Hidden Camers and Truvelos(?)
Discussion
I hope that this hasn't been done to death on the speeding thread but it occurred to me that forward facing Truvelos are akin to hidden cameras anyway? On a long (reasonably brisk) drive recently, I had no idea of the road and whereabouts of cameras so kept my speed a little lower than maybe I would have done otherwise. Is this not the desired effect of hidden cameras? (I know I know... they are only there to make cash but this is reasonably obvious)
In the absence of previous or prior knowledge, I came around a bend at or about the limit and there, smiling at me, was a truvelo! If I hadnt known where the cameras were (which I didnt) I would have stayed at a speed where I am unlikely to be caught. The Truvelo could be seen on rounding the bend and as a result could not be described as hidden. The fact that I couldnt see it until it had seen me was a bonus for me as I was driving 'defensively' as far as getting caught is concerned.
I do personally think that driving would probably improve and be safer if people couldnt see the damn things! (Tin hat on) We have all been a victim to some retard slamming their breaks on at a camera and slowing to 50 in a NSL as they are too stupid to realise that the limit is 60 FFS....
The downside is that obviously having every little scrote picked off by 3 points a time will only lead to more cloned and unregistered cars but then I never thought for one minute that reducing the number of traffic patrols was a good idea. And I do like a blast where appropriate in case this comes across as a bit of tree hugging!
Someone on another thread implied that the cloning issue of plates and unregistered cars problem is nowhere near as bad as popular belief but if this were indeed the case, why introduce a rule (which I understand Trafpol love) whereby the car can be impounded immediately if the info doesnt stack up when stopped - moving into ANPR territory but hopefully you get what I mean?
In the absence of previous or prior knowledge, I came around a bend at or about the limit and there, smiling at me, was a truvelo! If I hadnt known where the cameras were (which I didnt) I would have stayed at a speed where I am unlikely to be caught. The Truvelo could be seen on rounding the bend and as a result could not be described as hidden. The fact that I couldnt see it until it had seen me was a bonus for me as I was driving 'defensively' as far as getting caught is concerned.
I do personally think that driving would probably improve and be safer if people couldnt see the damn things! (Tin hat on) We have all been a victim to some retard slamming their breaks on at a camera and slowing to 50 in a NSL as they are too stupid to realise that the limit is 60 FFS....
The downside is that obviously having every little scrote picked off by 3 points a time will only lead to more cloned and unregistered cars but then I never thought for one minute that reducing the number of traffic patrols was a good idea. And I do like a blast where appropriate in case this comes across as a bit of tree hugging!
Someone on another thread implied that the cloning issue of plates and unregistered cars problem is nowhere near as bad as popular belief but if this were indeed the case, why introduce a rule (which I understand Trafpol love) whereby the car can be impounded immediately if the info doesnt stack up when stopped - moving into ANPR territory but hopefully you get what I mean?
As I understand the problem, (and I’m no expert) the issue is that if you make otherwise safe drivers drive at a speed lower than they would do ‘naturally’ then they are more likely to let their concentration wander and are thus more likely to become involved in an accident. Given that lack of concentration (in whatever guise you want to call it) is already the biggest single cause of accidents on the roads then the prospect of actually pushing even more drivers into a state of mindless boredom becomes terrifying.
There is also the issue that there are enough people on the roads who already believe that driving either at or under the relevant speed limit is a guarantee of safety. In my opinion the last thing that is required is further encouragement of such ways of thinking .
What is needed to reduce accidents is to improve driver training with more emphasis on overall road skills. There also believe that there needs to be respect for the rules of the road by all road users, but while there is such a focus on vigorously enforcing such a limited set of rules where the safety benefits(costs?) of that enforcement are extremely questionable then this is unlikely to happen.
There is also the issue that there are enough people on the roads who already believe that driving either at or under the relevant speed limit is a guarantee of safety. In my opinion the last thing that is required is further encouragement of such ways of thinking .
What is needed to reduce accidents is to improve driver training with more emphasis on overall road skills. There also believe that there needs to be respect for the rules of the road by all road users, but while there is such a focus on vigorously enforcing such a limited set of rules where the safety benefits(costs?) of that enforcement are extremely questionable then this is unlikely to happen.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff