SAFETY camera spotted
Discussion
I've lived where I currently live for six years now. There is a stretch of road I drive nearly every day, dual carriageway, good surface, decent visibility, not terribly busy (often entirely empty.) In all the time I've lived here, I've never heard of, or seen, an accident on that stretch of road. People who have lived here longer than me have said that the road has not had an accident on it ever.
However, it does have a really convenient bridge (with lots of convenient big shrubbery as well) for a SAFETY camera to sit and take happy snaps of people. At least once a week it plays host to a SAFETY camera. Because it's such a DANGEROUS road, obviously.
So, clearly, the SAFETY camera is working because there are NO accidents on this stretch of road nor have there ever been, but they obviously have to keep working their mojo there, just in case.
So: SAFETY cameras work.
OK?
However, it does have a really convenient bridge (with lots of convenient big shrubbery as well) for a SAFETY camera to sit and take happy snaps of people. At least once a week it plays host to a SAFETY camera. Because it's such a DANGEROUS road, obviously.
So, clearly, the SAFETY camera is working because there are NO accidents on this stretch of road nor have there ever been, but they obviously have to keep working their mojo there, just in case.
So: SAFETY cameras work.
OK?
Near where I work there is a "bypass".It's abot 4 miles in length,the only way on and off is a r/about at either end so no junctions along it's length,it's a dual carriageway with a grass median strip with armco on in .The road used to be 70mph.Now it's 50 and guess what comes to visit twice a week..............
Part of the problem is that they need to catch people to justify their existance and get some income, if you were in their position then I'd guess you'd also chose a place where you were going to catch people whether it's a blackspot or not. I'm not quite sure what the definition of a blackspot is tho as a blackspot seems to have a rather large radius.
spokey said:
I've lived where I currently live for six years now. There is a stretch of road I drive nearly every day, dual carriageway, good surface, decent visibility, not terribly busy (often entirely empty.) In all the time I've lived here, I've never heard of, or seen, an accident on that stretch of road. People who have lived here longer than me have said that the road has not had an accident on it ever.
However, it does have a really convenient bridge (with lots of convenient big shrubbery as well) for a SAFETY camera to sit and take happy snaps of people. At least once a week it plays host to a SAFETY camera. Because it's such a DANGEROUS road, obviously.
So, clearly, the SAFETY camera is working because there are NO accidents on this stretch of road nor have there ever been, but they obviously have to keep working their mojo there, just in case.
So: SAFETY cameras work.
OK?
However, it does have a really convenient bridge (with lots of convenient big shrubbery as well) for a SAFETY camera to sit and take happy snaps of people. At least once a week it plays host to a SAFETY camera. Because it's such a DANGEROUS road, obviously.
So, clearly, the SAFETY camera is working because there are NO accidents on this stretch of road nor have there ever been, but they obviously have to keep working their mojo there, just in case.
So: SAFETY cameras work.
OK?
I used astral projection to distribute alien repellant all over the world.
My work seems to be as effective as that safety camera
There are no reasons required these days to set up a camera location, though some sites are inappropriate due to, for example, being on a bend or because the location regularly has a lot of parked vehicles or other obstructions which make 'enforcement' problematic - probably uneconomic in fact.
Many many 'community leaders' will be pushing to locations in their areas to be 'assessed' - it gives them something to do. The Pratnerships are expected to respond to these requests and do. Well, you should follow up every lead, no matter how much the assessment costs. Some will turn into genuine opportunities.
Equally leads can be generated by checking out likely stretches of road and doing some relatively inexpensive speed monitoring. There are quite a few devices around that can be left on the road for a few days and count vehicles (by type and therefore can identify the limit they should be obeying and if they are) and speeds.
Many sites, particularly in towns, are likely to have permanent loop systems embedded in the road for the purpose, often shared with the local council's traffic volume monitoring activity. Existing volume loops can, apparently, be relatively easily enhanced to record speed and vehicle type as well. Find a site that shows potential and there is every justification for undertaking operations there whether or not there have been any accidents, though regular published sites still require correct and proper signage I believe. For now at least.
Many of these systems are very likely to be monitored closely for motorbike activity it seems.
If, as seems to be happening, central government quietly washes its hands of the scamera partnerships it means thet local government will have an ever more important input to both policy and funding. Any centralised policy influence - for instance from the Highways Authority as a declining partner in the SCPs as more and more roads are de-trunked - will be eroded or removed altogether. Local road planners and councillors (neither often recognised for their support of motoring when they have bus services to manage ....) will be in a position to undertake whatever they have a mind to undertake. They will also, largely, control the business plans.
More and more of the SCP take is supposed to fund road safety schemes. Or to put it another way, if the LA can shift some of the budget for road maintenance into the 'safety scheme' arena, justified by any means at their disposal, they can divert the money 'saved' from the original budget somewhere else - maybe even reduce the road budget as it will be paid for by the safety camera tax.
Whether the SCPs have the current budget and staff to process the tax is an interesting question. I have seen some suggestions that the number of tickets are down and that (perhaps) more are being disputed and so going to court. That would also mean their income would be reduced.
But if the funding rules are changing the LA's might take an opportunity to support the investment if returns were pretty much guaranteed. And they have the existing infrastructure to identify the most lucrative opportunities.
Presumably things will become clearer after April.
Many many 'community leaders' will be pushing to locations in their areas to be 'assessed' - it gives them something to do. The Pratnerships are expected to respond to these requests and do. Well, you should follow up every lead, no matter how much the assessment costs. Some will turn into genuine opportunities.
Equally leads can be generated by checking out likely stretches of road and doing some relatively inexpensive speed monitoring. There are quite a few devices around that can be left on the road for a few days and count vehicles (by type and therefore can identify the limit they should be obeying and if they are) and speeds.
Many sites, particularly in towns, are likely to have permanent loop systems embedded in the road for the purpose, often shared with the local council's traffic volume monitoring activity. Existing volume loops can, apparently, be relatively easily enhanced to record speed and vehicle type as well. Find a site that shows potential and there is every justification for undertaking operations there whether or not there have been any accidents, though regular published sites still require correct and proper signage I believe. For now at least.
Many of these systems are very likely to be monitored closely for motorbike activity it seems.
If, as seems to be happening, central government quietly washes its hands of the scamera partnerships it means thet local government will have an ever more important input to both policy and funding. Any centralised policy influence - for instance from the Highways Authority as a declining partner in the SCPs as more and more roads are de-trunked - will be eroded or removed altogether. Local road planners and councillors (neither often recognised for their support of motoring when they have bus services to manage ....) will be in a position to undertake whatever they have a mind to undertake. They will also, largely, control the business plans.
More and more of the SCP take is supposed to fund road safety schemes. Or to put it another way, if the LA can shift some of the budget for road maintenance into the 'safety scheme' arena, justified by any means at their disposal, they can divert the money 'saved' from the original budget somewhere else - maybe even reduce the road budget as it will be paid for by the safety camera tax.
Whether the SCPs have the current budget and staff to process the tax is an interesting question. I have seen some suggestions that the number of tickets are down and that (perhaps) more are being disputed and so going to court. That would also mean their income would be reduced.
But if the funding rules are changing the LA's might take an opportunity to support the investment if returns were pretty much guaranteed. And they have the existing infrastructure to identify the most lucrative opportunities.
Presumably things will become clearer after April.
Peter Ward said:
So road repairs will be funded by speeding fines. Neat! Don't you wish you'd thought of that?
I was thinking more when re-engineer junctions and things for 'safety' which in former times would have had its own budget. I bet that could be fudged quite easily.
As for repairs - nah! Haven't seen any proper repairs for years - just hardstanding for scamera vans. I'm sure they would not waste the take on repairing roads - unless it meant the taxation opportunity was likely to improve ...
james_j said:
Peter Ward said:
So road repairs will be funded by speeding fines. Neat! Don't you wish you'd thought of that?
That's as likely as the main causes of CO2 emissions (deforestation) being addressed by labour's new "green" taxes on various forms of travel.
Are you referring to the deforestation that is happening so that more palm oil can be produced for use as fuel oil in Asia (and Europe when it takes off here) because that would be a "carbon neutral" fuel?
The ones the Greenies have recently worked out may not be such a good idea?
(There second reason for it not being a good idea is that it can be used to form some sort of argument for the continuation of 'green' personal transport which is still an anathema to them.)
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff