Discussion
^Slider^ said:
Yeah but remember the camera van op may well have been a civilian so could not do any patroling.
Indeed, but the money spent on a civilian mobile camera operator + van could happily pay for another police officer.
I know which I would rather have...
BTW was the query as to whether a ticket issued by a civilian operated van was valid been settled or not?
havent got a clue tbh.
may sound strange but... the budget used for police officers is not the same as for speed enforcement and i dont think they can reduce one to increase the other as the budgets are pretty much set by the govenment from what i understand.
This financial stuff and the police service is very confusing.
may sound strange but... the budget used for police officers is not the same as for speed enforcement and i dont think they can reduce one to increase the other as the budgets are pretty much set by the govenment from what i understand.
This financial stuff and the police service is very confusing.
It may well have something to do with us motorists being
EASY TARGETS
We all drive cars so we can all afford a £60 fine RIGHT???????
Not to mention the hike in the insurance....
Dont get me wrong, cameras outside schools and areas where people really should watch there speed, well good luck to them, you should be caught, but hiding in a bush in a 60 mph limit, well, we all know what thats about...
Jon
EASY TARGETS
We all drive cars so we can all afford a £60 fine RIGHT???????
Not to mention the hike in the insurance....
Dont get me wrong, cameras outside schools and areas where people really should watch there speed, well good luck to them, you should be caught, but hiding in a bush in a 60 mph limit, well, we all know what thats about...
Jon
I guess they are easy targets. Mainly because probably on every stretch of road in the country there will be someone speeding.
And will pay the £60 notes.
And they get 4 chances before being disqual.
But people still speed (including myself).
Self fulfilling really.
And the machines / civilians have less discression than police. (ie none) cost less than police, and generate more fines than the police. (Im no fan of speed cameras personally).
If you dont want the fine then dont speed (i know some limits are too low for the roads etc and i speed myself where appropriate)
Awaits flaming.
And will pay the £60 notes.
And they get 4 chances before being disqual.
But people still speed (including myself).
Self fulfilling really.
And the machines / civilians have less discression than police. (ie none) cost less than police, and generate more fines than the police. (Im no fan of speed cameras personally).
If you dont want the fine then dont speed (i know some limits are too low for the roads etc and i speed myself where appropriate)
Awaits flaming.
^Slider^ said:
I guess they are easy targets. Mainly because probably on every stretch of road in the country there will be someone speeding.
im sure all the victims of serious crimes will agree, but the fact is, the governemt and the police have introduced cameras as a revenue for them, i dont know how much each camera costs, but im going to stick my neck on the line here and say for each camera, it could well pay for an officers wage for a year.
Yes speeding is wrong, so why not set a 60mph limit camera to 100mph eh, and catch the idiots. I think that 66 mph in a 60 is somewhat by the by when you consider people are being mugged, raped, and so on. no one can dissagree with that
The funds could be better spent IMHO.
Jon
evolution666 said:
I guess they are easy targets. Mainly because probably on every stretch of road in the country there will be someone speeding.
im sure all the victims of serious crimes will agree, but the fact is, the governemt and the police have introduced cameras as a revenue for them, i dont know how much each camera costs, but im going to stick my neck on the line here and say for each camera, it could well pay for an officers wage for a year.
Yes speeding is wrong, so why not set a 60mph limit camera to 100mph eh, and catch the idiots. I think that 66 mph in a 60 is somewhat by the by when you consider people are being mugged, raped, and so on. no one can dissagree with that
The funds could be better spent IMHO.
Jon
I agree the funds could be better spent.
In terms of cost of an officers wages, training etc we would be talking alot more than the cost of a camera, also the other fact that i cannot generate as much money as the cameras, but i can catch criminals!
I personally would prefer to see more traffic police than cameras, but there lies a flip side. If trafpol was to use laser or vascar and did someone for say 70 in a 60 would you still complain. If so whats the difference between trafpol doing you for 70 in a 60 and a camera or camera van doing you for the same?
I know that in 1 area (not saying which) the speed cameras set in 40MPH zones were actually set to trigger at 60MPH.
If you include speedo innacuracies in this, you would be looking at anything from 60 - 68 MPH on the clock before you would get pinged.
This seemed to be quite reasonable to me.
The same cameras are now set at 46. kerching!.
Accidents are up at camera sites as well by the way.
If you include speedo innacuracies in this, you would be looking at anything from 60 - 68 MPH on the clock before you would get pinged.
This seemed to be quite reasonable to me.
The same cameras are now set at 46. kerching!.
Accidents are up at camera sites as well by the way.
bryan35 said:
in answer to sliders last question........
You'd know about it, and get a talking to from the Trafpol, which is quite a scary thing (from my experience)
Getting a brown envelope up to 2 weeks later for something you can't even remember achieves nothing but anger in the motorist.
... or provokes to respond in kind.
When I got my 77 in a 70 (yes 77 in a 70 - no typo) in north wales (
), I was so pissed off considering it was 8am no traffic around duel carrageway dead stright for miles etc etc that I just counterarmed myself. I still drive the same as I drive to the conditions (sometimes below, sometimes above the limit) but now I dont get caught by lasers. Been targetted 3 times though - once doing 29 in a 30
, once doing 45 in a 40 and once on a motorway when I was doing 60 But there you go
Gh0st
>> Edited by gh0st
on Monday 22 November 20:43 >> Edited by gh0st
on Monday 22 November 20:43^Slider^ said:
I guess they are easy targets. Mainly because probably on every stretch of road in the country there will be someone speeding.
And will pay the £60 notes.
And they get 4 chances before being disqual.
But people still speed (including myself).
Self fulfilling really.
And the machines / civilians have less discression than police. (ie none) cost less than police, and generate more fines than the police. (Im no fan of speed cameras personally).
If you dont want the fine then dont speed (i know some limits are too low for the roads etc and i speed myself where appropriate)
Awaits flaming.
Good man. Flaming not appropriate.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
^Slider^ said:Didn't Nottingham spend about £6 Million on its digital cameras? And aren't they losing money hand over fist. Allegedly. As everyone now drives (speeds?) as the crow flies. Instead of crawling round the ring road between the cameras.
In terms of cost of an officers wages, training etc we would be talking alot more than the cost of a camera, also the other fact that i cannot generate as much money as the cameras
diesel ed said:
In terms of cost of an officers wages, training etc we would be talking alot more than the cost of a camera, also the other fact that i cannot generate as much money as the cameras
Didn't Nottingham spend about £6 Million on its digital cameras? And aren't they losing money hand over fist. Allegedly. As everyone now drives (speeds?) as the crow flies. Instead of crawling round the ring road between the cameras.
going round the A52 last night (nottingham ring road) following an AMG65 merc at *40+ until we hit the 40 zone whereupon hit the anchors down to dead on 40mph meaning nasty specs cameras get fck all money from us and we have a happy blast = all good.
plus, absolutely nobody speeds in the zones where they have specs set up, the very very sweet result being the council are thinking about removing them because they are losing too much money!!! so what was that sh1t about "if it saves one life etc,etc"? always financially driven
and they don't even hide it, the apathetic voters (gimps) just ignore it and when forced to think about the issue squeal "but think of the poor children!" 
/
diesel ed said:
If you dont want the fine then dont speed
Get that soundbite from the safer streets initiative or brake? Remind me - what's the slowest someone has been prosecuted for?
Dont know mate, didnt get the "soundbite" from anywhere, i know limits may be set too low on some roads but thats not the point of the comment, i was saying as the limits are set as they are, the only way to advoid a ticket is not to speed.
^Slider^ said:And the point of MY comment was - how slow have people tried to go and STILL failed to avoid a ticket (hint - haven't a couple of people been done under 5mph?).
If you dont want the fine then dont speed
diesel ed said:
And the point of MY comment was - how slow have people tried to go and STILL failed to avoid a ticket (hint - haven't a couple of people been done under 5mph?).
gone said:So, what are you saying? under 4mph? Under 3mph? Under 2mph? Under 1mph? Under 0mph?
And the point of MY comment was - how slow have people tried to go and STILL failed to avoid a ticket Not slow enough!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff