RE: Gatso Danger
Thursday 22nd January 2004
Gatso Danger
The Wrong side of the Road theory
Speed Camera operators in West Yorkshire are revisiting their camera sites to paint calibration marks on both sides of the road.
Currently the white 'ladders' are painted on the side of the carriageway that the camera is monitoring. Now, after evidence that some motorists have been resorting to driving on the wrong side of the road to avoid capture, the West Yorkshire Safety Camera team are to have the ladders painted on both sides of the road.
It's hoped that the extra paintwork will stop dangerous driving.
Discussion
Alex said:
It sounds like removing the camera would be more likely to "stop dangrous driving" to me.
Agree, although its taken them long enough to realise this is going on. My first experience of it was coming back from town in a taxis a 2am.. not only did he go on the wrong side of the road he had to go past 2 of those dividing pedestrian island things!
oh yeah cameras make our roads safer though
Lorries have to do 40mph on NSL roads, lots of Gatso's have been set to trap them exceeding their 40mph limit on an otherwise 60mph limit road. A303 westbound of Chicklade & A303 Llangport Bypass(until 3 months ago) are perfect examples
Therefore it is perfectly possible in a car to execute an overating manouver within range of a Gatso on the wrong side of the road. Obviously subject to the usual overtaking rules etc.
Unfortunately I see lots of frustrated drivers exucuting dangerous overatakes due to lorries obeying their limit near these Gatos's.
So much for fricking safety!!!!!!!
Therefore it is perfectly possible in a car to execute an overating manouver within range of a Gatso on the wrong side of the road. Obviously subject to the usual overtaking rules etc.
Unfortunately I see lots of frustrated drivers exucuting dangerous overatakes due to lorries obeying their limit near these Gatos's.
So much for fricking safety!!!!!!!
cptsideways said:
Lorries have to do 40mph on NSL roads, lots of Gatso's have been set to trap them exceeding their 40mph limit on an otherwise 60mph limit road. A303 westbound of Chicklade & A303 Llangport Bypass(until 3 months ago) are perfect examples
So are our taxes being wasted with Gatso's taking lots of totally useless pictures of bikes, cars etc etc all doing a perefectly legal 48 mph plus?
Or can these things really distinguish between HGV's and smaller vehicles.
And if so, how the devil does a dumb scamera tell the difference between a goods vehicle <=7.5t mgvw, speed limit = 50, from a good vehicle over 7.5t mgvw spped limit = 40.
This country really has lost the
plot!Flat in Fifth said:
Lorries have to do 40mph on NSL roads, lots of Gatso's have been set to trap them exceeding their 40mph limit on an otherwise 60mph limit road. A303 westbound of Chicklade & A303 Llangport Bypass(until 3 months ago) are perfect examples
So are our taxes being wasted with Gatso's taking lots of totally useless pictures of bikes, cars etc etc all doing a perefectly legal 48 mph plus?
Or can these things really distinguish between HGV's and smaller vehicles.
And if so, how the devil does a dumb scamera tell the difference between a goods vehicle <=7.5t mgvw, speed limit = 50, from a good vehicle over 7.5t mgvw spped limit = 40.
This country really has lost the
They would appear to have a height setting on the radar angle, I've followed plenty of trucks them & they get flashed at the 56mph speed.
Does having the ladder lines on both sides of the road mean the camera can detect cars on the wrong side or is it just to make drivers think it does?
Had them on both sides down here for ages, always had a sneaking suspision they could detect cars going both ways? Most people slow down even with the camera pointing away from them
Had them on both sides down here for ages, always had a sneaking suspision they could detect cars going both ways? Most people slow down even with the camera pointing away from them
I've had my picture taken by cameras many times while travelling at or well under the limit (in a car that under reads by ~2 mph @ 30 according to GPS). The cars on the otherside of the road from the camera were moving fairly quickly...and I certainly never got a ticket...so I figured that they are set up to catch both sides.
Alex said:
It sounds like removing the camera would be more likely to "stop dangrous driving" to me.
What an outrageous statement! I can't believe the knee-jerk reactions I read in here to what are (often) perfectly legitimate announcements on the subject of speeding and Gatsos. How do you know where this camera is sited? How do you know it's not sited at a dangerous accident zone, and hasn't helped to prevent dozens of accidents? How do you KNOW that it's inherently unfair?
Drivers using the wrong side of the road (ipso facto at speeds well above the speed limit) just to escape the camera at what is (probably) an accident black spot should be jailed! Not supported by the Pistonheads readership for their actions!
Grrrr!
Sorry for not explaining this in my original post - I could only spit out those two words in disgust before going to look at pictures of flowers and puppies to calm down.
Hardly think comments like Alex's are going to help paint the Pistonheads readership in the respectable, reasonable light that your anti-camera fight needs in the face of the pro-camera lobby. What they do is make the author look like a dangerous subversive, for whom any illegal actions are legitimate in the fight against the Government's attempts to cut road deaths.
>> Edited by sublimatica on Friday 23 January 09:38
sublimatica said:
It sounds like removing the camera would be more likely to "stop dangrous driving" to me.
What an outrageous statement! I can't believe the knee-jerk reactions I read in here to what are (often) perfectly legitimate announcements on the subject of speeding and Gatsos. How do you know where this camera is sited? How do you know it's not sited at a dangerous accident zone, and hasn't helped to prevent dozens of accidents? How do you KNOW that it's inherently unfair?
Drivers using the wrong side of the road (ipso facto at speeds well above the speed limit) just to escape the camera at what is (probably) an accident black spot should be jailed! Not supported by the Pistonheads readership for their actions!
Grrrr!
Sorry for not explaining this in my original post - I could only spit out those two words in disgust before going to look at pictures of flowers and puppies to calm down.
Hardly think comments like Alex's are going to help paint the Pistonheads readership in the respectable, reasonable light that your anti-camera fight needs in the face of the pro-camera lobby. What they do is make the author look like a dangerous subversive, for whom any illegal actions are legitimate in the fight against the Government's attempts to cut road deaths.
>> Edited by sublimatica on Friday 23 January 09:38
I just spilled coffee on my keyboardif you read his post again you will see alex didn't advocate dangerous driving, just suggested a real-world solution to reduce it.
if a low-life has a car registered in his name but is untaxed/uninsured/banned he will do anything to avoid that camera, regardless of the danger to other road users. Current estimates are that there are about a million cars driven illegaly in uk. The camera will actually make these people's driving more dangerous.
Replace the camera with occasional visits by trafpol and you might even catch some of these illegal drivers.
Replace the camera with a radar operated flashing sign to remind drivers of the limit and you are three times more likely to stop people speeding.
so yes, remove the camera and replace it with something that works better!
if a low-life has a car registered in his name but is untaxed/uninsured/banned he will do anything to avoid that camera, regardless of the danger to other road users. Current estimates are that there are about a million cars driven illegaly in uk. The camera will actually make these people's driving more dangerous.
Replace the camera with occasional visits by trafpol and you might even catch some of these illegal drivers.
Replace the camera with a radar operated flashing sign to remind drivers of the limit and you are three times more likely to stop people speeding.
so yes, remove the camera and replace it with something that works better!
deeen said:Not if the driver of the speeding vehicle can't get away with it by driving on the wrong side of the road!!! Paint the 'ladder' lines on the wrong side of the road, and then the drivers whose speeds are illegally dangerous can't escape the law. You catch both legal vehicles and illegal vehicles, if they are driving above the camera's trigger speed.
if a low-life has a car registered in his name but is untaxed/uninsured/banned he will do anything to avoid that camera, regardless of the danger to other road users. Current estimates are that there are about a million cars driven illegaly in uk. The camera will actually make these people's driving more dangerous.
I don't see the problem here! I'm no fan of speed cameras, but I am a huge fan of catching the very drivers who put others' lives at unnecessary risk by behaving stupidly and (for example) driving on the wrong side of the road, when what they really should be doing is slowing down to the speed limit at accident black spots.
How will removing the speed camera completely stop people driving dangerously (and that includes driving too fast for the circumstances)???
It is very simple really. Speed cameras kill. Therefore they should be removed. It really does not matter why they kill. It is not important to understand that motorists behaviour is modified in a way that kills. The atkins diet is more worthy of investigation. Truth is, cameras kill, those who support them are killers and should be jailed for good, no parole. Why should people going about their lawful business be killed by scamera partnerships just to create a few extra civil service jobs? Close the whole lot down and put them on gardening leave.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff