Hamphsire to get more Cameras?
Discussion
Was listening to the radio the other day and it appears that Hampshire's stats for Christmas was fewer DD's but more accidents. Do you recon this will lead to the Police requesting more cameras?
Edited 'cos I have just thought maybe I should have put this in general gassing. I apologise if that's the case.
>>> Edited by icamm on Friday 17th January 15:47
Edited 'cos I have just thought maybe I should have put this in general gassing. I apologise if that's the case.
>>> Edited by icamm on Friday 17th January 15:47
A27 Titchfield W On island at W end of Titchfield gyratory 40 244 1997-05-29
A27 Sarisbury Green E Mobile - Bridge Road, Sarisbury Green, regular use to catch E dir. traffic coming up hill in two lanes. Camera usually at top of hill near playing field. 1902 2000-01-28
A27 Fareham W Mobile - Portchester Road, Fareham. Usually sited on central reservation opposite entrance to golf course. Used at various times of day and any day. 1904 2000-01-28
A30 Area of M3 Junction 6 - forked connnection of Andover Rd & A30 to Basingstoke, camera situated just after fork on A30 at fast bend - 50mph zone. 1663 1999-10-18
A325 Mobile Gatos units used at the following sites: Whitehill as you enter 40 mph zone in both directions, Bordon just before garage on left 40mph zone and on grass verge by Frithend sand pit 60mph zone 40 804 1999-04-29
A325 Farnborough Hampshire,Farnborough area.No fixed sites.Frequent mobile sites on A325 Farnborough-Aldershot road,oppsite 'Swan' pub. 1583 1999-09-13
A325 Aldershot to Farnborough A325 between Aldershot and Farnborough. Police sit in the 30 zone just before the 40 zone, catching people as they speed up into the 40 zone 30 1837 1999-12-08
A33 Winchester A33 Winchester to Basingstoke road after you have left the A34. You pass under the A34 and it is before the Coach and Horses pub at Kings Worthy. 1675 1999-10-18
from Yately to Camberley along this route you will pass through a total of 4 speed camera within a 2 mile stretch 512 1998-03-25
James Callaghan Drive, Nr Portsmouth at the top of Portsdown Hill. Outside DRA 40mph speed limit 40 608 1998-10-07
A338 Ringwood to Fordingbridge, North & Southbound, portable camera in use at Ibsley, 40 mph limit 40 612 1998-11-05
Lee-on-the-Solent W Mobile - approx every two weeks, Marine Parade West, Lee-on -the -Solent. Usually mornings from about 0830 for an hour. Near Dadulus slipway or in bus shelter close by. 1901 2000-01-28
Sarisbury Green N Mobile - Barnes Lane, Sarisbury Green, near Holly Hill park entrance. Often at weekends and mornings. 1903 2000-01-28
Ringwood Bournemouth area - Police stealth bikes - totally black bike and the rider wearing a black suit and helmet 2145 2000-05-22
Eastleigh Leigh Rd Eastleigh Hants 2162 2000-06-26
A27 Sarisbury Green E Mobile - Bridge Road, Sarisbury Green, regular use to catch E dir. traffic coming up hill in two lanes. Camera usually at top of hill near playing field. 1902 2000-01-28
A27 Fareham W Mobile - Portchester Road, Fareham. Usually sited on central reservation opposite entrance to golf course. Used at various times of day and any day. 1904 2000-01-28
A30 Area of M3 Junction 6 - forked connnection of Andover Rd & A30 to Basingstoke, camera situated just after fork on A30 at fast bend - 50mph zone. 1663 1999-10-18
A325 Mobile Gatos units used at the following sites: Whitehill as you enter 40 mph zone in both directions, Bordon just before garage on left 40mph zone and on grass verge by Frithend sand pit 60mph zone 40 804 1999-04-29
A325 Farnborough Hampshire,Farnborough area.No fixed sites.Frequent mobile sites on A325 Farnborough-Aldershot road,oppsite 'Swan' pub. 1583 1999-09-13
A325 Aldershot to Farnborough A325 between Aldershot and Farnborough. Police sit in the 30 zone just before the 40 zone, catching people as they speed up into the 40 zone 30 1837 1999-12-08
A33 Winchester A33 Winchester to Basingstoke road after you have left the A34. You pass under the A34 and it is before the Coach and Horses pub at Kings Worthy. 1675 1999-10-18
from Yately to Camberley along this route you will pass through a total of 4 speed camera within a 2 mile stretch 512 1998-03-25
James Callaghan Drive, Nr Portsmouth at the top of Portsdown Hill. Outside DRA 40mph speed limit 40 608 1998-10-07
A338 Ringwood to Fordingbridge, North & Southbound, portable camera in use at Ibsley, 40 mph limit 40 612 1998-11-05
Lee-on-the-Solent W Mobile - approx every two weeks, Marine Parade West, Lee-on -the -Solent. Usually mornings from about 0830 for an hour. Near Dadulus slipway or in bus shelter close by. 1901 2000-01-28
Sarisbury Green N Mobile - Barnes Lane, Sarisbury Green, near Holly Hill park entrance. Often at weekends and mornings. 1903 2000-01-28
Ringwood Bournemouth area - Police stealth bikes - totally black bike and the rider wearing a black suit and helmet 2145 2000-05-22
Eastleigh Leigh Rd Eastleigh Hants 2162 2000-06-26
, must be the wrong time of day. How many of those are fixed though? Alot of them are specifically listed as mobile or specific times of day. Certainly haven't seen the one near M3J6 A30 although I have to admit I don't go down that road too often.
I bet they've missed alot of the mobile sites off as well (I know of 2).
I bet they've missed alot of the mobile sites off as well (I know of 2).
Also 3 more near me (as I have the points to prove)
1. Maunsell Way in Hedge End - stands by the entrance to the HE railway Station - tends to do people going East.
2. Same road but on the rise between Stanier Way and Britannia Gardens
3. Going into Botley from the Horton Heath direction, just after the 30 limit, stands on the LH side of road about 100m after the limit board.
These are all mobile laser sites and I haven't seen them for a while but do be aware!!
1. Maunsell Way in Hedge End - stands by the entrance to the HE railway Station - tends to do people going East.
2. Same road but on the rise between Stanier Way and Britannia Gardens
3. Going into Botley from the Horton Heath direction, just after the 30 limit, stands on the LH side of road about 100m after the limit board.
These are all mobile laser sites and I haven't seen them for a while but do be aware!!
They did about a year ago ...... I spent a day out with the Winchester traffic dept in one 
I gather that most of the sites listed above are for mobile camera or manned speed traps. I have to say though, I hardly/never drive the roads with the fixed cameras on. Must remeber them the next time I'm on the A27
Cheers for the info mate
Paul
>> Edited by ultimapaul on Monday 27th January 20:09
I gather that most of the sites listed above are for mobile camera or manned speed traps. I have to say though, I hardly/never drive the roads with the fixed cameras on. Must remeber them the next time I'm on the A27
Cheers for the info mate
Paul
>> Edited by ultimapaul on Monday 27th January 20:09
I saw on TV news this morning that there will be new cameras in Hampshire because of the number of KSIs in the county (I don't think they said this had gone up -- just gave the number).
However, the item on TV was supported by CCTV footage of a young boy walking out into the road without looking and being hit by a car. There was no statement that a camera would be placed there, and it was clearly stated that the car was only travelling at 26mph.
Of course, the boy's mother stated how she was in favour of cameras. She was not questioned as to why she had let her son walk into the road, nor whether she felt bad about giving the driver such a shock. Instead, a guy from the "safety" camera partnership was interviewed saying he didn't want to catch drivers out, simply to slow them down. Apparently only 1% of those questioned in the county were against more cameras.
So, a boy was hit by a car not exceeding the limit (and not badly hurt, it seems), but still we're meant to believe that cameras will in some way fix such problems. All presented with no opposing point of view or critique. Surprised? No.
However, the item on TV was supported by CCTV footage of a young boy walking out into the road without looking and being hit by a car. There was no statement that a camera would be placed there, and it was clearly stated that the car was only travelling at 26mph.
Of course, the boy's mother stated how she was in favour of cameras. She was not questioned as to why she had let her son walk into the road, nor whether she felt bad about giving the driver such a shock. Instead, a guy from the "safety" camera partnership was interviewed saying he didn't want to catch drivers out, simply to slow them down. Apparently only 1% of those questioned in the county were against more cameras.
So, a boy was hit by a car not exceeding the limit (and not badly hurt, it seems), but still we're meant to believe that cameras will in some way fix such problems. All presented with no opposing point of view or critique. Surprised? No.
and there arent really going to be any more cash grabbing cameras built. I believe that they are putting in a total of 13 new cameras in Hampshire (6? in Basingstoke) because the death rate in the first 3 months of this year is higher than the same period last year.
As you say the TV coverage of this was appalling as it showed and incident that was not fatal, involving a car doing LESS than the speed limit. Which involved a supervised child being allowed to wander off the pavement between parked cars onto the road.
They didn't blame the mother or say that this accident could have been avoided with speed cameras BUT it was used to re-inforce and appalling argument for these cameras.
It's like they way they ALWAYS use the "xxxx deaths and serious injuries" in one breath rather than "x deaths and xxx serious injuries". As if the two are actually the same thing.
As you say the TV coverage of this was appalling as it showed and incident that was not fatal, involving a car doing LESS than the speed limit. Which involved a supervised child being allowed to wander off the pavement between parked cars onto the road.
They didn't blame the mother or say that this accident could have been avoided with speed cameras BUT it was used to re-inforce and appalling argument for these cameras.
It's like they way they ALWAYS use the "xxxx deaths and serious injuries" in one breath rather than "x deaths and xxx serious injuries". As if the two are actually the same thing.
Spud Gunner & Peter Ward. I wrote a complaining e-mail to South Today re that item, pointing out that the speed cameras would not have prevented the accident, and hence the use of that film was misleading when linked to the new cameras. I also suggested that their reporters may like to do some research on the web as to the arguments for and against speed cameras, so that they can question the council's pro-camera propaganda and excessive reliance on speed control as a means to reduce the KSI stats.
Guess what? No reply other than the standard 'We've received your message'. If they do send a proper reply I'll post it.
Guess what? No reply other than the standard 'We've received your message'. If they do send a proper reply I'll post it.
Hi guys - I'm a long term lurker much entertained by your gassing. Agree about the BBC coverage referred to above and also sent the following email to BBC South.
Also got the standard reply but I'be interested to see if they accept my challenge - not holding my breath!
As a licence payer I strongly object to the BBC parroting the propaganda of various pressure groups or government agencies. I expect responsible and questioning journalism not something so full of obvious contradictions as to be rubbish.
I refer to the item on this morning's Breakfast TV concerning the installation of speed cameras.
Let me firstly make it clear that no responsible person, including me, can possibly object to the installation of any useful measures to control driver speed in accident blackspots or high risk areas, such as in the vicinity of schools.
However, you illustrated your piece with video of an accident where the cause was clearly a careless child and inadequate adult supervision. The car concerned was not exceeding a speed limit so the presence of a camera would be irrelevant. And, by the way, why did you not comment on the trauma that the innocent driver was likely to have experienced? Obviously because this would not have been politically correct!
You also showed footage of a 'talking head' representing, if memory serves, an organisation called the Speed Camera Partnership. He said something along the lines of '......we don't want to catch drivers we want to deter them from speeding'. If that were truly the case, you might have wanted to highlight research, commented upon in the media recently, that vehicle speed activated warning signs were found to be more effective in doing this than the cameras. But the fact remains that where, as in the example shown, a driver is below the speed limit all automatic devices will be irrelevant.
Furthermore, they do nothing to deter accident risks arising from other sources such as driver inattention or incompetence; or non-driver related causes e.g. careless pedestrians. Nor do they detect transgressions such as driving while under the influence of drugs/alcohol, or without insurance, or without Road Tax, or even in an unroadworthy vehicle. Only Traffic Police on the roads will do that. In fact speed cameras, or 'scameras', as they have come to be known, are in too many cases simply revenue producing devices. Clearly, as the Blair Broadcasting Corporation this is too politically incorrect a point of view for you to acknowledge.
If you wish to remain credible as a News organisation I suggest that you familiarise yourself with more than just the politically correct line before broadcasting on topics such as this. There have been more spurious statistics quoted about speed in relation to road accidents than just about anything else which springs readily to mind.
A final, hopefully constructive, suggestion. I challenge you to collect the data to run an authoritative feature on speed cameras in the South Today region. Consult your viewers. Of the installations they can identify, how many are justified by the accident history or risk? And how many are simply put there by Council 'jobsworths' trying to justify their existence and/or to provide extra income for stretched police budgets?"
Also got the standard reply but I'be interested to see if they accept my challenge - not holding my breath!
Message Board | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff