Dorset speed camera thresholds
Discussion
The Dorset Camera Partnership have announced that the threshold speeds in fixed and mobile cameras is to be lowered. The information came to light in the minutes from the Dorset Criminal Justice board when senior Police officers warned that more drivers are likely to fall foul of the cameras, and there were fears that the new levels would lead to a massive increase in in the courts.
The meeting was reassured 'that most of the new offenders who are caught by the new enforcement level will go on courses and not be prosecuted'.
The trigger speed of the cameras is to remain a closely guarded secret.
The meeting was reassured 'that most of the new offenders who are caught by the new enforcement level will go on courses and not be prosecuted'.
The trigger speed of the cameras is to remain a closely guarded secret.
james_j said:
Sounds like they want to fine more people.
Now the question is why ?
Insufficient revenue I guess.
That's exactly what would happen throughout the country if everyone were to copy that Funky chap's method of "fighting back".
Too true. And as predicted theyre lowering the thresholds to make more cash.
Burn em all i say.
jesusbuiltmycar said:
Sounds like they want to fine more people.
Now the question is why ?
Because Bournemouth has a Lib Dem councill that hates motorists. They need higher revenue to finance more bus lanes, look at the fing mes they have made of castle lane.....
W
Lib Dems doorstepped last night.
Told them what I thought of their covert anti-car stance, amongst other things. Canvasser went away ashen faced.
Oh I do love giving a good bollocking.
james_j said:
Sounds like they want to fine more people.
Now the question is why ?
Insufficient revenue I guess.
That's exactly what would happen throughout the country if everyone were to copy that Funky chap's method of "fighting back".
Yes but my method of fighting back wouldn't just be slowing down, that would only be the start of it.
People slowing down will still result in accidents and we know this. However, as the accidents are still happening at slower speeds then even more people should note that speed isn't the sole factor in causing accidents.
The way things are going though nothing we seem to do has any effect on the partnerships rolling our more cameras.
You say keep speeding. Well this just costs you money and keeps the coffers coming in for the partnerships. I say slow down and stop paying them, but you say that this will lead to reduced speeds and even more 'persecution' of the motorist.
Tell me one thing though. If my method is so stupid and won't work, what has your method done to improve the situation??? All I am seeing is more speed cameras in more ridiculous places, more fines and points for people, and more fuel for the 'speed causes accidents' fire.
Enlighten me please. What has the method of carrying on speeding done to solve any issues with speed cameras??
Does anybody think we motorists CAN actually do anything about this?
Knock it off with the Speed fixation Funky, all the proof you need is here: www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=174495&f=10&h=0
Raed and learn.
Raed and learn.
deltafox said:
Knock it off with the Speed fixation Funky, all the proof you need is here: www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=174495&f=10&h=0
Raed and learn.
Regardless of my alleged speed fixation, please can you tell me what ignoring speed limits and continuing to speed has solved???
I don't see less cameras on the road.
funkyrobot said:
Knock it off with the Speed fixation Funky, all the proof you need is here: <a href="http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=174495&f=10&h=0">www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=174495&f=10&h=0</a>
Raed and learn.
Regardless of my alleged speed fixation, please can you tell me what ignoring speed limits and continuing to speed has solved???
I don't see less cameras on the road.
Dont you read and connect the dots effectively or what?
Just WTH is the problem with exceeding the speed limit if its only capable of causing just 3%(and maybe less) of ALL road crashes?????
Thats the issue! Thats where your efforts should be concentrated! Not on making silly suggestions of slowing down. All that will do is encourage the greedy scammers to LOWER ever further the limits at the expense of REAL road safety matters as is now happening in Dorset! Can you see the viscious circle thats taking us into?
Clearly, exceeding the speed limit IS NOT a major cause of accidents at all, so just why should anyone slow down?? Its senseless!
Regards DF.
deltafox said:
deltafox said:
Knock it off with the Speed fixation Funky, all the proof you need is here: <a href="http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=174495&f=10&h=0"><a href="http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=174495&f=10&h=0">www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=174495&f=10&h=0</a></a>
Raed and learn.
Regardless of my alleged speed fixation, please can you tell me what ignoring speed limits and continuing to speed has solved???
I don't see less cameras on the road.
Dont you read and connect the dots effectively or what?
Just WTH is the problem with exceeding the speed limit if its only capable of causing just 3%(and maybe less) of ALL road crashes?????
Thats the issue! Thats where your efforts should be concentrated! Not on making silly suggestions of slowing down. All that will do is encourage the greedy scammers to LOWER ever further the limits at the expense of REAL road safety matters as is now happening in Dorset! Can you see the viscious circle thats taking us into?
Clearly, exceeding the speed limit IS NOT a major cause of accidents at all, so just why should anyone slow down?? Its senseless!
Regards DF.
Can you please just answer my question.
Has the continued breaking of speed limits by drivers (and the increasing amount of fines and tickets as a result) reduced the number of speed cameras installed on the roads??
funkyrobot said:
deltafox said:
funkyrobot said:
deltafox said:
Knock it off with the Speed fixation Funky, all the proof you need is here: <a href="http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=174495&f=10&h=0"><a href="http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=174495&f=10&h=0"><a href="http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=174495&f=10&h=0"><a href="http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=174495&f=10&h=0">www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=174495&f=10&h=0</a></a></a></a>
Raed and learn.
Regardless of my alleged speed fixation, please can you tell me what ignoring speed limits and continuing to speed has solved???
I don't see less cameras on the road.
Dont you read and connect the dots effectively or what?
Just WTH is the problem with exceeding the speed limit if its only capable of causing just 3%(and maybe less) of ALL road crashes?????
Thats the issue! Thats where your efforts should be concentrated! Not on making silly suggestions of slowing down. All that will do is encourage the greedy scammers to LOWER ever further the limits at the expense of REAL road safety matters as is now happening in Dorset! Can you see the viscious circle thats taking us into?
Clearly, exceeding the speed limit IS NOT a major cause of accidents at all, so just why should anyone slow down?? Its senseless!
Regards DF.
Can you please just answer my question.
Has the continued breaking of speed limits by drivers (and the increasing amount of fines and tickets as a result) reduced the number of speed cameras installed on the roads??
No it hasnt. And it hasnt made any difference to deaths on our roads either!
And the reason is that theres too much money at stake now for them to remove any of their cash generators. Its a multimillion pound industry thats morphed into a cash raiser from its original "safety" idea.
Going slower will have no positive results either as proved in Dorset.
They want their cash and bollox to us all, whatever we do.
They rely on us being passive and compliant to push us around. When we say "F:ensored: You!" to them and kick back, its showing em we're still here, that we havent given up that we'll fight em.
If everyone slowed down for just one week, it WOULD have an impact on their cash generation- It wouldnt make a f
k of difference to the numbers dying though, and thats what this is all about, supposedly. Just one other thing: By exceeding the speed limits and not having all the accidents they say we are sure to have, it disproves their arguments that slow is safe and that "safety bullshit" cameras are ahem, "working".......
>> Edited by deltafox on Thursday 28th April 15:55
hedders said:
No, now go away.
You have now made your point, you can leave.
It's an irrelevant point anyway
edited for wordiness.
>> Edited by hedders on Thursday 28th April 15:52
Why is it irrelevant?? You want less speed cameras on the road, surely your speeding actions should be helping this.
Are your actions working??
I think this is a very strong fact that you simply can't accept. It totally ruins your argument doesn't it.
Dear F R
Getting Really pd off with the monotony of your posts.
If you really are a robot the I suggest you get yourself serviced as something is stuck in a loop.
S C's in the vast majority of cases are not about safety but about generating revenue. If the level of revenue falls for any reason then the limits used to trigger the revenue stream will be adjusted accordingly.
Its already starting to happen. constant increases in taxation (including stealth) of motorists by whatever means is an easy way for chancellors to fill their "black holes"
At last something positive is starting with the M4 protest.
viva La revolution
Getting Really p
d off with the monotony of your posts. If you really are a robot the I suggest you get yourself serviced as something is stuck in a loop.
S C's in the vast majority of cases are not about safety but about generating revenue. If the level of revenue falls for any reason then the limits used to trigger the revenue stream will be adjusted accordingly.
Its already starting to happen. constant increases in taxation (including stealth) of motorists by whatever means is an easy way for chancellors to fill their "black holes"
At last something positive is starting with the M4 protest.
viva La revolution
shagga said:
Dear F R
Getting Really p
If you really are a robot the I suggest you get yourself serviced as something is stuck in a loop.
S C's in the vast majority of cases are not about safety but about generating revenue. If the level of revenue falls for any reason then the limits used to trigger the revenue stream will be adjusted accordingly.
Its already starting to happen. constant increases in taxation (including stealth) of motorists by whatever means is an easy way for chancellors to fill their "black holes"
At last something positive is starting with the M4 protest.
viva La revolution
Monotony? You mean the fact that I disagree and you don't like it.
My question was simple - 'has ignorance of the speed limit by motorists resulted in less speed cameras'?
No.
Very simple question with a very simple answer. With this question I wasn't interested in all of the blog relating to the politics of speed cameras, I just wanted to know if the actions of people had resulted in the desired outcome.
In relation to the 'black holes', why are so many people moaning about this, yet not doing anything???
The M4 protest is a good idea because if people stick to the proposed speed it will starve the cameras. But will it cause unecessary problems
?? One more thing, you are peed off with my posts, yet you post a multi-paragraph reply????
>> Edited by funkyrobot on Thursday 28th April 16:14
See this thread: www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=174495&f=10&h=0
Slowing down will cause limits to be lowered. Camera partnerships are a business, don't think otherwise.
To increase revenue, they will lower limits. Safety has nothing to do with it, despite the views of the "useful idiots" who appear to think it is.
Meanwhile, most drivers drive safely (with a view on an appropriate speed (not usually connected with the revenue-focussed speed limit) and only have 3% (probably less) accidents because of their velocity.
One day, a government (Conservatives are the only hope) who understands this will be able to rid us, or at least curtail, these frankly evil partnership businesses.
Slowing down will cause limits to be lowered. Camera partnerships are a business, don't think otherwise.
To increase revenue, they will lower limits. Safety has nothing to do with it, despite the views of the "useful idiots" who appear to think it is.
Meanwhile, most drivers drive safely (with a view on an appropriate speed (not usually connected with the revenue-focussed speed limit) and only have 3% (probably less) accidents because of their velocity.
One day, a government (Conservatives are the only hope) who understands this will be able to rid us, or at least curtail, these frankly evil partnership businesses.
tonto said:
Sounds like they want to fine more people.
Now the question is why ?
Because they say the new wave of offenders will go on courses.......
Re-education.....that used to be confined to communist states, didn't it?
And all the revenue from courses goes to the plod outfit running the courses.....
Unlike fixed penalties, which (supposedly) pay the camera costs, with excess funds going to Gordon Brown.
So there you have it.....
Long queues to the lecture room at £200 a throw = one very happy Chief Constable.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff