Long range speeding cameras
Discussion
Right, advice please or opinions on what the point is of these ‘long range cameras’, which seem to be popping up all over like a bad rash. Yeah there’s a rant coming and I was clocked doing 48 in a 30 zone but by no means at all am I bad or unsafe on the roads, and this is what’s really irritating about it??
Bloody ‘long range camera’ was pointing a good half mile up the road waiting to catch people entering the lowered speed limit zone but it was my undetstanding that you had to be able to at least see the speed vehicles at a reasonable distance so you could have chance to alter your speed? I can’t see half a mile down the road and the the van was partly obscure by a parked car. I also don’t understand why you’d be catching traffic that far out of the village when surely the whole point is to catch speeders going through a village?
It’s straight for almost a mile and a half, along the bit where I was travelling and people do put their foot down. No hazards and you could assume the 30 zone didn’t start until further on if you’d not seen the signs by the roadside, so really it just gets everyone’s back up around there and I doubt it does anything for road safety.
Bloody ‘long range camera’ was pointing a good half mile up the road waiting to catch people entering the lowered speed limit zone but it was my undetstanding that you had to be able to at least see the speed vehicles at a reasonable distance so you could have chance to alter your speed? I can’t see half a mile down the road and the the van was partly obscure by a parked car. I also don’t understand why you’d be catching traffic that far out of the village when surely the whole point is to catch speeders going through a village?
It’s straight for almost a mile and a half, along the bit where I was travelling and people do put their foot down. No hazards and you could assume the 30 zone didn’t start until further on if you’d not seen the signs by the roadside, so really it just gets everyone’s back up around there and I doubt it does anything for road safety.
It's not about road safety, it's about money.
Around these parts they're never to be found near dangerous areas or accident blackspots, they are always hanging around the roads that are wide and straight, and have good visibility. That's because that's where people will feel a higher speed than the limit is safe, and they're probably right. Speed limits are arbitrary. For every sensible speed limit you can probably find many more that make no sense.
But.... you get caught then you pay up.
Around these parts they're never to be found near dangerous areas or accident blackspots, they are always hanging around the roads that are wide and straight, and have good visibility. That's because that's where people will feel a higher speed than the limit is safe, and they're probably right. Speed limits are arbitrary. For every sensible speed limit you can probably find many more that make no sense.
But.... you get caught then you pay up.
Lizzyweb said:
Right, advice please or opinions on what the point is of these ‘long range cameras’, which seem to be popping up all over like a bad rash. Yeah there’s a rant coming and I was clocked doing 48 in a 30 zone but by no means at all am I bad or unsafe on the roads, and this is what’s really irritating about it??
Bloody ‘long range camera’ was pointing a good half mile up the road waiting to catch people entering the lowered speed limit zone but it was my undetstanding that you had to be able to at least see the speed vehicles at a reasonable distance so you could have chance to alter your speed? I can’t see half a mile down the road and the the van was partly obscure by a parked car. I also don’t understand why you’d be catching traffic that far out of the village when surely the whole point is to catch speeders going through a village?
It’s straight for almost a mile and a half, along the bit where I was travelling and people do put their foot down. No hazards and you could assume the 30 zone didn’t start until further on if you’d not seen the signs by the roadside, so really it just gets everyone’s back up around there and I doubt it does anything for road safety.
You are only allowed to do a maximum of 30 in a 30, 48 is 18 more than 30.Bloody ‘long range camera’ was pointing a good half mile up the road waiting to catch people entering the lowered speed limit zone but it was my undetstanding that you had to be able to at least see the speed vehicles at a reasonable distance so you could have chance to alter your speed? I can’t see half a mile down the road and the the van was partly obscure by a parked car. I also don’t understand why you’d be catching traffic that far out of the village when surely the whole point is to catch speeders going through a village?
It’s straight for almost a mile and a half, along the bit where I was travelling and people do put their foot down. No hazards and you could assume the 30 zone didn’t start until further on if you’d not seen the signs by the roadside, so really it just gets everyone’s back up around there and I doubt it does anything for road safety.
I do find it funny when people kick off about this sort of thing. You were breaking the law and got caught, you have no right to complain. No i'm not saying that I never break speed limits but I am saying if I got caught, it's deserved as I know the rules so wouldn't be complaining. Suck it up, you chose to break the limit (by quite a considerable amount, 60%) so take the punishment.
Edited by eybic on Tuesday 8th January 15:01
eybic said:
I do find it funny when people kick off about this sort of thing. You were breaking the law and got caught, you have no right to complain. No i'm not saying that I never break speed limits but I am saying if I got caught, it's deserved as I know the rules so wouldn't be complaining. Suck it up, you chose to speed so take the punishment.
Maybe the issue for the OP is driving to rules he had in his fantasy world rather than the U.K. Traffic Law.eybic said:
I do find it funny when people kick off about this sort of thing. You were breaking the law and got caught, you have no right to complain. No i'm not saying that I never break speed limits but I am saying if I got caught, it's deserved as I know the rules so wouldn't be complaining. Suck it up, you chose to break the limit (by quite a considerable amount, 60%) so take the punishment.
And are we not allowed to complain about the law itself?Edited by eybic on Tuesday 8th January 15:01
j_4m said:
eybic said:
I do find it funny when people kick off about this sort of thing. You were breaking the law and got caught, you have no right to complain. No i'm not saying that I never break speed limits but I am saying if I got caught, it's deserved as I know the rules so wouldn't be complaining. Suck it up, you chose to break the limit (by quite a considerable amount, 60%) so take the punishment.
And are we not allowed to complain about the law itself?Edited by eybic on Tuesday 8th January 15:01
eybic said:
j_4m said:
eybic said:
I do find it funny when people kick off about this sort of thing. You were breaking the law and got caught, you have no right to complain. No i'm not saying that I never break speed limits but I am saying if I got caught, it's deserved as I know the rules so wouldn't be complaining. Suck it up, you chose to break the limit (by quite a considerable amount, 60%) so take the punishment.
And are we not allowed to complain about the law itself?Edited by eybic on Tuesday 8th January 15:01
I am sure that in the name of safety such considerations have long since been banished but am interested.
Whilst there is little or no defense for breaking the law it is always useful to actually know the law and how it is imposed upon us so that considered decisions can be made to ensure either actual or ostensible compliance.
What the OP is complaining about is that there are the rules of the road, and then there are the rules of The Game.
The rules of The Game are:
1. Don't be a cock.
2. Don't break the rules of the road where we can see you.
The OP was playing by the rules of The Game, but the other team cheated re: Rule #2.
If the authorities are serious about getting all of us to play by the rules of the road all of the time, they need to be consistent in that approach, and they aren't. Probably because they don't actually care about that.
The rules of The Game are:
1. Don't be a cock.
2. Don't break the rules of the road where we can see you.
The OP was playing by the rules of The Game, but the other team cheated re: Rule #2.
If the authorities are serious about getting all of us to play by the rules of the road all of the time, they need to be consistent in that approach, and they aren't. Probably because they don't actually care about that.
Rude-boy said:
I am very much in the camp of don't do the crime if you can't do the time but where i would question this is on the level of how could the SC operator possibly have formed an opinion as to the speed of the vehicle to be verified by the camera at such a distance?
I am sure that in the name of safety such considerations have long since been banished but am interested.
Whilst there is little or no defense for breaking the law it is always useful to actually know the law and how it is imposed upon us so that considered decisions can be made to ensure either actual or ostensible compliance.
Yep they got rid of that requirement, now all that is required, is the equipment to give the evidence of speed, the operator only needs to gives evidence of the use of the equipment.Can I say I understand that the kit can detect speed at longer distances. Half a mile is probably not that far to spot a "Safety" van but I suppose at 48 it's fair enough. I am sure that in the name of safety such considerations have long since been banished but am interested.
Whilst there is little or no defense for breaking the law it is always useful to actually know the law and how it is imposed upon us so that considered decisions can be made to ensure either actual or ostensible compliance.
Bennet said:
What the OP is complaining about is that there are the rules of the road, and then there are the rules of The Game.
The rules of The Game are:
1. Don't be a cock.
2. Don't break the rules of the road where we can see you.
The OP was playing by the rules of The Game, but the other team cheated re: Rule #2.
If the authorities are serious about getting all of us to play by the rules of the road all of the time, they need to be consistent in that approach, and they aren't. Probably because they don't actually care about that.
The rules of The Game are fewer/simpler than the two you've listed.The rules of The Game are:
1. Don't be a cock.
2. Don't break the rules of the road where we can see you.
The OP was playing by the rules of The Game, but the other team cheated re: Rule #2.
If the authorities are serious about getting all of us to play by the rules of the road all of the time, they need to be consistent in that approach, and they aren't. Probably because they don't actually care about that.
The rules of The Game are:
1. Don't get caught.
And they can use any lawful means to catch you.
No the rules of the game is that you are going to be caught at some point but don’t get caught too often.
They want to milk you every so often as it keeps people employed and the money flowing.
The robots policing humans approach means that sooner or later you have to pay. I consider it one of the prices of being a car driver these days.
They want to milk you every so often as it keeps people employed and the money flowing.
The robots policing humans approach means that sooner or later you have to pay. I consider it one of the prices of being a car driver these days.
Truffs said:
No the rules of the game is that you are going to be caught at some point but don’t get caught too often.
They want to milk you every so often as it keeps people employed and the money flowing.
The robots policing humans approach means that sooner or later you have to pay. I consider it one of the prices of being a car driver these days.
The numbers on a nationwide scale aren't that big, so with just a little thought in application the risks are pretty mitigable.They want to milk you every so often as it keeps people employed and the money flowing.
The robots policing humans approach means that sooner or later you have to pay. I consider it one of the prices of being a car driver these days.
Fewer than 6% of licence holders have penalty points for any offence, let alone just speeding offences. So they don't get to milk everybody let alone milk them every so often, just some expose themselves to a greater risk by a poorer choice of when & where than others do.
Lizzyweb said:
<snip>
... but it was my undetstanding that you had to be able to at least see the speed vehicles at a reasonable distance so you could have chance to alter your speed?
<snip>
Do you think you could 'scrub off' 18 MPH in time to prevent getting caught as soon as you see a camera? Because by then, you have been caught anyway.... but it was my undetstanding that you had to be able to at least see the speed vehicles at a reasonable distance so you could have chance to alter your speed?
<snip>
I think it would be obvious that you were speeding, and arguably a danger to anyone following you as well.
vonhosen said:
The numbers on a nationwide scale aren't that big, so with just a little thought in application the risks are pretty mitigable.
Fewer than 6% of licence holders have penalty points for any offence, let alone just speeding offences. So they don't get to milk everybody let alone milk them every so often, just some expose themselves to a greater risk by a poorer choice of when & where than others do.
Then add in those that have had a speed/other awareness course and what's the number? Even at 6%, over a 50 year driving career everyone will on average pick up points (6%/3years*50=100%).Fewer than 6% of licence holders have penalty points for any offence, let alone just speeding offences. So they don't get to milk everybody let alone milk them every so often, just some expose themselves to a greater risk by a poorer choice of when & where than others do.
Keeping up with traffic it is incredibly easy to be at risk of points, especially where there are constant changes in speed limit. On an occaisonal 15 mile route home through one village and a hamlet on an A road, limits are NSL, 40, 30,NSL, 50, NSL, 40, 30, NSL, 50, 40, 30 with the 50s being very similar stretches to the NSL. The 50s seemed designed to catch those that aren't watching for every limit repeater. Whereas the alternative is all NSL on narrower, twisty roads with no road markings which I would think poses greater danger. Which one do I regularly see speed cameras on, sited at the speed limit changes?
How many times have you driven along an unfamiliar road looking for repeater as the road could anything from 30 to NSL nowadays. Get it slightly wrong and you may get a brown envelope.
These s get ever more devious in trying to steal your money but if you level the playing field by investing in some state of the art electronic jamming counter measures they’ll try to move the goalposts again and throw a PCoJ at you. Outrageous, no wonder there are so many cloned and stolen plates about..
928 said:
vonhosen said:
The numbers on a nationwide scale aren't that big, so with just a little thought in application the risks are pretty mitigable.
Fewer than 6% of licence holders have penalty points for any offence, let alone just speeding offences. So they don't get to milk everybody let alone milk them every so often, just some expose themselves to a greater risk by a poorer choice of when & where than others do.
Then add in those that have had a speed/other awareness course and what's the number? Even at 6%, over a 50 year driving career everyone will on average pick up points (6%/3years*50=100%).Fewer than 6% of licence holders have penalty points for any offence, let alone just speeding offences. So they don't get to milk everybody let alone milk them every so often, just some expose themselves to a greater risk by a poorer choice of when & where than others do.
Keeping up with traffic it is incredibly easy to be at risk of points, especially where there are constant changes in speed limit. On an occaisonal 15 mile route home through one village and a hamlet on an A road, limits are NSL, 40, 30,NSL, 50, NSL, 40, 30, NSL, 50, 40, 30 with the 50s being very similar stretches to the NSL. The 50s seemed designed to catch those that aren't watching for every limit repeater. Whereas the alternative is all NSL on narrower, twisty roads with no road markings which I would think poses greater danger. Which one do I regularly see speed cameras on, sited at the speed limit changes?
How many times have you driven along an unfamiliar road looking for repeater as the road could anything from 30 to NSL nowadays. Get it slightly wrong and you may get a brown envelope.
As I also said the fewer than 6% who have points are from all offences, not just speeding.
I don't spend my days & nights worrying about brown envelopes because with a modicum of wit, about where, when & how much, the chances are fairly remote based on many decades of personal experience (& four generations of drivers in the family with zero points ever amongst them).
Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 8th January 23:56
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff