pray do tell me what the problem is. Why are people whinging about it. Speed limits are there for a reason, not to hinder your journey, but to make the roads safer for other people too. Its only the selfish and ignorant that speed on these roads. If you have to go fast because you are late, leave earlier, get out of bed earlier etc. Its really quite simple.
Posted by: Ian, UK on 8:44pm Wed 21 May 08
The problem is beth, that your assumption isn't true, with plate cloning rife in the uk at the moment, the chances of picking up a penalty are even higher than ever before, so unless you're lucky enough to be in hospital and unable to drive at the time of the alledged offence and can prove it wasn't you, you're going to be convicted of something you have not done.
Speed camera policy is weak and strewn with loopholes which are being exploited by those prepared to take the chance leaving the innocent to pay the fine while being patronised by short sighted people who can't, or perhaps 'won't' see the problems.
The day you get a fixed penalty and can't remember ever being there, is the day you may open your eyes to the explotation cameras.
The problem is beth, that your assumption isn't true, with plate cloning rife in the uk at the moment, the chances of picking up a penalty are even higher than ever before, so unless you're lucky enough to be in hospital and unable to drive at the time of the alledged offence and can prove it wasn't you, you're going to be convicted of something you have not done.
Speed camera policy is weak and strewn with loopholes which are being exploited by those prepared to take the chance leaving the innocent to pay the fine while being patronised by short sighted people who can't, or perhaps 'won't' see the problems.
The day you get a fixed penalty and can't remember ever being there, is the day you may open your eyes to the explotation cameras.
Posted by: beth, hawkwell on 8:55pm Wed 21 May 08
ok Ian you may have a certain point, but are you now claiming that everyone who gets caught in the speed cameras have been a victim of cloning. Sorry but i refuse to believe that every one of the whingers and whiners on here have been cloned. They have been caught speeding and because they didnt see the camera, they didnt have chance to slam on the brakes to avoid being caught before then speeding up again once past.
ok Ian you may have a certain point, but are you now claiming that everyone who gets caught in the speed cameras have been a victim of cloning. Sorry but i refuse to believe that every one of the whingers and whiners on here have been cloned. They have been caught speeding and because they didnt see the camera, they didnt have chance to slam on the brakes to avoid being caught before then speeding up again once past.
Posted by: beth, hawkwell on 9:00pm Wed 21 May 08
oh and yes i have been caught speeding, i am not an innocent driver. But i dont whinge and whine about it, i was speeding i got caught, i paid the fine and got my 3 points, but i now watch my speed, i have educated myself on the speed limits and if i am at all unsure i stick to 30mph. 9/10 if there are no speed limit reminders the limit is 30, What really really **** me off is the tail gaters, the ones that hassle you to try and make you go faster because they are late because they didnt get out of bed earlier. Sorry but those types of people actually make me drive even slower. I refuse to be forced to drive faster to get a bigger braking gap because all that happens is they speed up. Tapping the brakes to light up brake lights dont work either. So basically if you see me doing 30mph and then slowing down, get off my arse, i pay for my diesel i am not towing you too.
oh and yes i have been caught speeding, i am not an innocent driver. But i dont whinge and whine about it, i was speeding i got caught, i paid the fine and got my 3 points, but i now watch my speed, i have educated myself on the speed limits and if i am at all unsure i stick to 30mph. 9/10 if there are no speed limit reminders the limit is 30, What really really **** me off is the tail gaters, the ones that hassle you to try and make you go faster because they are late because they didnt get out of bed earlier. Sorry but those types of people actually make me drive even slower. I refuse to be forced to drive faster to get a bigger braking gap because all that happens is they speed up. Tapping the brakes to light up brake lights dont work either. So basically if you see me doing 30mph and then slowing down, get off my arse, i pay for my diesel i am not towing you too.
Posted by: Ian, UK on 10:25pm Wed 21 May 08
The point of the matter beth is that it shouldn't be happening at all in 2008 and wouldn't be if we weren't depending on falible technology.
Too many loopholes, too little reduction in casualtys, poor policy of a weak bean counting government.
There are better cheaper strategies available, but they're being ignored because it's cheaper to police with falible autocop than pay real policeman, this government should be ashamed.
The point of the matter beth is that it shouldn't be happening at all in 2008 and wouldn't be if we weren't depending on falible technology.
Too many loopholes, too little reduction in casualtys, poor policy of a weak bean counting government.
There are better cheaper strategies available, but they're being ignored because it's cheaper to police with falible autocop than pay real policeman, this government should be ashamed.
Posted by: Confused, Essex on 10:27pm Wed 21 May 08
[quote][bold]beth[/bold] wrote:
oh and yes i have been caught speeding, i am not an innocent driver. But i dont whinge and whine about it, i was speeding i got caught, i paid the fine and got my 3 points, but i now watch my speed, i have educated myself on the speed limits and if i am at all unsure i stick to 30mph. 9/10 if there are no speed limit reminders the limit is 30, What really really **** me off is the tail gaters, the ones that hassle you to try and make you go faster because they are late because they didnt get out of bed earlier. Sorry but those types of people actually make me drive even slower. I refuse to be forced to drive faster to get a bigger braking gap because all that happens is they speed up. Tapping the brakes to light up brake lights dont work either. So basically if you see me doing 30mph and then slowing down, get off my arse, i pay for my diesel i am not towing you too.[/quote] Are you sure you are Beth?
You sound like a geezer !?!?!
beth wrote:
oh and yes i have been caught speeding, i am not an innocent driver. But i dont whinge and whine about it, i was speeding i got caught, i paid the fine and got my 3 points, but i now watch my speed, i have educated myself on the speed limits and if i am at all unsure i stick to 30mph. 9/10 if there are no speed limit reminders the limit is 30, What really really **** me off is the tail gaters, the ones that hassle you to try and make you go faster because they are late because they didnt get out of bed earlier. Sorry but those types of people actually make me drive even slower. I refuse to be forced to drive faster to get a bigger braking gap because all that happens is they speed up. Tapping the brakes to light up brake lights dont work either. So basically if you see me doing 30mph and then slowing down, get off my arse, i pay for my diesel i am not towing you too.
Are you sure you are Beth?
You sound like a geezer !?!?!
Posted by: Mark on 11:00pm Wed 21 May 08
More of the same tired partnership propaganda I see.
I'd comment at length, but I can't be bothered.
Speed cameras no solution to road safety, nuff said.
More of the same tired partnership propaganda I see.
I'd comment at length, but I can't be bothered.
Speed cameras no solution to road safety, nuff said.
Posted by: eddieyates, Grays on 11:42pm Wed 21 May 08
[quote][bold]beth[/bold] wrote:
oh and yes i have been caught speeding, i am not an innocent driver. But i dont whinge and whine about it, i was speeding i got caught, i paid the fine and got my 3 points, but i now watch my speed, i have educated myself on the speed limits and if i am at all unsure i stick to 30mph. 9/10 if there are no speed limit reminders the limit is 30, What really really **** me off is the tail gaters, the ones that hassle you to try and make you go faster because they are late because they didnt get out of bed earlier. Sorry but those types of people actually make me drive even slower. I refuse to be forced to drive faster to get a bigger braking gap because all that happens is they speed up. Tapping the brakes to light up brake lights dont work either. So basically if you see me doing 30mph and then slowing down, get off my arse, i pay for my diesel i am not towing you too.[/quote] Beth I'm glad to see you are making a effort with your driving. I don't know if you are interested but if you are serious about your driving you can join Rospa and take their advanced driving test.I passed my advanced driving test with IAM whilst training to be a driving instructor, It will take the pressure off when people tail gate and also help your hazard perception and be able to drive defensively. I think it is a very good Idea to drive 30 mph in a 30 zone (mainly built up areas were you will find pedestrians, Schools etc)see the little girl on the TV ad, over 30 and theirs a 80% chance she will die, 30 or under their is a 80% chance she will live. The national speed limit for a single carriageway road is 60 mph for cars, 70 mph on duel carriagways and motorways unless restricted. Hope this is of help. Drive safe all.
P.S I'm am never bothered by speed cameras because I stay within the stated speed limits
beth wrote:
oh and yes i have been caught speeding, i am not an innocent driver. But i dont whinge and whine about it, i was speeding i got caught, i paid the fine and got my 3 points, but i now watch my speed, i have educated myself on the speed limits and if i am at all unsure i stick to 30mph. 9/10 if there are no speed limit reminders the limit is 30, What really really **** me off is the tail gaters, the ones that hassle you to try and make you go faster because they are late because they didnt get out of bed earlier. Sorry but those types of people actually make me drive even slower. I refuse to be forced to drive faster to get a bigger braking gap because all that happens is they speed up. Tapping the brakes to light up brake lights dont work either. So basically if you see me doing 30mph and then slowing down, get off my arse, i pay for my diesel i am not towing you too.
Beth I'm glad to see you are making a effort with your driving. I don't know if you are interested but if you are serious about your driving you can join Rospa and take their advanced driving test.I passed my advanced driving test with IAM whilst training to be a driving instructor, It will take the pressure off when people tail gate and also help your hazard perception and be able to drive defensively. I think it is a very good Idea to drive 30 mph in a 30 zone (mainly built up areas were you will find pedestrians, Schools etc)see the little girl on the TV ad, over 30 and theirs a 80% chance she will die, 30 or under their is a 80% chance she will live. The national speed limit for a single carriageway road is 60 mph for cars, 70 mph on duel carriagways and motorways unless restricted. Hope this is of help. Drive safe all.
P.S I'm am never bothered by speed cameras because I stay within the stated speed limits
Posted by: Alfie on 12:13am Thu 22 May 08
Too many assumptions being made,
I criticise the advert with the little girl for some fundamental flaws, even if you hit that little girl at 30 and she lives, she's never going to be the same again and I think it is abhorant to make it look like as long as you're traveling below 30 everything is going to be fine.
It also doesn't even start to address other conditions such as ice, snow, wet roads, bad light worn tarmac and children that run out from behind parked cars because they're not receiving the same kind of education about road safety that I did when I was a child and has kept me safe, but has forced me to teach my own children myself because the emphasis is all on the driver, not prevention of the accident in the first place.
When was the last time anyone here saw a road safety advert to inform young children to 'hold their parents hand and to look right, look left and look right again' prefer to emphasise this pseudo intelectual nonsense and abuse of the laws of physics and enertia of vehicles driving that little bit more slowely.
It also fails to inform about such events such as over 600 LGV (Heavy Goods vehicles) drivers being caught using our roads with false licenses purchased on the internet whom obviously are not qualified to the task and which speed cameras are simply no solution.
The drop in the number of breathalizer tests since speed cameras were introduced as highlighted by the liberal party is also masked neatly away as counties survive on two day crack downs once of at best twice a year if you include the annual christmas anti drink drive campaigns.
In london last year, over 200,000 speeding convictions were not settled due to raft of reasons, from fake names and addresses to illegal number plates with one motorcyclist caught 66 times by the same camera but that partnerships then taking four years to catch him at enormous cost, only to be given a suspended sentence and be sent on his way complete with license.
The number of speed camera convictions being over turned because of operator incompetence is now in the tens of thousands as partnerships across the country come under scrutiny for alleged misuse and fixing of speeds to bump up conviction rates.
Can I point out that the majority of criticism toward speed cameras is not as the partnership wants us to belive, delivered by the leaded footed, the majority is put forward on documented fact by people who use the roads everyday and have watched driving standards deteriorate dramatically.
No one is saying that speeding is ok, but many are saying that although it is important to enforce speeding law, it is morally corrupt to enforce it at the cost of all else.
It does not take Carol Vorderman to work out that by the governments own declaration that a mere 10% of accidents can be attributed to inappropriate use of speed, that a targeted reduction of a 33% drop in casualtys by 2020 is simply not going to happen unless a significant rethink of policy is held at top level by an authority that is only concerned with road safety and not with finances.
Putting traffic law in the hands of well meaning do-gooders was a mistake and should have been left in the hands of the police, who up until speed cameras arrived, were doing a hell of a lot better job of casualty reduction than the authorities are now.
In other words, if single mindedly pursue speeding as the only cause of fatal accidents on our roads, you're as guilty of the road deaths as those who do the speeding and it's about time we all grew up a bit and stopped simply accepting what we're told because the government said so.
Too many assumptions being made,
I criticise the advert with the little girl for some fundamental flaws, even if you hit that little girl at 30 and she lives, she's never going to be the same again and I think it is abhorant to make it look like as long as you're traveling below 30 everything is going to be fine.
It also doesn't even start to address other conditions such as ice, snow, wet roads, bad light worn tarmac and children that run out from behind parked cars because they're not receiving the same kind of education about road safety that I did when I was a child and has kept me safe, but has forced me to teach my own children myself because the emphasis is all on the driver, not prevention of the accident in the first place.
When was the last time anyone here saw a road safety advert to inform young children to 'hold their parents hand and to look right, look left and look right again' prefer to emphasise this pseudo intelectual nonsense and abuse of the laws of physics and enertia of vehicles driving that little bit more slowely.
It also fails to inform about such events such as over 600 LGV (Heavy Goods vehicles) drivers being caught using our roads with false licenses purchased on the internet whom obviously are not qualified to the task and which speed cameras are simply no solution.
The drop in the number of breathalizer tests since speed cameras were introduced as highlighted by the liberal party is also masked neatly away as counties survive on two day crack downs once of at best twice a year if you include the annual christmas anti drink drive campaigns.
In london last year, over 200,000 speeding convictions were not settled due to raft of reasons, from fake names and addresses to illegal number plates with one motorcyclist caught 66 times by the same camera but that partnerships then taking four years to catch him at enormous cost, only to be given a suspended sentence and be sent on his way complete with license.
The number of speed camera convictions being over turned because of operator incompetence is now in the tens of thousands as partnerships across the country come under scrutiny for alleged misuse and fixing of speeds to bump up conviction rates.
Can I point out that the majority of criticism toward speed cameras is not as the partnership wants us to belive, delivered by the leaded footed, the majority is put forward on documented fact by people who use the roads everyday and have watched driving standards deteriorate dramatically.
No one is saying that speeding is ok, but many are saying that although it is important to enforce speeding law, it is morally corrupt to enforce it at the cost of all else.
It does not take Carol Vorderman to work out that by the governments own declaration that a mere 10% of accidents can be attributed to inappropriate use of speed, that a targeted reduction of a 33% drop in casualtys by 2020 is simply not going to happen unless a significant rethink of policy is held at top level by an authority that is only concerned with road safety and not with finances.
Putting traffic law in the hands of well meaning do-gooders was a mistake and should have been left in the hands of the police, who up until speed cameras arrived, were doing a hell of a lot better job of casualty reduction than the authorities are now.
In other words, if single mindedly pursue speeding as the only cause of fatal accidents on our roads, you're as guilty of the road deaths as those who do the speeding and it's about time we all grew up a bit and stopped simply accepting what we're told because the government said so.
Posted by: eddieyates, Grays on 1:42am Thu 22 May 08
[quote][bold]Alfie[/bold] wrote:
Too many assumptions being made, I criticise the advert with the little girl for some fundamental flaws, even if you hit that little girl at 30 and she lives, she\'s never going to be the same again and I think it is abhorant to make it look like as long as you\'re traveling below 30 everything is going to be fine. It also doesn\'t even start to address other conditions such as ice, snow, wet roads, bad light worn tarmac and children that run out from behind parked cars because they\'re not receiving the same kind of education about road safety that I did when I was a child and has kept me safe, but has forced me to teach my own children myself because the emphasis is all on the driver, not prevention of the accident in the first place. When was the last time anyone here saw a road safety advert to inform young children to \'hold their parents hand and to look right, look left and look right again\' prefer to emphasise this pseudo intelectual nonsense and abuse of the laws of physics and enertia of vehicles driving that little bit more slowely. It also fails to inform about such events such as over 600 LGV (Heavy Goods vehicles) drivers being caught using our roads with false licenses purchased on the internet whom obviously are not qualified to the task and which speed cameras are simply no solution. The drop in the number of breathalizer tests since speed cameras were introduced as highlighted by the liberal party is also masked neatly away as counties survive on two day crack downs once of at best twice a year if you include the annual christmas anti drink drive campaigns. In london last year, over 200,000 speeding convictions were not settled due to raft of reasons, from fake names and addresses to illegal number plates with one motorcyclist caught 66 times by the same camera but that partnerships then taking four years to catch him at enormous cost, only to be given a suspended sentence and be sent on his way complete with license. The number of speed camera convictions being over turned because of operator incompetence is now in the tens of thousands as partnerships across the country come under scrutiny for alleged misuse and fixing of speeds to bump up conviction rates. Can I point out that the majority of criticism toward speed cameras is not as the partnership wants us to belive, delivered by the leaded footed, the majority is put forward on documented fact by people who use the roads everyday and have watched driving standards deteriorate dramatically. No one is saying that speeding is ok, but many are saying that although it is important to enforce speeding law, it is morally corrupt to enforce it at the cost of all else. It does not take Carol Vorderman to work out that by the governments own declaration that a mere 10% of accidents can be attributed to inappropriate use of speed, that a targeted reduction of a 33% drop in casualtys by 2020 is simply not going to happen unless a significant rethink of policy is held at top level by an authority that is only concerned with road safety and not with finances. Putting traffic law in the hands of well meaning do-gooders was a mistake and should have been left in the hands of the police, who up until speed cameras arrived, were doing a hell of a lot better job of casualty reduction than the authorities are now. In other words, if single mindedly pursue speeding as the only cause of fatal accidents on our roads, you\'re as guilty of the road deaths as those who do the speeding and it\'s about time we all grew up a bit and stopped simply accepting what we\'re told because the government said so.[/quote] I am not suggesting speeding is the only cause of so called accidents nothing is 100% but what it is about is REDUCING the risk of accidents ie a child is easly distracted an runs out in front of you, you don't see her/him in time and brake late if you hit her at 30 or under she has 80% chance she will survive thats 80% not 100% sure their is a chance of complications.But hit her at say 40mph in a 30 zone(highly populated areas) and their is a 80% that child will die. As for driving in snow/ice conditions again reduce the risk, keep your windows clear, drive in a higher gear and possibly lower the air pressure in your tyres for snow that is. I am not sure about the statistics you say about but the law is the law and I have been driving since 1984 and have no points on my licence and have never been sent to prison for killing someone due to driving without due care and attention. Also I did make the point about the national speed limits, their is nothing wrong in comming out of a 30 into a national speed limit zone dropping a gear and accelerating to 60/70 depending on road conditions and type of road, this is a vital part of advanced driving as it shows you are making good progress for the conditions.So like I said learn to drive defensivly, have a look at the police driving manual its called Road Craft or the Driving manual all can be found on Amazon. Just one more thing say you are driving on a motorway (motorways are one of the safest roads to travel on) your doing 70 mph in the first lane, road conditions are good, you need to overtake a slower moving vehicle to make good progress. Their is nothing wrong in doing 80mph for the over taking manover as long as you get back into the middle or first lanes as soon as possible and go back to 70 the police will not nick you and if you were taking a advanced test you would not fail
Alfie wrote:
Too many assumptions being made, I criticise the advert with the little girl for some fundamental flaws, even if you hit that little girl at 30 and she lives, she\'s never going to be the same again and I think it is abhorant to make it look like as long as you\'re traveling below 30 everything is going to be fine. It also doesn\'t even start to address other conditions such as ice, snow, wet roads, bad light worn tarmac and children that run out from behind parked cars because they\'re not receiving the same kind of education about road safety that I did when I was a child and has kept me safe, but has forced me to teach my own children myself because the emphasis is all on the driver, not prevention of the accident in the first place. When was the last time anyone here saw a road safety advert to inform young children to \'hold their parents hand and to look right, look left and look right again\' prefer to emphasise this pseudo intelectual nonsense and abuse of the laws of physics and enertia of vehicles driving that little bit more slowely. It also fails to inform about such events such as over 600 LGV (Heavy Goods vehicles) drivers being caught using our roads with false licenses purchased on the internet whom obviously are not qualified to the task and which speed cameras are simply no solution. The drop in the number of breathalizer tests since speed cameras were introduced as highlighted by the liberal party is also masked neatly away as counties survive on two day crack downs once of at best twice a year if you include the annual christmas anti drink drive campaigns. In london last year, over 200,000 speeding convictions were not settled due to raft of reasons, from fake names and addresses to illegal number plates with one motorcyclist caught 66 times by the same camera but that partnerships then taking four years to catch him at enormous cost, only to be given a suspended sentence and be sent on his way complete with license. The number of speed camera convictions being over turned because of operator incompetence is now in the tens of thousands as partnerships across the country come under scrutiny for alleged misuse and fixing of speeds to bump up conviction rates. Can I point out that the majority of criticism toward speed cameras is not as the partnership wants us to belive, delivered by the leaded footed, the majority is put forward on documented fact by people who use the roads everyday and have watched driving standards deteriorate dramatically. No one is saying that speeding is ok, but many are saying that although it is important to enforce speeding law, it is morally corrupt to enforce it at the cost of all else. It does not take Carol Vorderman to work out that by the governments own declaration that a mere 10% of accidents can be attributed to inappropriate use of speed, that a targeted reduction of a 33% drop in casualtys by 2020 is simply not going to happen unless a significant rethink of policy is held at top level by an authority that is only concerned with road safety and not with finances. Putting traffic law in the hands of well meaning do-gooders was a mistake and should have been left in the hands of the police, who up until speed cameras arrived, were doing a hell of a lot better job of casualty reduction than the authorities are now. In other words, if single mindedly pursue speeding as the only cause of fatal accidents on our roads, you\'re as guilty of the road deaths as those who do the speeding and it\'s about time we all grew up a bit and stopped simply accepting what we\'re told because the government said so.
I am not suggesting speeding is the only cause of so called accidents nothing is 100% but what it is about is REDUCING the risk of accidents ie a child is easly distracted an runs out in front of you, you don't see her/him in time and brake late if you hit her at 30 or under she has 80% chance she will survive thats 80% not 100% sure their is a chance of complications.But hit her at say 40mph in a 30 zone(highly populated areas) and their is a 80% that child will die. As for driving in snow/ice conditions again reduce the risk, keep your windows clear, drive in a higher gear and possibly lower the air pressure in your tyres for snow that is. I am not sure about the statistics you say about but the law is the law and I have been driving since 1984 and have no points on my licence and have never been sent to prison for killing someone due to driving without due care and attention. Also I did make the point about the national speed limits, their is nothing wrong in comming out of a 30 into a national speed limit zone dropping a gear and accelerating to 60/70 depending on road conditions and type of road, this is a vital part of advanced driving as it shows you are making good progress for the conditions.So like I said learn to drive defensivly, have a look at the police driving manual its called Road Craft or the Driving manual all can be found on Amazon. Just one more thing say you are driving on a motorway (motorways are one of the safest roads to travel on) your doing 70 mph in the first lane, road conditions are good, you need to overtake a slower moving vehicle to make good progress. Their is nothing wrong in doing 80mph for the over taking manover as long as you get back into the middle or first lanes as soon as possible and go back to 70 the police will not nick you and if you were taking a advanced test you would not fail
Posted by: Alfie on 2:38am Thu 22 May 08
eddie yates,
You can't make a statement like yours based on hearsay or previous wisdom.
The speed limit on motorways is 70 and regardless of your experienced opinion, an average speed camera will not have the ability or wisdom of an advanced police driver so would not be able to determine an over-taking manouvre.
Also, it should be made clear that the 10% + 2mph margin for a breach of a speed limit is a myth and that simply reflects what some areas set their cameras at.
There is no legislation to allow for breaking the speed limit by any margin and you should not advise otherwise, with partnerships getting evermore desperate for those illusive results.
Too many myths and old wives tales and too much propaganda surrounds cameras, but at least the Americans authorities opennly admit and in fact boast, that theirs are for generating revenue and funding road repairs.
eddie yates,
You can't make a statement like yours based on hearsay or previous wisdom.
The speed limit on motorways is 70 and regardless of your experienced opinion, an average speed camera will not have the ability or wisdom of an advanced police driver so would not be able to determine an over-taking manouvre.
Also, it should be made clear that the 10% + 2mph margin for a breach of a speed limit is a myth and that simply reflects what some areas set their cameras at.
There is no legislation to allow for breaking the speed limit by any margin and you should not advise otherwise, with partnerships getting evermore desperate for those illusive results.
Too many myths and old wives tales and too much propaganda surrounds cameras, but at least the Americans authorities opennly admit and in fact boast, that theirs are for generating revenue and funding road repairs.
Posted by: George on 2:57am Thu 22 May 08
I'd like to add to Alfies myths and the hit me at 30 film
Hit me at 40 and there's an 80% chance I'll die, hit me at 30 and there's an 80% chance I'll live, start prosecuting parents for allowing children to cross busy roads with no supervision or teaching of the highway code and there's a 99% chance I won't get knocked over in the first place.
Think! stop dumbing down important road safety messages, to validate faulty, simplistic technology if you want more people to survive on Britains Roads.
I'd like to add to Alfies myths and the hit me at 30 film
Hit me at 40 and there's an 80% chance I'll die, hit me at 30 and there's an 80% chance I'll live, start prosecuting parents for allowing children to cross busy roads with no supervision or teaching of the highway code and there's a 99% chance I won't get knocked over in the first place.
Think! stop dumbing down important road safety messages, to validate faulty, simplistic technology if you want more people to survive on Britains Roads.
Posted by: Geoff Marshall on 12:57pm Thu 22 May 08
In a civilised uncorrupt country the fact that fatal accidents amongst pedestrians, cyclists and especially children have risen and continue to rise since speed cameras were introduced, would bring the effectivness of camera usage into serious question by government.
But lets all continue to turn a blind eye and hope the propaganda onslaught doesn't kill too many people before the reality is realised.
In a civilised uncorrupt country the fact that fatal accidents amongst pedestrians, cyclists and especially children have risen and continue to rise since speed cameras were introduced, would bring the effectivness of camera usage into serious question by government.
But lets all continue to turn a blind eye and hope the propaganda onslaught doesn't kill too many people before the reality is realised.
Posted by: Brian on 1:08pm Thu 22 May 08
We do seem to keep being told the same thing over and over again don't we. So let me remind everyone who signed us up to the speed camera program, the now chancellor, Alistair Darling, when he was at the DfT with Gordon 'bean counter' Brown's full support as Chancellor at the time.
Yes, the incompetant baffoons who've lost data at HMRC and DVLA, ruined the national health computer systems, rendered the child support agency impotent and made an enormous taxation mistake by removing the basic rate of tax on purely political grounds (amongst many other things including the Iraq war,) introduced the speed camera.
Question: Could speed cameras be the one thing they got right? or as a nation, are we simply not that optimistic?
We do seem to keep being told the same thing over and over again don't we. So let me remind everyone who signed us up to the speed camera program, the now chancellor, Alistair Darling, when he was at the DfT with Gordon 'bean counter' Brown's full support as Chancellor at the time.
Yes, the incompetant baffoons who've lost data at HMRC and DVLA, ruined the national health computer systems, rendered the child support agency impotent and made an enormous taxation mistake by removing the basic rate of tax on purely political grounds (amongst many other things including the Iraq war,) introduced the speed camera.
Question: Could speed cameras be the one thing they got right? or as a nation, are we simply not that optimistic?
Posted by: beth, hawkwell on 4:01pm Thu 22 May 08
Most people seem to be missing the point, Camera operators have to be crafty now, because they KNOW that the minute you have safely passed the camera, you speed up. If you adhere to the limit you WONT get caught. People call them money making machines, they may well be that, so why on earth do you speed and feed the fund. dont make sense to me.
There is one person on here that would have you believe that every person that gets caught speeding has been cloned. I agree it does happen, but come on, the cloners have a higher purpose than to shoot thru every available speed camera totting up fines and points for you. They are the ones that are intent on burglary and what to hide the real identity of their car,
Most people seem to be missing the point, Camera operators have to be crafty now, because they KNOW that the minute you have safely passed the camera, you speed up. If you adhere to the limit you WONT get caught. People call them money making machines, they may well be that, so why on earth do you speed and feed the fund. dont make sense to me.
There is one person on here that would have you believe that every person that gets caught speeding has been cloned. I agree it does happen, but come on, the cloners have a higher purpose than to shoot thru every available speed camera totting up fines and points for you. They are the ones that are intent on burglary and what to hide the real identity of their car,
Posted by: Mark on 6:13pm Thu 22 May 08
I think it's you who's missing the point Beth, Britains road safety record is getting worse with 40% of our roads now well below minimum European safety standards, collisions have platued out countrywide and there is now an increase in casualties especially amongst pedestrians and above all children.
Inspite of the presence of so many cameras and their operators who're now resorting to hiding them in their desperate attempts to trap even more drivers as they try to prove their faulty case, the figures aren't dropping, they're increasing, because cameras simply don't work and millions of pounds of fines is being taken to prop up a failing government who can't even stand by it's agreements on pay for the police.
When it is going to become clear to those of limited IQ, that simply erecting speed cameras on sub standard infrastructure is no solution to road safety when less than 10% of the accidents are attributed to inappropriate use of speed in the first place.
The philosophy is wrong, it shouldn't be a question of what speed is safe to hit a child at, it should be a question of how do we stop children and cars meeting on the roads at all.
It should be quite simple to understand, take the Eurostar, it travels at 125mph and is considered very safe, however, if you stand a child in front of the same train, even at 20mph, that child is going to die.
In simpler terms, speed isn't the problem, thats why more people are dieing as the wild goose chase continues.
I think it's you who's missing the point Beth, Britains road safety record is getting worse with 40% of our roads now well below minimum European safety standards, collisions have platued out countrywide and there is now an increase in casualties especially amongst pedestrians and above all children.
Inspite of the presence of so many cameras and their operators who're now resorting to hiding them in their desperate attempts to trap even more drivers as they try to prove their faulty case, the figures aren't dropping, they're increasing, because cameras simply don't work and millions of pounds of fines is being taken to prop up a failing government who can't even stand by it's agreements on pay for the police.
When it is going to become clear to those of limited IQ, that simply erecting speed cameras on sub standard infrastructure is no solution to road safety when less than 10% of the accidents are attributed to inappropriate use of speed in the first place.
The philosophy is wrong, it shouldn't be a question of what speed is safe to hit a child at, it should be a question of how do we stop children and cars meeting on the roads at all.
It should be quite simple to understand, take the Eurostar, it travels at 125mph and is considered very safe, however, if you stand a child in front of the same train, even at 20mph, that child is going to die.
In simpler terms, speed isn't the problem, thats why more people are dieing as the wild goose chase continues.
Posted by: Mark on 6:26pm Thu 22 May 08
I should point out that I don't advocate breaking the speed limits of the country, I simply point out that obsessive pursuit of the wrong reason for accidents isn't going to stop them as todays actual non partnership manipulated figures show.
Can I also point out the one claim that partnerships make?
Accidents drop at camera sites.
When you take into account that along with the speed camera the road surface has often also been renewed, slashing stoping distances, lighting, road lining, signs and other street furniture is renewed and refurbished it is little wonder that accidents return to the same level as before the road fell into such bad repair.
Speed cameras and the pursuit of so many drivers less than 10 mph over an arbitrary is absurd when those same camares result in a reduction in traffic police and the ease with which drivers who break the speed limits by a large margin and do indeed drive dangerously are simply not caught at all.
Partnership figures show that 95% of speeding fines are given to vehicles at less than 40mph.
It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why more people are dieing.
I should point out that I don't advocate breaking the speed limits of the country, I simply point out that obsessive pursuit of the wrong reason for accidents isn't going to stop them as todays actual non partnership manipulated figures show.
Can I also point out the one claim that partnerships make?
Accidents drop at camera sites.
When you take into account that along with the speed camera the road surface has often also been renewed, slashing stoping distances, lighting, road lining, signs and other street furniture is renewed and refurbished it is little wonder that accidents return to the same level as before the road fell into such bad repair.
Speed cameras and the pursuit of so many drivers less than 10 mph over an arbitrary is absurd when those same camares result in a reduction in traffic police and the ease with which drivers who break the speed limits by a large margin and do indeed drive dangerously are simply not caught at all.
Partnership figures show that 95% of speeding fines are given to vehicles at less than 40mph.
It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why more people are dieing.
Posted by: Dave the Rave, Essex on 9:39pm Thu 22 May 08
If speed cameras are so effective, then explain to me why casualty figures have not fallen since their introduction?
If speeding is dangerous, explain to me why motorways are the safest roads?
Speed limits were introduced when the average saloon car could only do 75 MPH. The famed Lotus Cortina could do 104MPH.
More road deaths have been avoided by introduction of seatbelts, airbags and crumple zones/safety cells, steel radial tyres etc than speed cameras.
Do speed cameras catch uninsured drivers, or those on mobile phones, drunk drivers, drivers under the influence of drugs? or those using unroadworthy cars?
Its just the illusion of safety.
As for a police state, we have more CCTV cameras than anywhere else in the world.
This country is sleepwalking to a totalitarian state. ID cards are coming, email/phone calls/text database.
Don't tell me that "only the guilty have anything to fear", thats what the Dutch people said when the Dutch government started recording lots of data about their people, only for it it be used by the Gestapo when the Germans invaded.
The famed quote is "those who give up liberty for security deserve neither"
If speed cameras are so effective, then explain to me why casualty figures have not fallen since their introduction?
If speeding is dangerous, explain to me why motorways are the safest roads?
Speed limits were introduced when the average saloon car could only do 75 MPH. The famed Lotus Cortina could do 104MPH.
More road deaths have been avoided by introduction of seatbelts, airbags and crumple zones/safety cells, steel radial tyres etc than speed cameras.
Do speed cameras catch uninsured drivers, or those on mobile phones
