WooHoo! : Big curb on speed cameras
Discussion
www.thisislondon.co.uk/dynamic/news/story.html?in_review_id=589527&in_review_text_id=557662
New guidelines just mean different rules to bend and circumvent I suppose..
Just because you're paranoid...
quote:Where's the catch.. what's going on.. hmm.. devil.. details.. conspriacy ..grumble.. I do not believe it..
Hundreds of badly sited speed cameras across Britain are to be ripped out in what has been hailed as a major victory for drivers and safety groups.
The Government has issued tougher-than-expected rules on where the spy devices can be placed - and insists that motorists are warned of their location.
New guidelines just mean different rules to bend and circumvent I suppose..
Just because you're paranoid...
s will still get you with those. Very encouraging that this is seen as a victory for "drivers AND safety groups"
Still dubious about "Government studies have repeatedly demonstrated that cameras save lives and prevent injuries - when they are sited in blackspots" but at least the qualification is there, it's not just saying that cameras save lives - period.
Will be interesting to see the rabid anti-car types response though. Probably start wailing about how those nasty "powerful" cars are being given carte blanche to carry on squashing fluffy little children whose only crime was to want to play in the middle of the road and how the mighty pro-car lobby has scored yet another victory in its evil campaign to get driving through schoolyards at 100mph+ legalised etc. etc.
Still dubious about "Government studies have repeatedly demonstrated that cameras save lives and prevent injuries - when they are sited in blackspots" but at least the qualification is there, it's not just saying that cameras save lives - period.
Will be interesting to see the rabid anti-car types response though. Probably start wailing about how those nasty "powerful" cars are being given carte blanche to carry on squashing fluffy little children whose only crime was to want to play in the middle of the road and how the mighty pro-car lobby has scored yet another victory in its evil campaign to get driving through schoolyards at 100mph+ legalised etc. etc.
Well we'll see. So far it has been the pro-car lobby huffing and puffing and going on about conspiracy theories and green plots to remove their freedom etc..
If the greens/mothers-in-cardigans think tanks start going on about car lobby being too powerful and coming up with conspiracy theories then at least we'll know that both sides are as bad as eachother!
funkihamsta
If the greens/mothers-in-cardigans think tanks start going on about car lobby being too powerful and coming up with conspiracy theories then at least we'll know that both sides are as bad as eachother!
funkihamsta
Couldn't believe the article in Daily Mail today - I bought the paper, something I very rarely so, just to read it again.
Apparently the Government have seen through the tricks and delaying tactics police forces have used to help them continue to fleece the motorist with speed cameras, and they are now to be forced to prove that all cameras actually reduce accidents at proven accident sites. Remarkable! Mobile cameras will have to be deployed in marked vehicles and operatives will have to wear flourescent gear. ALL cameras will be reviewed at six monthly intervals. Misleading signposting will not be allowed (no more signs where there are no cameras).
All good common sense. Lets hope that it is true, and that more effort is put into actually addressing real safety issues than in circumventing the new rules, as has happened over the last six months.
Maybe New Labour isn't so bad after all. Now if they'd just repeal IR35 ....
Apparently the Government have seen through the tricks and delaying tactics police forces have used to help them continue to fleece the motorist with speed cameras, and they are now to be forced to prove that all cameras actually reduce accidents at proven accident sites. Remarkable! Mobile cameras will have to be deployed in marked vehicles and operatives will have to wear flourescent gear. ALL cameras will be reviewed at six monthly intervals. Misleading signposting will not be allowed (no more signs where there are no cameras).
All good common sense. Lets hope that it is true, and that more effort is put into actually addressing real safety issues than in circumventing the new rules, as has happened over the last six months.
Maybe New Labour isn't so bad after all. Now if they'd just repeal IR35 ....
Steady on Phil..
Sounds more like the police have been doing what they're told by the government, and realising the depth of antipathy toward the whole revenue camera issue, government have stepped away from the police, pointed a finger at them and said "we're going to do something about the way police are abusing speed cameras".
Let's not forget that under no scheme AFAICT do the police earn revenue from the cameras - local authorities can apply to retain fines collected for the specific purpose of maintaining cameras or erecting new ones.. not good, but nonetheless neiother the council or the police are making a quid out of it. The treasury, on the other hand, does make money out of them and will continue to do so..
So they've woken up and realised that this is not an acceptable way to raise money, but in the process, rather than admitting responsibility and (shock horror
) apologising, they've simply laid the blame on the Police, who, if we're honest, have mostly been railing against the abuse of cameras for a good 12 months..
It's typical "not our fault guv" New Labour deception, and back-stabbery of the police, only days after Blunkett was putting their collective pecker in his mouth at the PA conference.
And they'll need to do a damned sight more than repeal IR35 before they drop off my "wish they were dead" list....
Sounds more like the police have been doing what they're told by the government, and realising the depth of antipathy toward the whole revenue camera issue, government have stepped away from the police, pointed a finger at them and said "we're going to do something about the way police are abusing speed cameras".
Let's not forget that under no scheme AFAICT do the police earn revenue from the cameras - local authorities can apply to retain fines collected for the specific purpose of maintaining cameras or erecting new ones.. not good, but nonetheless neiother the council or the police are making a quid out of it. The treasury, on the other hand, does make money out of them and will continue to do so..
So they've woken up and realised that this is not an acceptable way to raise money, but in the process, rather than admitting responsibility and (shock horror
) apologising, they've simply laid the blame on the Police, who, if we're honest, have mostly been railing against the abuse of cameras for a good 12 months.. It's typical "not our fault guv" New Labour deception, and back-stabbery of the police, only days after Blunkett was putting their collective pecker in his mouth at the PA conference.
And they'll need to do a damned sight more than repeal IR35 before they drop off my "wish they were dead" list....
Maybe all those strongly worded letters to MPs (when Meacher was trying to victimise bikers in national parks) have had some effect. Mine was pretty well anti speed camera/pro motorist, and it was followed up by my MP. I've had three replies him on the subject.
A small victory for democracy perhaps?
A small victory for democracy perhaps?
Perhaps the Police should hold a sponsored camera destruction event. Charge everyone a fiver or similar and let them go at a speed camera with their weapon of choice.
We get to take out our frustrations on the camera and the police dont have to spend any money taking them down!
Ideal!
Matt.
We get to take out our frustrations on the camera and the police dont have to spend any money taking them down!
Ideal!
Matt.
quote:Don't be stupid - these cameras cost a lot of money! They'll just relocate them, at a cost of £X to the tax-payer.
Perhaps the Police should hold a sponsored camera destruction event.
If we accept that they'll simply be relocated, where do people think they should go to? Personally I'd like to see them all located in 30mph zones, particually outside schools. I'm not subscribing to the "speed kills" lobby, but anything that makes numpty drivers think about their speed near a school can't be too bad.
I like the attitude on the Isle of Mann - speed limits in residential areas rigorously enforced, but truely derestricted open roads.
If they are to be relocated then I think every school in the country (nursery, primary, comp and private) should get one in each direction on all roads that directly pass them.
I wouldnt have any issue with that in anyway at all, but I would bet my bile duct that the numpties in the 4x4's dropping their little darlings off would be the first to complain.
Matt.
I wouldnt have any issue with that in anyway at all, but I would bet my bile duct that the numpties in the 4x4's dropping their little darlings off would be the first to complain.
Matt.
quote:
If they are to be relocated then I think every school in the country (nursery, primary, comp and private) should get one in each direction on all roads that directly pass them.
I wouldnt have any issue with that in anyway at all, but I would bet my bile duct that the numpties in the 4x4's dropping their little darlings off would be the first to complain.
Absolutly agree this is where the cameras should go. As for Numpty mums complaining: perhaps it will make them think about their driving, the more we can ban them the better IMHO.
BAN:
www.motorcyclenews.com/news/detail?sectionID=50677&documentID=147527
banned from using covert cameras
www.motorcyclenews.com/news/detail?sectionID=50677&documentID=147527
banned from using covert cameras
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff