RE: Speed cameras to be hidden?
Monday 20th February 2006
This one's already hidden...Speed camera partnerships may soon be able to hide speed cameras, according to a Times report (see link below).
Speed cameras to be hidden?
From bright yellow back to grey: it's possible
This one's already hidden...
This follows recent news, reported here on PistonHeads, that no system of public accountability exists, and that one police force is cheating the public with grossly misleading information.
In December 2005, the Department for Transport (DfT) announced new funding plans for camera partnerships with a annual 'road safety grant' of £120m.
Road safety campaign Safe Speed said it believes that hiding cameras would be considerably more dangerous for the following reasons:
- Drivers would spend even more time looking out for hard-to-spot cameras and will have less time available to observe the road ahead.
- If cameras were hidden they would be even less effective in their primary stated role of reducing vehicle speeds at accident black spots.
- Drivers believe that hidden cameras are 'sneaky'. Hiding them again would accelerate the serious ongoing damage to the police-public relationship. And it would further damage confidence in official road safety messages.
Safe Speed founder Paul Smith said: "We've seen such frightful behaviour from camera partnerships over the past couple of years, and we were sure that the new funding rules were the Department for Transport's (DfT) way of taking control - via the purse strings.
"Hiding the cameras would be another nail in the coffin of the UK's superior safe driving culture - DfT may not understand the damage, but we do. It's our safe driving culture that gave us the safest roads in the world, long before there were any speed cameras.
"Scrapping all the cameras is presently the most important and most effective road safety intervention available to government."
Links
- Times: police win the right to camouflage speed cameras
- PH: Police use fear against drivers
- PH: Are scamera bodies legal?
- Safe Speed
Photo courtesy of www.speedcam.co.uk
Discussion
. DfT spokesman said:
...But we do not want to see a return to the bad old days of cameras being hidden behind trees...
So he's admitting that this was the case. Of course things are different now -- they're hidden behind bushes, signs, bus shelters, bridge supports...
Some drivers drive too fast for the conditions and cause fear in those around them. I've seen it outside schools, in town centres, in residential areas. I can see that, if the country can't afford sufficient police to do the job, cameras might be a solution in these areas. So if we could see a switch of cameras from places where it's safe to exceed arbitrary limits to places where it isn't safe to drive at the speed limit, then (depending on a lot of other things) I might be able to support that.
OTOH, if this is just an excuse for even more cameras, sneakily placed where there are no problems but high revenue opportunities, then it's not what I think road safety needs nor what the police should be allowing in their name. Is it too early to guess what might happen? Am I cynical? Is the pope a catholic?
Yeah, who cares, let them get on.
It will only do more harm for safety and police/public relationships. They will loose favour with the majority of drivers, no matter if they agree with them or not.
GPS bought, problem solved. Chances are they will move away from mobile camera's too if they focus on hidden fixed ones, so even less risk to the lisence.
Let them get on. This in a way is the best news since camera's started. Their greed and stupidity will see the system flop by being too arrogant!
Dave
It will only do more harm for safety and police/public relationships. They will loose favour with the majority of drivers, no matter if they agree with them or not.
GPS bought, problem solved. Chances are they will move away from mobile camera's too if they focus on hidden fixed ones, so even less risk to the lisence.
Let them get on. This in a way is the best news since camera's started. Their greed and stupidity will see the system flop by being too arrogant!
Dave
Mr Whippy said:
Yeah, who cares, let them get on.
It will only do more harm for safety and police/public relationships. They will loose favour with the majority of drivers, no matter if they agree with them or not.
GPS bought, problem solved. Chances are they will move away from mobile camera's too if they focus on hidden fixed ones, so even less risk to the lisence.
Let them get on. This in a way is the best news since camera's started. Their greed and stupidity will see the system flop by being too arrogant!
Dave
It goes far further than that. Do you think it will stop there? I dont fancy living my entire life relying on reactionary measures (GPS's etc).. Plus the are not 100%
I have a well respected GPS camera detector and on more than one occasion it has missed cameras. (and yes i do keep it up to date!). And yes i can enter user positions on it but its a bit late to enter a user postion after you have passed the camera too fast.
I don't want to be in a position of saying ' I told you so' when everything we do is monitored and restricted. I'd rather we made a stand against things that are wrong now!!!
Yeah, fair point, but for now, in the short term, it's a good think.
The slowly slowly approach was far too clever and heart string thrumming. They had the logic of road accident victims on their side, they had worried parents with kids on their side.
Now, by just putting them anywhere, camoflaged into the surroundings, they WILL loose support quickly. If a middle aged good driver who has never had a crash or come close looses their lisence, they won't be happy, even if they admit they were wrong, and breaking a law. The point is the law is wrong, if it's just their for laws sake, and does nothing but opress driving safely, what does it do?
So yes, it's a bad way for it to be going, but the faster it happens, the better it will be in regards to public support going down the pan faster than anything else!
This time next year the whole system will be hated, and police won't get any help or public support out on the roads.
The government are doing something positive. They are assuring the end of the system by making people hate it! If they'd left what they had, and slowly added to it, they may have got away with it, but their greed will ruin it!
Good stuff imho!
Mentioned this to friends and they all mentioned "captain gatso" type people, and supporting them. If I saw someone chopping one down, don't think I'd be rushing to the police to report it
Dave
The slowly slowly approach was far too clever and heart string thrumming. They had the logic of road accident victims on their side, they had worried parents with kids on their side.
Now, by just putting them anywhere, camoflaged into the surroundings, they WILL loose support quickly. If a middle aged good driver who has never had a crash or come close looses their lisence, they won't be happy, even if they admit they were wrong, and breaking a law. The point is the law is wrong, if it's just their for laws sake, and does nothing but opress driving safely, what does it do?
So yes, it's a bad way for it to be going, but the faster it happens, the better it will be in regards to public support going down the pan faster than anything else!
This time next year the whole system will be hated, and police won't get any help or public support out on the roads.
The government are doing something positive. They are assuring the end of the system by making people hate it! If they'd left what they had, and slowly added to it, they may have got away with it, but their greed will ruin it!
Good stuff imho!
Mentioned this to friends and they all mentioned "captain gatso" type people, and supporting them. If I saw someone chopping one down, don't think I'd be rushing to the police to report it
Dave
Don said:
Pointless.
Does it matter if they're grey if you have a decent GPS database? No.
Painting them any particular colour is a bit ho-hum-so-what really.
Except: what if you don’t have a GPS database (and sat-nav with which to use it)? And what if the police decide they no longer have to make the location of their (now hidden) cameras public knowledge? What happens if/when they then introduce a new camera technology that can take your picture undetected (e.g. no flash required, or a device small enough to be concealed in a signpost)?
[rant]
Once they are allowed to start hiding these things, the door is wide open for them to get as sneaky as they want, and the average motorist will be the victim of this. By hiding the devices, the authorities once again prove that its revenue they’re after, and the ‘us’ versus (greedy) ‘them’ perception grows exponentially.
And frightening/bullying us into compliance of speed limits doesn’t work, either. It doesn’t work in North America - where they hide as a matter of course, and the police/public relationship is, predominantly, an ‘us’ versus ‘them’ culture - so why would it work here?
I will pledge my vote to any political organisation that seeks to reverse this police state approach, and return some trust and personal responsibility to the people who elect them. There is no sound argument for what they’re doing, and I cannot trust an organisation that seeks to hide anything from me, and is clearly uninterested in dealing with the real issues affecting road safety.
[/rant]
To the DFT :moon
No argument can stop them they give the old story of Deaths Roads speed.
Its time to analyse the data.
How many Drink driving deaths?
How many Drug driving deaths?
How many deaths in 30, 40, 50, 60, 70 and Motorway?....
Also if they say the investment is worth it to save 1 life, this then begs the question why hospitals and Health trusts can not spend £20k a year for a drug for breast cancer that will save lives. Lest get smart and attack not react.
Now who to approach?
>> Edited by garydvo on Monday 20th February 11:19
No argument can stop them they give the old story of Deaths Roads speed.
Its time to analyse the data.
How many Drink driving deaths?
How many Drug driving deaths?
How many deaths in 30, 40, 50, 60, 70 and Motorway?....
Also if they say the investment is worth it to save 1 life, this then begs the question why hospitals and Health trusts can not spend £20k a year for a drug for breast cancer that will save lives. Lest get smart and attack not react.
Now who to approach?
>> Edited by garydvo on Monday 20th February 11:19
Maybe we should step back and take a look at the way technology is driving our society and not just at the use of technology for speed limit enforcement.
It is clear that this gov't, and maybe any gov't, likes to have control over its citizens and current and developing technology enables this control as never before. For example, your emails are stored in a central data-base for 2 years, you will soon have bio-metric passports, every journey you make can/will be data-logged, DNA can identify you very easily, etc..
It certainly seems as though driving will become an activity in which it will not be possible to drive at over the speed limit without an automatic fine and points and, in time, with speed controlled cars.
Perhaps we should not be surprised as society has always developed with technology, whether we like certain aspects of it or not. It's not just in driving that increasing restrictions and monitoring take place. Private flying in increasingly controlled, monitored and restricted as passenger flying increases, for example.
Increasing traffic densities will, to some extent, make faster driving less possible anyway. Already journey times are significantly longer than they were 35 years ago, although the maximum speed and comfortable cruising speeds of cars is about 25% higher than then.
Vehicle engineering will now have to concentrate on reduction of fuel consumption, alternative fuels, increasing vehicle safety and better in-car information systems and electronics. More performance by improved aerodynamics and engine power will be lees important.
Those who try to se the 'bigger agenda' can see that the speed control issue is not about improved road safety, it's a part of more control over the individual by centralised gov't and reductions in personal freedoms to act and speak as we may wish. Disguise all this as road safety, fighting terrorism, racial issues, religious tolerance and anything else you can think of. That's the way it's going, but it's being achieved by nibbling away at our traditions and standards bit-by-bit. Speed limit total compliance is just a small part of it.
Maybe we just have to accept this and get on with it all as best we can.
It is clear that this gov't, and maybe any gov't, likes to have control over its citizens and current and developing technology enables this control as never before. For example, your emails are stored in a central data-base for 2 years, you will soon have bio-metric passports, every journey you make can/will be data-logged, DNA can identify you very easily, etc..
It certainly seems as though driving will become an activity in which it will not be possible to drive at over the speed limit without an automatic fine and points and, in time, with speed controlled cars.
Perhaps we should not be surprised as society has always developed with technology, whether we like certain aspects of it or not. It's not just in driving that increasing restrictions and monitoring take place. Private flying in increasingly controlled, monitored and restricted as passenger flying increases, for example.
Increasing traffic densities will, to some extent, make faster driving less possible anyway. Already journey times are significantly longer than they were 35 years ago, although the maximum speed and comfortable cruising speeds of cars is about 25% higher than then.
Vehicle engineering will now have to concentrate on reduction of fuel consumption, alternative fuels, increasing vehicle safety and better in-car information systems and electronics. More performance by improved aerodynamics and engine power will be lees important.
Those who try to se the 'bigger agenda' can see that the speed control issue is not about improved road safety, it's a part of more control over the individual by centralised gov't and reductions in personal freedoms to act and speak as we may wish. Disguise all this as road safety, fighting terrorism, racial issues, religious tolerance and anything else you can think of. That's the way it's going, but it's being achieved by nibbling away at our traditions and standards bit-by-bit. Speed limit total compliance is just a small part of it.
Maybe we just have to accept this and get on with it all as best we can.
If you could get everyone to not speed for say a month or maybe even a week, think about how it would hurt their finances. A year would cripple them.
People misguidedly try the fuel strike to force petrol prices lower, but that will never work as you need petrol, but a speed camera strike would. You don't need to speed, so just go at the speed limit for as long as you can stand it. I guarantee that will royally peeve them off no end, they will have lots of trouble justifying further expenditure on more cameras and tricks then.
People misguidedly try the fuel strike to force petrol prices lower, but that will never work as you need petrol, but a speed camera strike would. You don't need to speed, so just go at the speed limit for as long as you can stand it. I guarantee that will royally peeve them off no end, they will have lots of trouble justifying further expenditure on more cameras and tricks then.
Cooperman said:
Maybe we should step back and take a look at the way technology is driving our society and not just at the use of technology for speed limit enforcement.
It is clear that this gov't, and maybe any gov't, likes to have control over its citizens and current and developing technology enables this control as never before. For example, your emails are stored in a central data-base for 2 years, you will soon have bio-metric passports, every journey you make can/will be data-logged, DNA can identify you very easily, etc..
It certainly seems as though driving will become an activity in which it will not be possible to drive at over the speed limit without an automatic fine and points and, in time, with speed controlled cars.
Perhaps we should not be surprised as society has always developed with technology, whether we like certain aspects of it or not. It's not just in driving that increasing restrictions and monitoring take place. Private flying in increasingly controlled, monitored and restricted as passenger flying increases, for example.
Increasing traffic densities will, to some extent, make faster driving less possible anyway. Already journey times are significantly longer than they were 35 years ago, although the maximum speed and comfortable cruising speeds of cars is about 25% higher than then.
Vehicle engineering will now have to concentrate on reduction of fuel consumption, alternative fuels, increasing vehicle safety and better in-car information systems and electronics. More performance by improved aerodynamics and engine power will be lees important.
Those who try to se the 'bigger agenda' can see that the speed control issue is not about improved road safety, it's a part of more control over the individual by centralised gov't and reductions in personal freedoms to act and speak as we may wish. Disguise all this as road safety, fighting terrorism, racial issues, religious tolerance and anything else you can think of. That's the way it's going, but it's being achieved by nibbling away at our traditions and standards bit-by-bit. Speed limit total compliance is just a small part of it.
Maybe we just have to accept this and get on with it all as best we can.
I totally agree with you except the last line. People fought wars and gave their lives to grant us freedom!! If you allow paranoya and control freakery of the Government to reign unchallenged then all that was in vein and no doubt millions of people will be turning in their graves..
With all this greater control and monitoring, are people happier? are the streets safer? is society gaining? No..
Once again we should make a stand for the privilege of freedom that people previously were willing to make such huge personal sacrifice for!
Pah, you all worry too much.
Every "super duper" system they bring out fails or goes over budget. The economy is shafted. A recession now, with mass unemployment, homelessness, who knows whats coming soon.
The government will find that unless all is rosy (which it is becoming less and less these days), the people will not be content. No matter how much control the government *think* they have, pissed off citizens will fight for their freedom and for a better life!
I can't see it ever getting soooo bad. It'll get bad perhaps, like it is doing now, but it won't take long to swing back when it all goes tits up and people are angry and fight against it.
Anyway, for now, any "Captain Gatso's" out there. I fully support by any financial means (standing order, direct debit, paypal one off payment
) any continued action against camoflaged speed camera devices. I'd happily put £10 a month to good causes!
This government are stepping over the line now, and I for one am not going to sit back and let them control me. I pay my Income Tax and be a nice little citizen as long as they do a good job, but they can bugger off if they think they can control me!
If they do a good job then they recieve my support, afterall I elect them to represent me. As soon as they stop representing my interests, I stop giving them the power to represent me, and have no power as far as I'm concerned!
Selfish scum!
Dave
Every "super duper" system they bring out fails or goes over budget. The economy is shafted. A recession now, with mass unemployment, homelessness, who knows whats coming soon.
The government will find that unless all is rosy (which it is becoming less and less these days), the people will not be content. No matter how much control the government *think* they have, pissed off citizens will fight for their freedom and for a better life!
I can't see it ever getting soooo bad. It'll get bad perhaps, like it is doing now, but it won't take long to swing back when it all goes tits up and people are angry and fight against it.
Anyway, for now, any "Captain Gatso's" out there. I fully support by any financial means (standing order, direct debit, paypal one off payment
) any continued action against camoflaged speed camera devices. I'd happily put £10 a month to good causes! This government are stepping over the line now, and I for one am not going to sit back and let them control me. I pay my Income Tax and be a nice little citizen as long as they do a good job, but they can bugger off if they think they can control me!
If they do a good job then they recieve my support, afterall I elect them to represent me. As soon as they stop representing my interests, I stop giving them the power to represent me, and have no power as far as I'm concerned!
Selfish scum!
Dave
I thought the camapign for cameras was to put them in accident black spots to act as deterent / slow the speeds down to try and prevent accidents (well thats what all the police forces etc have been saying for the last few years) ......... this flies in the face of the bollox they have been spouting for the last few years by making the cameras invisible so they are not acting in line with what they are supposed to do.....
Maybe I got it wrong and they are suppossed to make money for the relevant authorities
on a side note noticed an intersting spelling variance to what I have typed
Maybe I got it wrong and they are suppossed to make money for the relevant authorities
on a side note noticed an intersting spelling variance to what I have typed
The quote I read over the weekend from some Chief Constable was that they wanted the ability to place cameras before there were 3+ accidents involving injury etc at one site. He immediately began talking about being able to put cameras outside schools before a child was killed, ergo he needed to be able to place them wherever he wanted.
This I wholeheartedly agree with - IF they put cameras where they are needed to prevent deaths due to excessive speed. Like outside schools. But we all know that they will place the cameras to maximise revenue - on dual carriageways that used to be perfectly safe NSL roads that are now reduced to 40 zones with soon-to-be-hidden scameras.
This I wholeheartedly agree with - IF they put cameras where they are needed to prevent deaths due to excessive speed. Like outside schools. But we all know that they will place the cameras to maximise revenue - on dual carriageways that used to be perfectly safe NSL roads that are now reduced to 40 zones with soon-to-be-hidden scameras.
"Also if they say the investment is worth it to save 1 life, this then begs the question why hospitals and Health trusts can not spend £20k a year for a drug for breast cancer that will save lives. Lest get smart and attack not react."
And there is not money to simply pay for the OXYGEN of a person...
and there is not money to buy DVDs in court! Only VHS otherwise the case is closed...
is this madness I say?
Why investing to save 1 life while the real purpose is to make a misery the life of millions, when actually you have already a life that can be saved just in the NHS? Is not that worth?
Labour priorities are all wrong: when there is a problem the solution is to put a tax on it, to block people. There is never a clever solution...
You cannot smack your children and then one is not surprised children insult, attack and rape teachers. Respect?
You cannot put people in jail because that would "ruin" them... so let's ruin the good citizens out there for good.
Will be Tony paid millions of £££ for his future speeches? To say what? I feel sick
A67
And there is not money to simply pay for the OXYGEN of a person...
and there is not money to buy DVDs in court! Only VHS otherwise the case is closed...
is this madness I say?
Why investing to save 1 life while the real purpose is to make a misery the life of millions, when actually you have already a life that can be saved just in the NHS? Is not that worth?
Labour priorities are all wrong: when there is a problem the solution is to put a tax on it, to block people. There is never a clever solution...
You cannot smack your children and then one is not surprised children insult, attack and rape teachers. Respect?
You cannot put people in jail because that would "ruin" them... so let's ruin the good citizens out there for good.
Will be Tony paid millions of £££ for his future speeches? To say what? I feel sick
A67
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff