30 points in a week!!
Discussion
Saw on another website (FleetNewsNet - not sure if I can post link/whole story for copyright reasons?) news item about a guy who drove to and from work for a week past (non-flashing) speed cameras in 40MPH road works.
He's appealing on the basis that he thought they should have flashed.
He's appealing on the basis that he thought they should have flashed.
nel said:
Silly sod, but all the same - was his driving dangerous? Did he have any accidents or cause any injuries/deaths? Has the speed camera made the world a safer place or has it just made the government some money?
Perhaps he didn't, but we don't know how many people slowed down as a result of the camera being there and didn't crash????
I've been to nearly a dozen serious collisions in the last week...all down to excessive speed..........
2 Smokin Barrels said:
If he didn't notice the camera, how many other hazards might he miss in a week? Best place for him probably is off the road!
Umm, by the sounds of the article, he WAS well aware of the camera, but thought it was out of action due to the lack of a flash. Given that he not only noticed the camera but also the way it appeared to be behaving as he drove by, I'd say he was being considerably more observant than a lot of drivers...
stepej said:
I've been to nearly a dozen serious collisions in the last week...all down to excessive speed..........
Only excessive speed?... None of them equally due to bad lane discipline?, or poor observation?
Certainly not bad lane discipline as 8/10 were single vehicle RTCs...
Poor observation? Difficult to say....what is easy to say is; if at least 7 out of the ten had been under the speed limit, it's highly likely that they wouldn't have crashed, wouldn't be dead or the people in their cars wouldn't be injured....
And these RTC have generally occured without other vehicles being around, no other factors other than excessive speed (in excess of the limit) on roads where it's not safe to do those speeds..
One of those was a very slight curve on a motorway with nobody else around....
twister said:
If he didn't notice the camera, how many other hazards might he miss in a week? Best place for him probably is off the road!
Umm, by the sounds of the article, he WAS well aware of the camera, but thought it was out of action due to the lack of a flash. Given that he not only noticed the camera but also the way it appeared to be behaving as he drove by, I'd say he was being considerably more observant than a lot of drivers...
Fair enough. Perhaps I should have read the article!
Being that there was a limit through road works he should have obeyed it regardless of the camera.
On a seperate point, does this story not clearly illustrate the fact that this camera did nothing to prevent this drivers behaviour.
Furthermore had this driver gone on to have a speeding-related accident the camera and the policy which governs it would have had zero effect in preventing it.
Money-makers for sure.
On a seperate point, does this story not clearly illustrate the fact that this camera did nothing to prevent this drivers behaviour.
Furthermore had this driver gone on to have a speeding-related accident the camera and the policy which governs it would have had zero effect in preventing it.
Money-makers for sure.
No Discretion said:
no other factors other than excessive speed (in excess of the limit) on roads where it's not safe to do those speeds..
That's a better way to put it, sorry to seem pedantic but it wasn't just excessive speed then but rather excessive speed where the conditions (weather, road surface, etc) dictated that it wasn't safe, that I would say was bad observation
swilly said:
Being that there was a limit through road works he should have obeyed it regardless of the camera.
On a seperate point, does this story not clearly illustrate the fact that this camera did nothing to prevent this drivers behaviour.
Furthermore had this driver gone on to have a speeding-related accident the camera and the policy which governs it would have had zero effect in preventing it.
Money-makers for sure.
I'm not sure...
Workmen work on these sections of motorway, day and night, with only a line of cones to protect them...
Temporary speed limits, backed up with cameras and camera warning signs do a great job in keeping these workers as safe as is possible...
No Discretion said:
Being that there was a limit through road works he should have obeyed it regardless of the camera.
On a seperate point, does this story not clearly illustrate the fact that this camera did nothing to prevent this drivers behaviour.
Furthermore had this driver gone on to have a speeding-related accident the camera and the policy which governs it would have had zero effect in preventing it.
Money-makers for sure.
I'm not sure...
Workmen work on these sections of motorway, day and night, with only a line of cones to protect them...
Temporary speed limits, backed up with cameras and camera warning signs do a great job in keeping these workers as safe as is possible...
You should find that works on motorways will be carried out behind concrete VCB's and that the cones only manage the traffic flow not contain it should there be an accident.
I agree with the temporary speed limits and backing up with cameras and signs (one of the few areas where cameras are justified) BUT my point is that this camera did nothing to prevent this driver exceeding the limit and thus simply earned revenue instead of providing safety for the workers.
[quote]
I'm not sure...
Workmen work on these sections of motorway, day and night, with only a line of cones to protect them...
Temporary speed limits, backed up with cameras and camera warning signs do a great job in keeping these workers as safe as is possible...[/quote]
Fair enough. However I get extremely pissed off and I'm surely not alone when there are miles and miles of so called roadworks and zillions of cones with bugger all happening and nobody there. Scameras in these circumstances are just for revenue surely, safety has
all to do with it! 
I'm not sure...
Workmen work on these sections of motorway, day and night, with only a line of cones to protect them...
Temporary speed limits, backed up with cameras and camera warning signs do a great job in keeping these workers as safe as is possible...[/quote]
Fair enough. However I get extremely pissed off and I'm surely not alone when there are miles and miles of so called roadworks and zillions of cones with bugger all happening and nobody there. Scameras in these circumstances are just for revenue surely, safety has
all to do with it! No Discretion said:
Workmen work on these sections of motorway, day and night, with only a line of cones to protect them...
Temporary speed limits, backed up with cameras and camera warning signs do a great job in keeping these workers as safe as is possible...
...and WHEN there are people working on the road, then I'd agree with this 100% and be quite happy to see the book thrown at anyone who breaks the limit through an active stretch of roadworks.
Unfortunately, in the past year the number of times I've driven through temporary roadwork limits and seen ANY evidence of work being carried out is significantly less than the number of times I've driven through temporary roadwork limits and seen precisely NO evidence of activity. It's this part-time nature of the work combined with the full-time nature of the restrictions and camera enforcement that tends to breed resentment and a lack of respect for the limits. If the limits are there for the protection of the roadworkers, then why enforce them if there are no roadworkers to protect?
No Discretion said:
Workmen work on these sections of motorway, day and night, with only a line of cones to protect them...
Temporary speed limits, backed up with cameras and camera warning signs do a great job in keeping these workers as safe as is possible...
Most of the roadworks I've been through lately, the workers are perfectly safe because they aren't there. Sure protecting them is a priority, but then so is protecting the income from the cameras
When the Avonmouth bridge was being refurbished, they made sure they maximised the workers safety by starting the restriction nearly three miles from the bridge...........coincidentally of course they put the first scamera at the bottom of a nice long hill. If I could be bothered to work it out, I think it nearly paid for the bridge works.
Phil
the other factor, when the workmen aren't there...are the big holes in the road and the uneven surface etc etc...all of which might bring you to a nasty stop if you entered the coned area....
Roadworks are never really more than a mile or so long...why risk all the hassle? Keep at the posted limit and r e l a x.
Roadworks are never really more than a mile or so long...why risk all the hassle? Keep at the posted limit and r e l a x.
parrot of doom said:
Doesn't matter if the camera flashed or not - the posted limit was 40mph, and hes been breaking it on several different journies.
Hopefully they'll go easy on him, but I reckon a couple of weeks ban.....
30 points!.. They can't combine the offences as they were different journeys. This chap is heading for a 6 month Totting up ban unless he can successfully plead mitigating circumstances to reduce the length of the ban.
DAZ
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff