[Archived] Speed Camera's Again

[Flopsy]

err..... Whose Law of Physics are you quoting there Den?

er basic GCSE standard physics.

1/2MV² Which is called Kinetic Energy.

Which shows that the velocity (Speed in a certain direction) has a massive effect on the energy involved in a collision.

eg, the faster you go, the energy you've got to disapate is increased exponentially.

That last bit's Newton's law of conservation of energy.

next

[Anti-Dingle-Brigade]

err..... Whose Law of Physics are you quoting there Den?

...

I hope that was tongue in cheek, or I'm afraid I'm going to have to "laugh out loud" for quite a while after your comments a few months ago regarding the "education standards are slipping" issue. I'd argue that kinetic energy, certainly the very basics, are covered in late primary school/early secondary school.

Standards slipping, eh? More like increasing at a freakishly explosive rate if everybody of Gordon's generation share his stunning ignorance of basic science.

EDIT: And just in case somebody picks me up some loose spelling or grammar - I'm in a rush.

[den]

Absolutly not!

Control is the key to safety, all studies and risk assesments confirm this

Oh well, I'm sure we would all agree that if nothing ever collided, we could all drive around at tremendous speeds.

That's it isn't it? Eureka, all you anti speed camera people are basing your arguments on the "nothing need ever collide" principle! Gotcha!

Or - if you accept that moving objects will always collide, and accept that the more force involved, the more the damage, then can I assume your only objections are against the type of hardware being used?

[yoda]

Oh well, I'm sure we would all agree that if nothing ever collided, we could all drive around at tremendous speeds.

That's it isn't it? Eureka, all you anti speed camera people are basing your arguments on the "nothing need ever collide" principle! Gotcha!

Or - if you accept that moving objects will always collide, and accept that the more force involved, the more the damage, then can I assume your only objections are against the type of hardware being used?

you obviously ignored my post above

"You have no idea what the criterior is for safety, look around your nursing home and check out the risk assesments that have or should have been done by law.

You might learn something about safety and control.

I will point out again that I am not anti speed cameras, they just do not do the job that the government says they are for, if they did nobody would get a ticket for speeding, which is the other point I was making, self regulation does not work, and that should be obvious to the whole world with the financial sector a shining example.

May I suggest you and Den carry out a risk assesment on the cameras and link it to the job they are supposed to be doing."

[den]

you obviously ignored my post above

"You have no idea what the criterior is for safety, look around your nursing home and check out the risk assesments that have or should have been done by law.

You might learn something about safety and control.

I will point out again that I am not anti speed cameras, they just do not do the job that the government says they are for, if they did nobody would get a ticket for speeding, which is the other point I was making, self regulation does not work, and that should be obvious to the whole world with the financial sector a shining example.

May I suggest you and Den carry out a risk assesment on the cameras and link it to the job they are supposed to be doing."

I am den

Yoda - speed camera's do stop people from speeding - fact. That's indisputable. Maybe not absolutely everyone, but certainly a lot of people slow down when in the range of camera's. A lot of people also slow down when they're not sure whether there's a speed camera as well.

I take it, that being accepted, you're happy with them? I'm also struggling to see how anyone can object to them if they accept that speed camera's slow most people down, speed kills and vehicles will always hit people.

[yoda]

I am den

Yoda - speed camera's do stop people from speeding - fact. That's indisputable. Maybe not absolutely everyone, but certainly a lot of people slow down when in the range of camera's. A lot of people also slow down when they're not sure whether there's a speed camera as well.

I take it, that being accepted, you're happy with them? I'm also struggling to see how anyone can object to them if they accept that speed camera's slow most people down, speed kills and vehicles will always hit people.

I have highlighted where it all falls down, like the government studies show!

[den]

I have highlighted where it all falls down, like the government studies show!

Totally beat Yoda?

[yoda]

Totally beat Yoda?

How so?

not capable of constructing a risk assesment are we ?

[den]

How so?

Because you don't have a comeback to the facts that speed camera's slow down traffic, thus making the roads safer. They also have an effect where people aren't sure whether there's a speed camera, or not.

Never mind.

[yoda]

Because you don't have a comeback to the facts that speed camera's slow down traffic, thus making the roads safer. They also have an effect where people aren't sure whether there's a speed camera, or not.

Never mind.

When are people like you going to wake up to the fact that some drivers only slow down in the immediate area of a camera, a miniscule area compared to the total road space in the UK.

I say some drivers because of the vast amount of revenue that cameras generate ie drivers still driving to fast,

again, all government studies show that they do not do what they are promoted as.

Is that not clear, or do you have shares in camera production company?

[den]

When are people like you going to wake up to the fact that some drivers only slow down in the immediate area of a camera, a miniscule area compared to the total road space in the UK.

I say some drivers because of the vast amount of revenue that cameras generate ie drivers still driving to fast,

again, all government studies show that they do not do what they are promoted as.

Is that not clear, or do you have shares in camera production company?

They're only supposed to look at the area they cover Yoda. - and guess what - they work! Didn't you say they don't? No-one claims they cover the whole country do they?

- and if they do what they're supposed to do, that's good isn't it? They slow vehicles down and that makes the road safer doesn't it? So they're worth having aren't they, because they make the roads safer?

[American]

Not quite sure how suddenly slowing down by up to 20mph is making the roads safer....

[colin]

Not quite sure how suddenly slowing down by up to 20mph is making the roads safer....

It means you don't kill or maim other people as much as you do if you are drivng 20mph faster if you have a crash. It also means that all road users in. say, a 30mph limit, expect vehicles to be under that speed and act acordingly. Not exactly rocket science really.

It seems quite a nice outcome. A sort of win-win situation. Someone lives & the driver gets off without a charge of "causing death by dangerous driving."

Driver gets where he or she is going 5 minutes later. Probably a small price to pay.

[thenodrog]

Driver gets where he or she is going 5 minutes later. Probably a small price to pay.

You'd have missed RSC's goal on Sat!

[Presty On Tour]

I don't mind the speed cameras in the 30mph zones. Rolling along 20mph in my "black bmw" on my big fat shinny alloys with some grime drum n bass vibrating the sub woofers and I'm totally chilled out, backing up the convoy behind me.

Luckily where I live there isn't many speed cameras, it's the speed van and guns you deal with.

I got my first 3 points on the m4 in Newport. It was my first time on the motorway as I only passed my test 4 weeks prior and I was on my way to Ewood Park to watch us play Liverpool. Was a bit excited about the match and was driving along to the instructions off the old man, "always look as far ahead as you can for dangers" and your in a Ford Escort, not an F1 car!

I was making good progress and moved from the fast lane into the middle lane and was cruising along when I looked in the rear view mirror and there was a Volvo estate police car with it's lights on waving me to pull over. Apparently I went through a speed trap at 99.1mph! Another 1mph and I would of been banned! Lucky because I wasn't banned but unlucky because what about the others going faster than me in their Mercedes, BMW's etc! What about them?

By the way, the game finished 1-1. Jansen for us and Owen for them.

The only other time I got caught speeding was in a 40mph dual carriage way. I was leaving the roundabout behind a HGV Oil Tanker and went past it in a controlled fashion and in the distance was a policeman with a speed gun waving me in. 48mph I was busted for and was not happy as it was around 11.30pm and hardly any traffic! By the time they finished with me at the side of the road, there was 5 cars behind me waiting inline to get tickets. Not a jolly bunch.

Haven't they got anything better to do like catching pedophiles, rapists, murderers etc instead of hiding in the bushes with a speed gun! Easy money though isn't it!

As for the speed vans, they are only parked in the 30mph zones here so they don't bother me. When I worked as a postman I used to wind them up by parking my van right in front of them so all they could see was red metal! They could do nothing about it as I wasn't breaking any law and was doing my round.

I do enjoy going out for a late night drive, around 2-3am. Nothing on the road and just hearing my engine growl as I let her out around the mountain side is very relaxing.

As for speed bumps, I'm think they are alright because if you don't slow down for them, your going to leave half your car behind. My only problem with them is they rub my bodykit and exhaust.

What I have learned is if your speeding in a high performance motor, you are less likely to be done than if your speeding in an older car with a smaller engine. This is what I believe is called the layer cake.

Since the days of my escort, astra, celica etc I have had a clean license now for a few years. The Only problem I have with my bmw these days is being searched all the time!

[Paul]

So lets get this right, within four weeks of passing your test and on your first trip on a motorway you found it appropriate to drive at almost 100mph? Might I suggest you needed a little more experience before attempting this. "In a controlled fashion" (your words) you exited a roundabout at 48mph (in 40 limit) and overtook an HGV in one manouevre? In a controlled fashion

Ladies and gentelmen I give you the perfect answer to those who think we shouldn't have speed cameras.

[Anti-Dingle-Brigade]

The money excuse is a load of cack. Even Clarkson admitted that, and he hates them. He pointed out that the Government got more money from Simon Cowell's income tax than from all the speed cameras in England, so it's hardly a cash cow.

[BiggusLaddus]

The money excuse is a load of cack. Even Clarkson admitted that, and he hates them. He pointed out that the Government got more money from Simon Cowell's income tax than from all the speed cameras in England, so it's hardly a cash cow.

They have never been about direct revenue raising, although there is obviously good profit in the vans or private companies wouldn't be operating them. The great thing about cameras from the governments point of view is that they are visible (they can be seen to be doing something) and they are self-financing. They are about policing on the cheap, just like PCSO's on the beat and HATO's on the motorway.

If all of these things had been brought in sensibly to support the police then there would be much less of an argument, but instead they are used instead of the policebecause they cost less, leaving the real police free to do more important things like fill out 4hrs of paperwork per arrest.

[Flopsy]

You'd have missed RSC's goal on Sat!

with your self admitted lack of knowledge on Physics, I doubt you'ld be able to cope with the idea of getting to the ground early. So five minutes either way, is, like your opinions, irrelevant to the grand scheme of things

[Presty On Tour]

So lets get this right, within four weeks of passing your test and on your first trip on a motorway you found it appropriate to drive at almost 100mph? Might I suggest you needed a little more experience before attempting this. "In a controlled fashion" (your words) you exited a roundabout at 48mph (in 40 limit) and overtook an HGV in one manouevre? In a controlled fashion

Ladies and gentelmen I give you the perfect answer to those who think we shouldn't have speed cameras.

My first time on the motorway i was just following the traffic in the fast line and got caught, no excuses.

With the 2nd ticket, maybe I worded it wrong. I followed the tanker off the roundabout at about 10-15mph and these are huge vehicles, so their acceleration is approx 0-40 in 4 days! Anybody else would of done the same maneuver and gone around it on a dual carriageway.

[Al]

I must admit to hating speed cameras but if I really think about why it has nothing really to do with being caught speeding. If I was caught by a plod in a car I would shrug my shoulders and accept a 'fair cop'.

It's really the whole 'Big Brother' 'Nanny State' scenario of being snooped on everywhere you go. It ranks with CCTV cameras, DNA databases the government wanting access to your private emails and tracking your movements by satellite . Now we are recording movements for congestion charges and police want to watch what is going on in pubs. What next? How long before the 'Thought Police' or a camera installed in your house?.

The whole thing is escalating at an alarming rate. It's an invasion of privacy and it really concerns me.

[colin]

I must admit to hating speed cameras but if I really think about why it has nothing really to do with being caught speeding. If I was caught by a plod in a car I would shrug my shoulders and accept a 'fair cop'.

It's really the whole 'Big Brother' 'Nanny State' scenario of being snooped on everywhere you go. It ranks with CCTV cameras, DNA databases the government wanting access to your private emails and tracking your movements by satellite . Now we are recording movements for congestion charges and police want to watch what is going on in pubs. What next? How long before the 'Thought Police' or a camera installed in your house?.

The whole thing is escalating at an alarming rate. It's an invasion of privacy and it really concerns me.

Not really Al,

Safety/speed cameras clock the registration of the offending vehicle. They have no way of knowing who was actually driving the vehicle. They are not there to record where you are nor what you are doing. If you stay within the speed limit they do not clock the vehicle registration.

On the other hand, as soon as I walk down a street in the centre of Manchester I'm on a camera. That's a different subject altogether.

[thenodrog]

Not really Al,

Safety/speed cameras clock the registration of the offending vehicle. They have no way of knowing who was actually driving the vehicle.

Ah there's the rub! They don't prosecute the vehicle do they? Nor even the driver. It's the person that the vehicle is registered to that cops it if the driver at the time cannot be established. Therefore in opposition to one of the basic principles of English law the owner is guilty until proven innocent.

[stuwilky]

The owner of the vehicle is required to know who is driving the vehicle at any given time though. Or they probably arent insured either....

[colin]

The owner of the vehicle is required to know who is driving the vehicle at any given time though. Or they probably arent insured either....

TY Stuwilky, saves me saying it.