Scamera pics on the Net

[cazzo]

Can't get the pictures? you can now.....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/3577777.stm

Speeders to view offence online

Speeding drivers in Wiltshire will soon be able to see evidence of their offence on a new website.
The county's Safety Camera Partnership has commissioned a software company to develop the system.

Drivers will be able to see photographs from speed cameras and get accident statistics.

The aim is to help motorists understand why they are being punished. Offenders will receive a PIN number with their penalty notice to access the site.

The county's drivers will be the first in the UK to have immediate access via the internet to information and pictures from speed cameras.

It will also give them information and statistics about crashes and fatalities that have occurred on the roads where speed cameras are placed.

The Wiltshire and Swindon Safety Camera Partnership has commissioned the system from a software company called Compuware Ltd.

The Partnership says that once motorists can see the statistics and understand how many crashes occur on each road, they might be more willing to slow down and create a safer driving environment.

[deltaf]

Not saying that scameras have failed are they? Oh deary me no.
Nobs.

[dazren]

They really don't know what to do with all that revenue do they?

DAZ

[james_j]

More than 6,500 men die each year from a ruptured abdominal artery - a simple scan could save them. Specialists advise that all men age 65 and over should have a scan - attempts are being made to persuade the government to introduce the test.

Examples such as this, where many more deaths than those due to driving too fast for the conditions result, are legion - falling off ladders, falling asleep at the wheel, kitchen accidents, smoking etc etc

Far far fewer people die from driving too fast for the conditions, but look at the time and effort wasted and the bad-will generated by the pathetic efforts to brainwash people into thinking than driving "fast" is somehow wrong. Truly pathetic and scandalously misguided.

[PumaLover]

Yes and 14 people die in the UK very HOUR from smoking, 120,000 a year, but then cigs. bring in a megabucks to Gordon Brown.

[PetrolTed]

Hi Ole Pop, welcome to PH.

The anger - personally - is that there are vast amounts of money attacking a problem that is a very minor cause of deaths on our roads.

Whilst speed is a factor, it's not the cause of many accidents. I'd far rather see the money being ploughed into schemes that stopped people having accidents rather than trying to limit the speeds at which accidents occur.

Since cameras were introduced the impact on road deaths has been negligible to non-existent despite motorists donating millions and millions of pounds to the 'road safety' budget. That money is being wasted, people still die on our roads and I resent that.

[busa_rush]

Ole'-Pop said:

. . . (speeding) is the one major factor in a large number of accidents that can be measured.

It's not, that's the whole point.

And just because you can measure something doesn't mean that it's the cause of accidents. You can say that 80% of all accidents involve cars with 4 wheels therefore 4 wheels are a cause of accidents . . . obviously not true. (Unless you went to the Brunstrom school of statistics)

If speed cameras were placed at genuine accident black spots that could not be made safe by any other means (Engineering/Education etc) than I doubt people would complain. Currently the majority are placed on safe, straight sections of road and are placed so as to catch motorists who are doing nothing wrong other than driving slightly in excess of an arbitarily decided speed limit.

[deltaf]

Its a piddling 12% max(dft figures...revised from 33% lie)...hardly a "major" cause is it?

[nonegreen]

Ole'-Pop said:

Why the incessant hostility to speed cameras?

No, you misunderstand. We were all quite happy to just go about our business and then some people full of chemicals and wearing sandals declared war on us. They started incessant, in the end we will finish it.

Ole'-Pop said:

Of course we all know that speed isn't the only thing that causes accidents but it is the one major factor in a large number of accidents that can be measured.

This is total lies in the same way as the Nazis denied the existence of concentration camps. At absolute maximum of 7% of accidents have excess speed as a contrubutory but not necessarily the major causal factor. Bearing in mind that Dr David Begg who is public enemy number 1 is doing his best to influence the stats. The revelation that the civil servants who record these stats just put "excess speed", when they can find no simple cause, suggests perhaps 1% or 2% may be closer to the truth. In other words speed is actually a very minor factor in all accidents.

Ole'-Pop said:

If you find a way of measuring or detecting tailgating - another major factor (also a major cause of speeding) or indeed of any of the other factirs that contribute to accidents then do tell so we can get the systems in place.

Tailgating is not a major a cause of speeding, it is a major cause of boredom and fatigue, however the fundamental danger it causes is this. The allowance of insufficient gap between moving vehicles causes bunching and results in lower overall speeds and an increase in collisions. There is a simple control available it is called trafic patrols.

Ole'-Pop said:

Basically if you don't like what they are selling don't shop there! The cameras would never have caught on if people didn't keep giving them money.

No politicians have as yet had a mandate to impose the kind of hardcore economic sanctions against motorists that have been in place for the last 5 years. If the government had put such punative sanctions in place against Iraq, then Sadam would have been toppled without military action. Bearing in mind that these people were never elected to perform such crimes against humanity. In any sensible situation Blair and his cabinet would be on trial in the Hague.

Ole'-Pop said:

Most speed limits aren't a secret so in addition to speeding the drivers could reasonably be done for careless driving or at least inattention.

Because the vast majority of motorists actually demonstrate a very high degree of alertness the speed limits are indeed becoming subtly disguised by the criminal liberal elite local authorities. Of course culturaly the speed limits were interpretted as a basic guide for drivers and could be literally enforced by the police if needed. Since the fall of the USSR and the rise of the sandalist movement terminal silliness has ocurred and the resulting increased deaths act as a macabre reminder of why drug abuse and umemployment should be discouraged.

Ole'-Pop said:

Oh and could those of you that barge past me at limit +25% then slam on your brakes and crawl past the cameras at limit - 20% just drive at or below the limit all the time - its easier safer and more relaxing all round.

You seem to be confusing drivers with numpties. Drivers will be the ones you go past in 30 and 40 limits especially in areas of maximum hazard. Frequently in adverse weather conditions and never in NSLs in good conditions where their speed may well be up to the limit plus 120%. Numpties will be the ones doing "thingy with the steering wheel until bang happens".

Take care and remember to use your mirrors.

[hornet]

Ole'-Pop said:

Hang on a minute! Its inappropriate speed that is a problem.

"Inappropriate speed" and "speed in excess of limit" are NOT the same thing, that's the problem. Cameras do nothing to address inappropriate speed as they're set at a fixed point, whereas the point at which a speed becomes inappropriate moves up and down depending on conditions. What's more of a problem? 60mph on a foggy motorway or 80mph on a dry, bright day? Which one would earn you 3 points? Daft isn't it...

I also object to living in a country where cameras are increasingly replacing human police and the rules are being made up as we go along. How can a camera be placed on a road with no accident history but a "speeding problem"? Surely if there is no accident history despite speeds being above the posted limit, that limit is too low?

[safespeed]

Ole'-Pop said:

If you find a way of measuring or detecting tailgating - another major factor (also a major cause of speeding) or indeed of any of the other factirs that contribute to accidents then do tell so we can get the systems in place.

But we had such a system in place. It wasn't perfect, but it worked very well. It detected all manner of offences - sometimes just by the smell - and even delivered roadside education exactly when and where it was needed most.

BRING BACK FULL STRENGTH TRAFPOL.

There's no substitute for thinking law enforcement.

Best Regards,
Paul Smith
Safe Speed
www.safespeed.org.uk

[dazren]

Ole'-Pop said:

One thing I taught my kids when they started driving was if you are not totally sure about everything you see and happy you understand what other vehicles are doing then stop accelerating or start to slow down. The advice may be in part responsible for them having kept out of trouble (accident and law) they are 26 and 29 now.

Excellent advice. The problem comes from the fact that many people do this whilst travelling at a speed above arbitrarily set limit.

DAZ

[hornet]

Ole'-Pop said:

I thought that road vehicles were governed by physics laws before any of the others but must be mistaken sorry to intrude !

Physics doesn't CAUSE crashes. Physics doesn't determine that because I'm exceeding a limit of x mph in a safe manner that I'm suddenly going to crash. By all means be observant and anticipate trouble, but browbeating people into believing that blindly observing a limit on a sign somehow makes them safer is dangerous, as the fatality statistics would seem to bear out.

[nonegreen]

hornet said:

Ole'-Pop said: I thought that road vehicles were governed by physics laws before any of the others but must be mistaken sorry to intrude ! Physics doesn't CAUSE crashes. Physics doesn't determine that because I'm exceeding a limit of x mph in a safe manner that I'm suddenly going to crash. By all means be observant and anticipate trouble, but browbeating people into believing that blindly observing a limit on a sign somehow makes them safer is dangerous, as the fatality statistics would seem to bear out.

Good points, although, in some respects it might be better to let this silliness run its course. It is a shame so many will have to die at the hands of the sandalists but there is no substitute for total humiliation. The end of prohibition in the states proved that.

[chrisgr31]

Ole'-Pop said:

OOOOppps! I seem to have triggered some vigorous hobby horse riding Maybe I am in the wrong place I thought that road vehicles were governed by physics laws before any of the others but must be mistaken sorry to intrude !

Nope! You made the error of stating in your first post that speeding was a major factor in accidents. In fact movement is a factor in all accidents. After all if nothing is moving then there can be no accidents.

In a later post you clarified your remarks to say inappropriate speed was the problem, and that is more correct. An inappropriate speed may be above or below the speed limit for that road. After all how often do accidents happen in thick fog where people are driving too fast, but within the speed limit?

For any given location the safe speed will be dependent on traffic conditions, weather conditions, the car, the driver, and the abilities of the other drivers around. The speed limit on any road is an arbitary one.

[cptsideways]

Ole'-Pop said:

Of course we all know that speed isn't the only thing that causes accidents but it is the one major factor in a large number of accidents that can be measured.

Thats what the Partnerships are trying to tell us, but the police forces such such as Durham say it's only 2-3% the majority are inatention or drink drug related.

Ole'-Pop said:

If you find a way of measuring or detecting tailgating - another major factor (also a major cause of speeding) or indeed of any of the other factirs that contribute to accidents then do tell so we can get the systems in place.

There is a system, it's called traffic policeman, only they're too busy on overtime catching speeders not the dangerous drivers

Ole'-Pop said:

Basically if you don't like what they are selling don't shop there! The cameras would never have caught on if people didn't keep giving them money.

We don't, how many PH'er and the like have stopped to going to brunstromnia for holidays & daytrips etc?

Ole'-Pop said:

Most speed limits aren't a secret

Yeovil main A30 throughfare, dual carrieageway, the signs are there but are hidden at the previous roundabouts, its a very safe road but a 30 limit, they post lots of camera sign no speed limit signs for 2 miles. Guess where they put the camera?, if they wanted poeople to drive at 30 at least they could make signs visible yes?

[Mr E]

Ole'-Pop said:

That means that a vehicle travelling at 42mph has twice as much of the stuff as one travelling at 30mph. The trouble with this kinetic energy stuff is it has to go somewhere when the vehicle stops! If it doesn't go in the brakes it is the stuff that bend the metal and pulps the humans. Do not ever forget that !!!

Yes. But doing 42mph rather than 30mph makes you no more likely to actually crash.

Which is kind of the whole point, yes?

Otherwise we might as well go back to men with flags.

[deltaf]

Mr E said:

Ole'-Pop said: That means that a vehicle travelling at 42mph has twice as much of the stuff as one travelling at 30mph. The trouble with this kinetic energy stuff is it has to go somewhere when the vehicle stops! If it doesn't go in the brakes it is the stuff that bend the metal and pulps the humans. Do not ever forget that !!! Yes. But doing 42mph rather than 30mph makes you no more likely to actually crash. Which is kind of the whole point, yes? Otherwise we might as well go back to men with flags.

Game over, set and match to Mr E.

[busa_rush]

Ar you a troll Mr Ole'-Pop ? Certainly quack like one.

[bogush]

Ole'-Pop said:

Ah Mr busa_rush now I begin to understand! I had thought that i was taking part in a sensible discussion forum - well other sections certainly seemed to be. But here you are talking about Trolls - confined to pages of Grimm's Fairy tales in my experience! And if I put other contributions making the case that physics does not apply to vehicles! Well I can see I have indeed strayed! I will leave you chaps to your fulminating about the evils of cmaeras - and return to a world where Newton rules!

So, what does this Mr Newton say about what laws of physics would apply in the two following experiments:

1) You drive along at 29.9mph, check your speedo, and just as you start to look down someone suddenly runs right across the road into your path, and gets hit at 29.9mph.

2) You are driving along at 39.9mph in a 30. You are watching the road, and see someone run out in front of you, so you steer round them and continue on your way.

If you will insist on quacking like a duck instead of taking part in a sensible discussion forum, and then flying away, how do you expect people to react to your scientific "facts"?