Speed camera rendered useless
Speed camera rendered useless
Author
Discussion

puggit

Original Poster:

49,807 posts

278 months

Sunday 12th June 2005
quotequote all
[url]www.thisisplymouth.co.uk|http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=133188&command=displayContent&sourceNode=133171&contentPK=12602907&moduleName=InternalSearch&formname=sidebarsearch[/url]

SPEED TRAP WARNINGS ARE STOLEN

HANNAH WOOD

12:00 - 09 June 2005
Road signs warning motorists that speed cameras are operating in front of a school have been stolen - just two weeks after they were installed. Police said the action was 'irresponsible' and that Kelly College, in Tavistock, had campaigned to have speed cameras in use on a dangerous stretch of the A386 to protect pupils.

The theft of the metal signs, which were nailed to lampposts, happened between Sunday evening and Monday afternoon.

A spokesperson for the Safety Camera Partnership said the thief must have been determined or have no regard for the consequences of his or her actions.

It is a statutory obligation to provide notices indicating where speed cameras are in use.

Without the signs the speed deterrents cannot be used. Replacement signs are due to be put up as soon as possible.

Communications manager for the Devon and Cornwall Safety Camera Partnership Natalie Hartwell said: "This is a very serious offence as it is theft of police property.

"The road is used by an average of 600 cars every day and is considered very dangerous, particularly as students at Kelly College cross it to use their sports facilities."

Police are investigating the theft and appealing for any witness to contact their local police station on 08452 777444.

mxdi

13,994 posts

279 months

Sunday 12th June 2005
quotequote all
If it is the part of the road that I am thinking of, it has never been road where people speed up, I can't see the point of a camera in there, it would just add congestion!

gh0st

4,693 posts

288 months

Sunday 12th June 2005
quotequote all
So this road was so unbelieveable dangourous before the signs was it? ks!

BliarOut

72,863 posts

269 months

Sunday 12th June 2005
quotequote all
Won't somebody think of the revenue

I can't believe parents have allowed their children to go to such a dangeous school for all these years. Sounds like social services should be involved, it's tantamount to abuse.

Apache

39,731 posts

314 months

Sunday 12th June 2005
quotequote all
"This is a very serious offence as it is theft of police property"

clearly more serious than theft of private property then, give em a crime number and tell em to sod off

NiceCupOfTea

25,590 posts

281 months

Sunday 12th June 2005
quotequote all
Apache said:
"This is a very serious offence as it is theft of police property"

clearly more serious than theft of private property then, give em a crime number and tell em to sod off


very true. Suddenly theft of property is a serious offence. cts.

parrot of doom

23,075 posts

264 months

Sunday 12th June 2005
quotequote all
I don't know the road, but if pupils are crossing regularly, why not install a pedestrian crossing?

DeMolay

351 posts

272 months

Sunday 12th June 2005
quotequote all
Someone's got their facts wrong here. The absence of warning signs doesn't invalidate any speeding charge, or have I misread something...

GreenV8S

31,021 posts

314 months

Sunday 12th June 2005
quotequote all
Give it another few years and I suspect people doing this sort of thing will be branded as terrorists. As far as I can see from the papers, terrorists more or less drop out of the normal legal system and you can do what you like to them.

james_j

3,996 posts

285 months

Sunday 12th June 2005
quotequote all
"...It is a statutory obligation to provide notices indicating where speed cameras are in use..."

That's interesting. Also, it seems to be permitted to put up signs suggesting the presence of revenue cameras when there are none.

Dwight VanDriver

6,583 posts

274 months

Sunday 12th June 2005
quotequote all
>>>>>It is a statutory obligation to provide notices indicating where speed cameras are in use.
<<<<<<<<<

What, what, what, WHAT. Boy cows dangley bits.....

Pikeys like road signs for scrap weighing values 9and man holes - the metal kind).

DVD

Apache

39,731 posts

314 months

Sunday 12th June 2005
quotequote all
james_j said:
"...It is a statutory obligation to provide notices indicating where speed cameras are in use..."

That's interesting. Also, it seems to be permitted to put up signs suggesting the presence of revenue cameras when there are none.



mmmmmn, yet it is illegal to notify drivers when there are talivans

tim.tonal

2,049 posts

263 months

Sunday 12th June 2005
quotequote all
I've noticed small plastic camera signs put up before a mobile unit by the road - just fixed to a post with 2 plastic cable ties.

There would be little to stop anybody coming along and removing them when the scams are there as they're normally out of view of the van.

The signs appear to be made of a very brittle plastic as I've seen a few snapped ones that have left there for a while.

>> Edited by tim.tonal on Sunday 12th June 13:50

bga

8,134 posts

281 months

Sunday 12th June 2005
quotequote all
IIRC that road runs between Kelly College & many of their sports fields.
I only visited a few times but can't remember it being a chore to walk over to the other fields & dodge the very light traffic. Saying that it is a long straight but wouldn't have thought it was more "deserving" than other places in Tavy. Maybe they don't want their little public school darlings to get scared - they always were wusses at rugby.

Boosted LS1

21,200 posts

290 months

Sunday 12th June 2005
quotequote all
Do they really have to post notices to operate? I'm not so sure about this. I often see them as permanant fixtures in my area but don't think they are an absolute requirement by law.

It would be far to easy to go to court and say there weren't any notices.

Boosted.

hedders

24,460 posts

277 months

Monday 13th June 2005
quotequote all
puggit said:
[url]

"The road is used by an average of 600 cars every day and is considered very dangerous."



Sounds very dangerous, thats an average of one car every two minutes..by their own figures, The entire school could cross the road inbetween cars!!!

xxplod

2,269 posts

274 months

Monday 13th June 2005
quotequote all
SCPs are definately starting to feel the heat I think. Posters have appeared around my forces stations trying to proclaim that the cameras are also a valuable crime fighting tool. They say that they have helped catch all sorts of criminals because they have snapped criminals driving cars etc....

This is of course propaganda. They may have helped in the odd case. How much more would a Traffic Officer have done? Of course, a great deal more.

I upset one Sergeant on our SCP when I told him that if he wanted to work for the Inland Revenue, I was sure the Chief Constable would have given him a career break!

apache

39,731 posts

314 months

Monday 13th June 2005
quotequote all
xxplod said:
SCPs are definately starting to feel the heat I think. Posters have appeared around my forces stations trying to proclaim that the cameras are also a valuable crime fighting tool. They say that they have helped catch all sorts of criminals because they have snapped criminals driving cars etc....

This is of course propaganda. They may have helped in the odd case. How much more would a Traffic Officer have done? Of course, a great deal more.

I upset one Sergeant on our SCP when I told him that if he wanted to work for the Inland Revenue, I was sure the Chief Constable would have given him a career break!



You don't know how good it makes me feel to hear a plod speak out like that, nice one xxplod

Mr Whippy

32,453 posts

271 months

Monday 13th June 2005
quotequote all
If they really cared about the school users safety, why not use the revenue, or even the cost of the scamera installation to build a bloody foot bridge or pelican/traffic light crossing?

Dumb asses, any point where pedestrians need to cross a busy road requires better design, not slower traffic to be made safe.

Bloody hell, this country really is run by retards!

No responsibility on the childrens behalf to cross safely too? Perhaps a road safety course with some gruesome pictures?

Dave

apache

39,731 posts

314 months

Monday 13th June 2005
quotequote all
Mr Whippy said:
If they really cared about the school users safety, why not use the revenue, or even the cost of the scamera installation to build a bloody foot bridge or pelican/traffic light crossing?

Dumb asses, any point where pedestrians need to cross a busy road requires better design, not slower traffic to be made safe.

Bloody hell, this country really is run by retards!

No responsibility on the childrens behalf to cross safely too? Perhaps a road safety course with some gruesome pictures?


Dave




Come on Mr Whippy get with the program, in this instance it's not about safety, it's about trying to convince the public that the cameras are there to save lives not make money