Speed scamera climbdown.
Discussion
These proposals (which in MP speak can mean nothing) seem like a step in the right direction.
However, there is the problem of who decides where there is still a safety issue demanding a revenue camera (i.e. after the "revenue-only" cameras have been removed). Of course, apart from the fact that cameras have not "saved lives" anyway, there will probably be the same council nanny who makes the decisions as to where a (probably still revenue) camera is placed.
Same problem as now, decisions will still be based of fiddled statistics and implemented by the same idiots.
The lucrative revenue camera partnerships won't go without a fight. I expect they are now preparing their case and building up more fiddled statistics.
However, there is the problem of who decides where there is still a safety issue demanding a revenue camera (i.e. after the "revenue-only" cameras have been removed). Of course, apart from the fact that cameras have not "saved lives" anyway, there will probably be the same council nanny who makes the decisions as to where a (probably still revenue) camera is placed.
Same problem as now, decisions will still be based of fiddled statistics and implemented by the same idiots.
The lucrative revenue camera partnerships won't go without a fight. I expect they are now preparing their case and building up more fiddled statistics.
in the Q&A section of the times website, i've entered the following 2 questions for mr. green:
"how do you intend to replace the monies that the Scameras take from the public in the offical drivers' tax they really are?"
"how can you prove beyond ANY doubt that the official rule of 8 deaths = a camera site are being followed?"
"how do you intend to replace the monies that the Scameras take from the public in the offical drivers' tax they really are?"
"how can you prove beyond ANY doubt that the official rule of 8 deaths = a camera site are being followed?"
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff