Discussion
SturdyHSV said:
Leins said:
SturdyHSV said:
Those paying attention to the road will see it and not be caught (and arguably won't be speeding in an inappropriate place anyway as they're paying attention), whereas the people who are actually a danger because they are both speeding and not paying enough attention to see a big police van on the side of the road will be caught
Kind of playing devil's advocate here to a degree, but I've often wondered if putting a great distraction like a camera van along a stretch of road where children might be crossing is actually the safest way to protect themAlex@POD said:
talksthetorque said:
First an apology. I know I said I'd flounce off, yet here I still am.
<re-flounce>
Actually, that was my mistake, I only misinterpreted it once. And you won't be able to fix me, people have tried. Alex@POD said:
If I misunderstood your meaning, twice, then why not make it clearer rather than flouncing off?
if you interpreted things i posted incorrectly twice in a row, what are the chances you will read what I put and not then rewrite your incorrect interpretation of it on the third or fourth attempt?<re-flounce>
However, you still refuse to clarify what you were trying to say. You might has well have said the road appears to be made of tarmac for all the value your post added to the thread!
Im sure you have them to hand, so can you share the accident statistics for the lane in question.
As you have it, can you also share the ages of the victims concerned.
Id like to know these details, before I go off on one about the good work that particular van must be doing for safety and making myself look a bit churlish if it turned out not to be the case.
Fanks!
My bother actually got caught by a camera along the road from a local secondary school, whilst on the way to the gym.
Good thing too!! 35mph in a 30. Bang to rights.
The only strange thing is that it was 07:45am on a Sunday morning.
I don't think he goes that way during school opening and closing times, as the road is normally gridlocked with badly parked parents and cars unable to go over 15mph due to congestion and people crossing the roads to reach those badly parked cars. Im sure most people passing at that time are looking at the 30mph limit with wide eyed wonder.
Good thing too!! 35mph in a 30. Bang to rights.
The only strange thing is that it was 07:45am on a Sunday morning.
I don't think he goes that way during school opening and closing times, as the road is normally gridlocked with badly parked parents and cars unable to go over 15mph due to congestion and people crossing the roads to reach those badly parked cars. Im sure most people passing at that time are looking at the 30mph limit with wide eyed wonder.
Mandalore said:
Alex@POD said:
talksthetorque said:
First an apology. I know I said I'd flounce off, yet here I still am.
<re-flounce>
Actually, that was my mistake, I only misinterpreted it once. And you won't be able to fix me, people have tried. Alex@POD said:
If I misunderstood your meaning, twice, then why not make it clearer rather than flouncing off?
if you interpreted things i posted incorrectly twice in a row, what are the chances you will read what I put and not then rewrite your incorrect interpretation of it on the third or fourth attempt?<re-flounce>
However, you still refuse to clarify what you were trying to say. You might has well have said the road appears to be made of tarmac for all the value your post added to the thread!
Im sure you have them to hand, so can you share the accident statistics for the lane in question.
As you have it, can you also share the ages of the victims concerned.
Id like to know these details, before I go off on one about the good work that particular van must be doing for safety and making myself look a bit churlish if it turned out not to be the case.
Fanks!
http://accidentdatabase.co.uk/accidents/view/20114...
Edited by Mandalore on Friday 29th April 16:30
Mandalore said:
Mandalore said:
Alex@POD said:
talksthetorque said:
First an apology. I know I said I'd flounce off, yet here I still am.
<re-flounce>
Actually, that was my mistake, I only misinterpreted it once. And you won't be able to fix me, people have tried. Alex@POD said:
If I misunderstood your meaning, twice, then why not make it clearer rather than flouncing off?
if you interpreted things i posted incorrectly twice in a row, what are the chances you will read what I put and not then rewrite your incorrect interpretation of it on the third or fourth attempt?<re-flounce>
However, you still refuse to clarify what you were trying to say. You might has well have said the road appears to be made of tarmac for all the value your post added to the thread!
Im sure you have them to hand, so can you share the accident statistics for the lane in question.
As you have it, can you also share the ages of the victims concerned.
Id like to know these details, before I go off on one about the good work that particular van must be doing for safety and making myself look a bit churlish if it turned out not to be the case.
Fanks!
http://accidentdatabase.co.uk/accidents/view/20114...
Edited by Mandalore on Friday 29th April 16:30
Mandalore said:
My bother actually got caught by a camera along the road from a local secondary school, whilst on the way to the gym.
Good thing too!! 35mph in a 30. Bang to rights.
The only strange thing is that it was 07:45am on a Sunday morning.
I don't think he goes that way during school opening and closing times, as the road is normally gridlocked with badly parked parents and cars unable to go over 15mph due to congestion and people crossing the roads to reach those badly parked cars. Im sure most people passing at that time are looking at the 30mph limit with wide eyed wonder.
Bit like my last session with RoSPA the other week. We hit the M57 at just after 10am on Sunday morning. In total there were four, maybe five cars on the entire motorway (counting both sides). Despite that, the camera van was up on one of the gantries (just around a bend) with traffic cars waiting to pounce on early morning kitten killers out for a Sunday jaunt before the traffic thickened up. You know, just in case. Lucky they were, as they'd already pulled over one errant child/polar bear murderer who was no doubt causing mayhem for the other three cars on the road before they collared him. Phew. Good thing too!! 35mph in a 30. Bang to rights.
The only strange thing is that it was 07:45am on a Sunday morning.
I don't think he goes that way during school opening and closing times, as the road is normally gridlocked with badly parked parents and cars unable to go over 15mph due to congestion and people crossing the roads to reach those badly parked cars. Im sure most people passing at that time are looking at the 30mph limit with wide eyed wonder.
The Crack Fox said:
I can see both sides of this argument.
It doesn't help that we're (mostly) all so pissed off with cameras being inappropriately sited, or not in use where they're actually needed, that we have little sympathy for the van pictured which may well be placed in a 'sensible' spot.
This, 100%. I'm still waiting to see if I have 3 points on the way for a camera van sited locally just metres in front of a 60 sign, where there are no houses, and it is entirely safe for people to pick up their speed anticipating it about to become NSL. It doesn't help that we're (mostly) all so pissed off with cameras being inappropriately sited, or not in use where they're actually needed, that we have little sympathy for the van pictured which may well be placed in a 'sensible' spot.
Where the van is parked will be reducing the visibility of the junction just in front of it, but when the vehicles pulling out do get hit at least they will be hit at a lower speed.
The Porsche owner may have questionable taste in cars, but I like his style. He also has bigger balls than me.
The Porsche owner may have questionable taste in cars, but I like his style. He also has bigger balls than me.
Alex@POD said:
most people are taking offence because they are trying to catch people speeding.
If people don't speed, they won't get caught!
If they get caught, it's their own fault for breaking the law.
Everyone speeds - including my 75yr old mother.If people don't speed, they won't get caught!
If they get caught, it's their own fault for breaking the law.
When only the fastest 10%-20% get points - as in the days before cameras - then the speed limits will be set at correct levels.
They are far too low and that wasn't an issue when they were enforced by Policemen with common sense - it is an issue now.
The safe speed cannot be the same for all vehicles, in all conditions, at all times - those of us who are not sheep cannot accept a random number on a stick has any relevance other than to raise revenue.
V8RX7 said:
Alex@POD said:
most people are taking offence because they are trying to catch people speeding.
If people don't speed, they won't get caught!
If they get caught, it's their own fault for breaking the law.
Everyone speeds - including my 75yr old mother.If people don't speed, they won't get caught!
If they get caught, it's their own fault for breaking the law.
When only the fastest 10%-20% get points - as in the days before cameras - then the speed limits will be set at correct levels.
They are far too low and that wasn't an issue when they were enforced by Policemen with common sense - it is an issue now.
The safe speed cannot be the same for all vehicles, in all conditions, at all times - those of us who are not sheep cannot accept a random number on a stick has any relevance other than to raise revenue.
If the speed limit on a particular road isn't appropriate, then why aren't people lobbying against it, or lobbying for fairer penalties, or better policing?
All I see is whinging about speed cameras catching people breaking the law, not a lot else.
Alex@POD said:
V8RX7 said:
Alex@POD said:
most people are taking offence because they are trying to catch people speeding.
If people don't speed, they won't get caught!
If they get caught, it's their own fault for breaking the law.
Everyone speeds - including my 75yr old mother.If people don't speed, they won't get caught!
If they get caught, it's their own fault for breaking the law.
When only the fastest 10%-20% get points - as in the days before cameras - then the speed limits will be set at correct levels.
They are far too low and that wasn't an issue when they were enforced by Policemen with common sense - it is an issue now.
The safe speed cannot be the same for all vehicles, in all conditions, at all times - those of us who are not sheep cannot accept a random number on a stick has any relevance other than to raise revenue.
If the speed limit on a particular road isn't appropriate, then why aren't people lobbying against it, or lobbying for fairer penalties, or better policing?
All I see is whinging about speed cameras catching people breaking the law, not a lot else.
Because it's utterly pointless, as shown by some on here "You have to think of the children"
Or because at 30 you produce less Co2 / mile covered etc
V8RX7 said:
That tends to be how protests / strike work.
Because it's utterly pointless, as shown by some on here "You have to think of the children"
Or because at 30 you produce less Co2 / mile covered etc
Protests and strikes are organised, and the bodies protested against are informed of what's going on, usually with a structured argument from the protesters about why they don't agree with something. A random guy parking in front of a speed camera for an hour, once, and walking away is idiotic.Because it's utterly pointless, as shown by some on here "You have to think of the children"
Or because at 30 you produce less Co2 / mile covered etc
Anyway, I can see I'm clearly in the minority here, so I'll stop arguing.
For the record, I break the speed limit pretty much every day. I only do it when I believe it is safe to do so, and if I should get caught then that will be my fault. That's not happened yet in 17 years though, because those cameras really aren't difficult to spot.
popeyewhite said:
pinchmeimdreamin said:
popeyewhite said:
The camera was blocked by the Porsche driver during pub hours. It even says that in the OP. So no kids about. People can relax, potential genocide averted.
You do know what time Pubs open don't you 
Hope that reduces your confusion.
wormus said:
Yeah, inhibiting the use of a safety camera in a residential area where it could do some good.
When they are are already a scarce, underfunded resource. What a dick.
Our local "safety cameras" park on pavements, grass verges and openings to fields. These are always in the most appropriate spot to catch someone speeding. Any private motorist would get a bWhen they are are already a scarce, underfunded resource. What a dick.
king for parking in those places.They often block line of sight for cars pulling out of junctions or driveways and because our local rules state they have to have a little sign up they often place that a few feet infront of where they are often dangerously parked and you guessed it in a dangerous position.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff