Essesx scamera club, i lurrve them!
Discussion
So much in fact that i fired off an email to them yesterday and blow me down (or just blow me 
) they went and replied today! Has to be some kind of record.
Now drunk or not, drunk actually, the need to respond as rapidly to them is within me, so heres my best effort, while typing uner the influence.
Dear Ms Fairweather,
Thanks for the speedy response, it was much appreciated.
Unfortunately, the response was more or less what i expected, in other words, all good news and no bad...... at all.
Thats not a very likely scenario is it?
How is it that Durham Force has no speed cameras yet theyve acheived a 12% drop in ksi?
What are they doing right that Essex is doing wrong?
Id suggest that Essex is relying on speed cameras as the fault in its strategy, and its being reflected in the numbers of DEATHS not KSI.
More DEATHS on the road but an overall reduction in slight or serious injury ISNT a success. A slight injury is just that; slight, heck, it could be a minor scratch, could it not?
Be truthful now please, we, the general public are NOT stupid, so why do "The partnerships" insist on treating us as though we are?
The cynic within me, just bursting to come out[cynic mode on] believes that speed cameras are being used to fund OTHER things, including large salaries and plush offices rather than road safety.
Is that NOT true?
Ive heard a statement recently from one of the partnerships, it may even have been Essex, where it was stated; "We dont know what happens away from our cameras".........hmmmm.
Is that a statement that your responsibility for road safety ends outside of the camera's "limited" field of influence?
So basically it matters not about what happens "elsewhere" but rather where you can place a camera for the purpose of "looking like we're doing something good" while actually making a packet.
Dont deny it, you ARE making MILLIONS out of them, some goes to the treasury, (tax take) and the rest you lavish upon offices, personal transport, big salaries and more roadside junk in the form of cameras.
Its a nice little earner and top marks for getting in on the act.
[cynic mode off]
Id be most interested in your response to the question of Durham Force's success with NO cameras, and they should, im sure you will agree, be congratulated for it.
I would also be most appreciative for any comments regarding my cynical alter-ego's points of view and must apologise for his probing and somewhat snap happy attitude, as he dosent get out very often!
Kindest Regards XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
) they went and replied today! Has to be some kind of record. Now drunk or not, drunk actually, the need to respond as rapidly to them is within me, so heres my best effort, while typing uner the influence.
Dear Ms Fairweather,
Thanks for the speedy response, it was much appreciated.
Unfortunately, the response was more or less what i expected, in other words, all good news and no bad...... at all.
Thats not a very likely scenario is it?
How is it that Durham Force has no speed cameras yet theyve acheived a 12% drop in ksi?
What are they doing right that Essex is doing wrong?
Id suggest that Essex is relying on speed cameras as the fault in its strategy, and its being reflected in the numbers of DEATHS not KSI.
More DEATHS on the road but an overall reduction in slight or serious injury ISNT a success. A slight injury is just that; slight, heck, it could be a minor scratch, could it not?
Be truthful now please, we, the general public are NOT stupid, so why do "The partnerships" insist on treating us as though we are?
The cynic within me, just bursting to come out[cynic mode on] believes that speed cameras are being used to fund OTHER things, including large salaries and plush offices rather than road safety.
Is that NOT true?
Ive heard a statement recently from one of the partnerships, it may even have been Essex, where it was stated; "We dont know what happens away from our cameras".........hmmmm.
Is that a statement that your responsibility for road safety ends outside of the camera's "limited" field of influence?
So basically it matters not about what happens "elsewhere" but rather where you can place a camera for the purpose of "looking like we're doing something good" while actually making a packet.
Dont deny it, you ARE making MILLIONS out of them, some goes to the treasury, (tax take) and the rest you lavish upon offices, personal transport, big salaries and more roadside junk in the form of cameras.
Its a nice little earner and top marks for getting in on the act.
[cynic mode off]
Id be most interested in your response to the question of Durham Force's success with NO cameras, and they should, im sure you will agree, be congratulated for it.
I would also be most appreciative for any comments regarding my cynical alter-ego's points of view and must apologise for his probing and somewhat snap happy attitude, as he dosent get out very often!
Kindest Regards XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff