It's official..... Scameras are for revenue
Discussion
Well it says so in the Sun 
www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2004171629,00.html
COPS have been told to plant speed cameras on SAFE roads - months after being ordered to stop sneaky tactics.
Secret new guidelines obtained by The Sun say police can place up to 1,000 Gatsos OUTSIDE accident blackspots.
The move revives fears that cameras are being used to raise money for Chancellor Gordon Brown. Ministers claim the traps are highly visible and are only placed on "death-trap" roads.
But the tough restrictions are relaxed in the new guidelines from the Department of Transport and police can now put 15 per cent of cameras at sites with a low record of deaths or injury crashes.
AA road safety boss Andrew Howard said last night: "This is very worrying. It is a large loophole for camera partnerships to exploit."
Tories slammed the Government for "sneaking" out the changes.
Shadow transport boss Damian Green claimed that motorists were being punished for driving more safely.
He said: "It is worrying that the change in the rules is buried deep down in a document that has had no publicity. This gives police a get-out to raise
revenue because motorists have become safer.
"Partnerships now have an incentive to put cameras where they will rake in the most."
The new guidance says cameras can be placed at less dangerous roads after death and injury blackspots have been exhausted.
A good reason must be given to place a camera at a non-blackspot - such as complaints about speeding cars. Yesterday it emerged 10,767 drivers have been caught by cameras on a seven-mile stretch of motorway.
The traps were set ten weeks ago when a 40mph limit was introduced alongside roadworks on the M25.
At the current rate cameras will have raked in £6.5million in fines by the time the work is finished in 2006. Because the rebuilding of the motorway is
a national project, all the £60 speed fines go straight into Mr Brown's coffers.
Although work stopped for Easter, the cameras and the 40mph limit remained in force.
The AA's Rebecca Rees said: "There should be variable limits so 40mph does not apply 24 hours a day."
www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2004171629,00.html
COPS have been told to plant speed cameras on SAFE roads - months after being ordered to stop sneaky tactics.
Secret new guidelines obtained by The Sun say police can place up to 1,000 Gatsos OUTSIDE accident blackspots.
The move revives fears that cameras are being used to raise money for Chancellor Gordon Brown. Ministers claim the traps are highly visible and are only placed on "death-trap" roads.
But the tough restrictions are relaxed in the new guidelines from the Department of Transport and police can now put 15 per cent of cameras at sites with a low record of deaths or injury crashes.
AA road safety boss Andrew Howard said last night: "This is very worrying. It is a large loophole for camera partnerships to exploit."
Tories slammed the Government for "sneaking" out the changes.
Shadow transport boss Damian Green claimed that motorists were being punished for driving more safely.
He said: "It is worrying that the change in the rules is buried deep down in a document that has had no publicity. This gives police a get-out to raise
revenue because motorists have become safer.
"Partnerships now have an incentive to put cameras where they will rake in the most."
The new guidance says cameras can be placed at less dangerous roads after death and injury blackspots have been exhausted.
A good reason must be given to place a camera at a non-blackspot - such as complaints about speeding cars. Yesterday it emerged 10,767 drivers have been caught by cameras on a seven-mile stretch of motorway.
The traps were set ten weeks ago when a 40mph limit was introduced alongside roadworks on the M25.
At the current rate cameras will have raked in £6.5million in fines by the time the work is finished in 2006. Because the rebuilding of the motorway is
a national project, all the £60 speed fines go straight into Mr Brown's coffers.
Although work stopped for Easter, the cameras and the 40mph limit remained in force.
The AA's Rebecca Rees said: "There should be variable limits so 40mph does not apply 24 hours a day."
destroyer said:
The ruling has been there for 2 years.
It was there during the period when the cameras were forcibly removed from sites in London.
Why would this start a furious insall of cameras. Why didn't the StUN mention that?
Perhaps the areas outside of the London have not acted in a similar manner?
I'm pretty sure the zealots running the Avon & Somerset Scamera partnership have been using the "latitude" to rake in some extra revenue, for the sake of the children you understand. Similarly the Talivan operators sitting above the M4 near the Second Severn crossing Toll booths must be using the 15% rule. DAZ
err... I thought that would be a GOOD thing?
like outside schools rather than "safe" dual tracks?
where the 'perception' of a need to be slow is far greater than the death toll (if any toll)
dual road: 100,000 cars a month, 2 deaths by plain wrekless drivers that were accidents waiting to happen. : fits guidelines for a camera placement; 99998 cars a month punished for the sake of the minority
school: no deaths, 100's of children with little awareness of the dangers running around. outside the placement guidelines (although most of the risks are from the parents 4x4's parked on zigzags 
)
like outside schools rather than "safe" dual tracks?
where the 'perception' of a need to be slow is far greater than the death toll (if any toll)
dual road: 100,000 cars a month, 2 deaths by plain wrekless drivers that were accidents waiting to happen. : fits guidelines for a camera placement; 99998 cars a month punished for the sake of the minority
school: no deaths, 100's of children with little awareness of the dangers running around. outside the placement guidelines (although most of the risks are from the parents
4x4's parked on zigzags )
destroyer said:
The ruling has been there for 2 years.
It was there during the period when the cameras were forcibly removed from sites in London.
Why would this start a furious insall of cameras. Why didn't the StUN mention that?
Because they are toss*rs that's why.
The "StUN" is national "news"paper. Grains of hometruths in the rag
(which is why you BiBs (and you give some inkling to be one - destructive one!) cannot handle it! You do not like hearing a few home truths as evidenced by the "whinge" thread - cos when we explained why general public were "whingeing" - people got accused of the "gramophone record" and talking "censored:ks ) StUN commenting on Prats like TVP, NottingSCAMshire and LanCASHire and Dictatorship of Brunstromia whacking up scams willy nilly on safest stretches of road, near speed limit changes and deluding themselves that they are "saving lives" when even their own statistics show reverse trend.
Risk of repeating myself for 000000000000th time: too rigid an enforcement by artificial, underhand, sinister, money-grabbing means is bad law, bad politics, alienates people and does nothing to improve relationships between BiBs, (and even the Prats) and the people who EMPLOY them - which is us really!
Bring back proper polite? coppers who can at least explain in friendly-ish speak why the driving was a bit er...er "dangerous!"
(Apart from the twazaks in uniform that I met the other day - we need those like a hole in the head! - See very few trafpols ever (but lots of scams) - and three numpties turn up in one day! Is it me?
)Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff