Ridiculous Batheaston camera necklaced
Ridiculous Batheaston camera necklaced
Author
Discussion

Mon Ami Mate

Original Poster:

6,589 posts

288 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all
I'm happy to admit that I believe there is merit in some cameras. In built-up suburban areas or near dangerous junctions.

However, this camera is probably the most ridiculous I have come across. Hidden behind a bridge halfway along the newly constructed, dead straight, dual carriageway Batheaston bypass, where there are no junctions for a mile in each direction. This stretch of road has been given an arbitrary 50mph limit. A mile up the road the bypass ends and becomes a twisty single-lane A road with a failing surface - and the limit goes up to NSL. I don't advocate destroying cameras, I advocate destroying petty local Governments. If ever a camera had it coming though, it was this one. Rust in pieces...

MOTORIST GETS REVENGE


15:00 - 27 February 2003



A speed camera on the edge of Bath has been destroyed after it was set alight amid a national surge in anticamera violence. The box, on the Batheaston bypass, did not have a camera inside when it was attacked.

However the casing was so badly damaged it had to be removed and may not be replaced.

Tyres had been placed on top of it and set alight - a form of vandalism dubbed necklacing.

The cost of a replacement would be £7,000 and speed camera chiefs are now examining the casualty figures for the stretch of road to see if there is still a need for one at the site.

As a temporary measure, a mobile team will be monitoring the site instead.

And motorists have been warned the chances of being caught by a mobile unit is higher than by a fixed camera.

The Avon and Somerset Safety Camera Partnership has condemned the attack - which happened on Tuesday - as mindless.

Dick Bowen, the partnership's project manager, said: "They are there for a reason.

It's not as if people don't know they are there.

"The whole project is to slow people down and reduce casualties.

"Bearing in mind what has happened we will review it in line with the casualty statistics.

"If it doesn't warrant a replacement, we will look at mobile enforcement."

He said there were occasional displays of ill-feeling towards the speed camera scheme by irate motorists.

It is the first attack of its kind in the Bath area.

A safety camera box in Somerset was necklaced a year ago and a driver was given a hefty fine at court after being caught trying to pull a camera out of the ground in Weston-superMare.

Police are making inquires into the incident.

Although the Government believes most motorists are in favour, resentment has reached new heights in recent weeks with a spate of attacks on cameras across the country.

In Northamptonshire, one camera was blown up with a home-made bomb.


robp

5,803 posts

284 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all
Another one bites the dust

And the plice still dribble on about how they will continue to monitor the site with a mobile unit.

At least a mobile site packs up and goes home every day!

jeremyc

26,691 posts

304 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all

...speed camera chiefs are now examining the casualty figures for the stretch of road to see if there is still a need for one at the site.



Dick Bowen, the partnership's project manager, said: "They are there for a reason."

Typically hypocrisy: the reason is clearly revenue generation.

Bonce

4,339 posts

299 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all
I know that stretch of road well but the camera has never bothered me.

The thing is, the box was empty so the "camera" wasn't a problem. Now they're going to put a mobile speed trap on the road which is far far worse for everybody thanks to the dickhead or dickheads who burned the old case.

granville

18,764 posts

281 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all

I don't advocate destroying cameras, I advocate destroying petty local Governments.


Wonderful! Best jot of ticklus ribbtolatum all day.





FourWheelDrift

91,559 posts

304 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all

Bonce said: I know that stretch of road well but the camera has never bothered me.

The thing is, the box was empty so the "camera" wasn't a problem. Now they're going to put a mobile speed trap on the road which is far far worse for everybody thanks to the dickhead or dickheads who burned the old case.



If they didn't put the camera in (probably due to budgeting problems due to not having enough cameras generating revenue - chicken...egg scenario...) I'm sure they won't get a more expensive mobile unit in place.


Question - How many tyres would it take to necklace a white transit van?

Mon Ami Mate

Original Poster:

6,589 posts

288 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all

Bonce said: I know that stretch of road well but the camera has never bothered me.

The thing is, the box was empty so the "camera" wasn't a problem. Now they're going to put a mobile speed trap on the road which is far far worse for everybody thanks to the dickhead or dickheads who burned the old case.


No they won't. Because they don't have any.

dazren

22,612 posts

281 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all

FourWheelDrift said:If they didn't put the camera in (probably due to budgeting problems due to not having enough cameras generating revenue - chicken...egg scenario...) I'm sure they won't get a more expensive mobile unit in place.

Don't you believe it. Avon and Somerset Scameraship in the last measured nine month period (Apr 02 to Jan 03 from memory) derived over 2/3 of their "speeding revenue" from mobile units. You would not believe how sneaky some of their locations are. The local newspapers are up in arms about it.

DAZ

P*Ting

5,618 posts

278 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all


The mobile enforcement teams will be attacked sooner or later.
Its inevitable.



Agreed. Just look at the situation with traffic wardens...

pointysquirty

44 posts

284 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all
The cameras on the Batheaston bypass have never had anything to do with safety. They are there to enforce the 50 limit which is there to pacify local nimby residents that feared the bypass would be noisy. They are right because I drive the whole thing in third and drop to second to go through the tunnels!

Also ... I get to win my argument about whether there was a camera in the box. A friend says he knows someone who got a ticket once. Pah!

Pointy
--
www.pointandsquirt.co.uk/

rich 36

13,739 posts

286 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all
If its of any interest, there is a lot of scamera van activity on the riverside retail park NORTHAMPTON, alongside the self store place, this may be their lair

pdv6

16,442 posts

281 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all

pointysquirty said:Also ... I get to win my argument about whether there was a camera in the box. A friend says he knows someone who got a ticket once. Pah!



The box, on the Batheaston bypass, did not have a camera inside when it was attacked.

It may have been capable of taking a camera. There are more boxes than cameras and the cameras are moved from box to box.

james_j

3,996 posts

275 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all
So it's a "safety" camera is it?

So why was it hidden? Surely if you don't know it's there, you'll go past it at a reasonable speed (which, on this road is of course higher than the limit enforced) and get a fine later in the post. So where's the safety there?

It's almost as if cameras are hidden so that they can raise revenue.

abailey

225 posts

278 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all
A month ago I was done by a Talivan on the same stretch of road going out of Bath. Up at the top of the hill just as I was going past a long line of trundling HGVs. They had me as I came towards the end of the dual carriageway doing 65 in what I am pretty sure was once a 70 zone now down to 50. I bet they had a productive day there! I am going to invest in a laser diffuser now.

trefor

14,709 posts

303 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all
I'm waiting for the first Tallivan to be, er, put out of service. There are 4 tyres on those things ...

apache

39,731 posts

304 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all

james_j said: So it's a "safety" camera is it?

So why was it hidden? Surely if you don't know it's there, you'll go past it at a reasonable speed (which, on this road is of course higher than the limit enforced) and get a fine later in the post. So where's the safety there?

It's almost as if cameras are hidden so that they can raise revenue.


take a drive up the A9, every scamera is hidden by a roadsign

hertsbiker

6,443 posts

291 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all
funny that, Deltaf, because I feel exactly the same thing - except it might be an old Landy, in low ratio... and push the f**ker off the road into a ditch before settign fire to it. But that would of course be hypothetical, and a beer induced fantasy.

deltaf

1,384 posts

277 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all
An old landy huh? sounds good to me mate!

hertsbiker

6,443 posts

291 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all
I was wondering where such a hypothetical group of people might meet for a beer? ooops, that would be a bit risky. I feel the rage too. I know what you think, because I live it myself. FFS we are ordinary law abiding citizens who respect society, yet society treats us like little children. In their defense, mosr people are amazingly crap at driving, and don't have an interest in their road craft - unlike us.

Sad state, but... not a lot we can do. Online..



DennisTheMenace

15,605 posts

288 months

Thursday 27th February 2003
quotequote all
the cull has begun