Rules Relaxed For Placement of Scameras
Discussion
According to BBC Radio 2, the rules governing the location of new speed cameras will shortly be relaxed. This means that ther ewill no longer need to be three accidents on a stretch of raod before a scamera can be installed. The reasoning for this is said to be 'why do people have to be killed or injured before a camera can be installed'.
This is a fundamentally flawed decision and will almost certainly lead to scameras all over our motorway network within months.
Isn't it about time for a backlash?
This is a fundamentally flawed decision and will almost certainly lead to scameras all over our motorway network within months.
Isn't it about time for a backlash?
groomi said:
The reasoning for this is said to be 'why do people have to be killed or injured before a camera can be installed'.
More people get killed and injured doing DIY and sports,than anything else.
The nanny state is going too far, and this government have blinkers on and not interested in what the public want.
puggit said:
Brake wheeled out the same old rubbish, including a claim from their spokesperson (not MW) who claimed she'd never, ever sped 
Well, then time to get hold of an LTI 20-20 and check, isn't it....
Much the same as that Welsh Druid buffoon whose daughter got caught.. Funny how they claimed the radar gun wasn't correctly used then....
puggit said:
Brake wheeled out the same old rubbish, including a claim from their spokesperson (not MW) who claimed she'd never, ever sped
She'll be a liar then...
More people die from infections that they pick up in hospital than die on the roads too...
Oh well more time spent watching the speedo than the road then, nice..
7db said:
jasandjules said:
fluffnik said:
Teach the elected who they serve: clue, it's not a party.
Is it the Wealthy Donors?
I don't know how you can think such a thing, especially after their selfless granting of casino licenses, they were thinking of the public at every stage during the proposals, I'm sure of it...
ukwill said:
Then we all know what to do at the next General Election. Excellent.
I think the first mainstream party to realise there are
better ways to solve the "death on the roads" problem
than speed cameras would attract a LOT of voters.
After all, a couple of million speeding tickets
a year and no real change in the number of fatalities
must surely generate some political reaction, or
are UK voters really remarkably docile ?
puggit said:
Radio 5 computer system crashed due to the number of people trying to comment...
Brake wheeled out the same old rubbish, including a claim from their spokesperson (not MW) who claimed she'd never, ever sped
Brake wheeled out the same old rubbish, including a claim from their spokesperson (not MW) who claimed she'd never, ever sped
Not relevant and not particularly interesting or praiseworthy. Driving everywhere never in excess of 10mph would fulfil that claim, but would also indicate seriously bad driving. The question should: "has she ever driven too fast for the road conditions?" (although driving everywhere at 10mph would still work...)
groomi said:
According to BBC Radio 2, the rules governing the location of new speed cameras will shortly be relaxed.
To be honest I welcome it. The so called "rules" already allow camera's to be placed where ever they want. The so called "rules" attempt to spin a justification for camera's which most people have bought into. The remove of this thin veneer of spin will expose them for what they really are.
bluepolarbear said:
groomi said:
According to BBC Radio 2, the rules governing the location of new speed cameras will shortly be relaxed.
To be honest I welcome it. The so called "rules" already allow camera's to be placed where ever they want. The so called "rules" attempt to spin a justification for camera's which most people have bought into. The remove of this thin veneer of spin will expose them for what they really are.
We should all be welcoming this move. Whilst, on the one hand, all it is doing is giving the SCPs the legal authority to do something they've been doing already (so from that point of view it won't make a lot of difference), on the other hand it will probably result in more FPNs being dished out to those who don't really deserve them (eg doing 40 on a DC with a stupidly low 30 limit), leading to more dissatisfaction in the general public.
The more people that come to realise that cameras are a cash cow, rather than a "road safety" tool, the sooner their demise will come about.
jasandjules said:
fluffnik said:
Teach the elected who they serve: clue, it's not a party.
Is it the Wealthy Donors?
There should be no such thing.
The only funding parties should have should be from subscriptions paid by registered voters who are members.
It costs nothing to go door to door and present a cogent political argument...
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff