Scamera Partnership Vans
#11
not at all an excuse no. but camera vans blanket apply a rule which is there to be applied sensibly.
70mph in fog is legal. 70mph in heavy rain with standing water is legal. 80mph in the dry on a clear sunny day is not. you tell me which is safest. common sense.
scamera vans make money for the local police authorities, that is the incentive given to them by tony blair. if you want effective control then specs is the only way as it measure average speed.
in 1997 I was tailed on the A4 in London late at night, I'd done over 100 leptons at one point, noone around and the stretch i was on had barriers to stop pedestrians getting on to the road, it was dual carriageway. there were speed cameras but the officer who pulled me rightly observed i 'slowed for all of 100 yards' at each one.
I got a slap on the wrist which I deserved and it slowed me right down. NIP has the opposite effect, I know they're crap at catching me so I actually speed up out of anger. especially when its a clear day and i'm 3mph over the limit.
my laser/radar detector means i don't get caught at all now
70mph in fog is legal. 70mph in heavy rain with standing water is legal. 80mph in the dry on a clear sunny day is not. you tell me which is safest. common sense.
scamera vans make money for the local police authorities, that is the incentive given to them by tony blair. if you want effective control then specs is the only way as it measure average speed.
in 1997 I was tailed on the A4 in London late at night, I'd done over 100 leptons at one point, noone around and the stretch i was on had barriers to stop pedestrians getting on to the road, it was dual carriageway. there were speed cameras but the officer who pulled me rightly observed i 'slowed for all of 100 yards' at each one.
I got a slap on the wrist which I deserved and it slowed me right down. NIP has the opposite effect, I know they're crap at catching me so I actually speed up out of anger. especially when its a clear day and i'm 3mph over the limit.
my laser/radar detector means i don't get caught at all now
#12
Originally Posted by StuartL,Dec 18 2005, 06:38 PM
1. you can't complain about ....... the methods by which the government enforce those laws.
2. If the laws are wrong campaign against the law not the enforcement method...
2. If the laws are wrong campaign against the law not the enforcement method...
2. Trouble is this government doesn't listen (no point you turning up at the next M4 scamera protest then)
#13
Originally Posted by Nick Graves,Dec 18 2005, 06:45 PM
I think all of the D-bases are incomplete & the only chance against laser is really a diffuser.
#14
Originally Posted by Nottm_S2,Dec 18 2005, 06:46 PM
scamera vans make money for the local police authorities, that is the incentive given to them by tony blair. if you want effective control then specs is the only way as it measure average speed.
BTW, talking about specs, watch out for the new installation of these in the tunnel on the M25 near the M11 turn-off.
#15
Originally Posted by mikdys,Dec 18 2005, 07:54 PM
or false number plates or a European vehicle still registered abroad
Now where are my Belgian transit plates?
BTW, the TTG's great - 270 yards before, it 'dongs', reminds me of the start of "Hell's Bells" by AC/DC, which seems appropriate.
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mansfield Nottinghamshire
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Nottm_S2,Dec 18 2005, 10:46 AM
not at all an excuse no. but camera vans blanket apply a rule which is there to be applied sensibly.
70mph in fog is legal. 70mph in heavy rain with standing water is legal. 80mph in the dry on a clear sunny day is not. you tell me which is safest. common sense.
scamera vans make money for the local police authorities, that is the incentive given to them by tony blair. if you want effective control then specs is the only way as it measure average speed.
in 1997 I was tailed on the A4 in London late at night, I'd done over 100 leptons at one point, noone around and the stretch i was on had barriers to stop pedestrians getting on to the road, it was dual carriageway. there were speed cameras but the officer who pulled me rightly observed i 'slowed for all of 100 yards' at each one.
I got a slap on the wrist which I deserved and it slowed me right down. NIP has the opposite effect, I know they're crap at catching me so I actually speed up out of anger. especially when its a clear day and i'm 3mph over the limit.
my laser/radar detector means i don't get caught at all now
70mph in fog is legal. 70mph in heavy rain with standing water is legal. 80mph in the dry on a clear sunny day is not. you tell me which is safest. common sense.
scamera vans make money for the local police authorities, that is the incentive given to them by tony blair. if you want effective control then specs is the only way as it measure average speed.
in 1997 I was tailed on the A4 in London late at night, I'd done over 100 leptons at one point, noone around and the stretch i was on had barriers to stop pedestrians getting on to the road, it was dual carriageway. there were speed cameras but the officer who pulled me rightly observed i 'slowed for all of 100 yards' at each one.
I got a slap on the wrist which I deserved and it slowed me right down. NIP has the opposite effect, I know they're crap at catching me so I actually speed up out of anger. especially when its a clear day and i'm 3mph over the limit.
my laser/radar detector means i don't get caught at all now
Nothing more than fundraisers... period!
I've past five of the feckers since Wednesday... most recently this morning at 9.30 travelling into Nottingham to shop and they are:
A) Totally inaffective against bad driving which is the main cause of accidents
B) A feckin menace!!
If i go around handbrake turning in the middle of the carriageway and drive around pi$$ed as a fart then how are the precious cameras gonna cure that?
And don't tell me the beat officers will deal with it as most forces patrols have been cut since the introduction of the "money makers".
#17
Originally Posted by s200sw,Dec 18 2005, 08:41 PM
If i go around handbrake turning in the middle of the carriageway and drive around pi$$ed as a fart then how are the precious cameras gonna cure that?
And don't tell me the beat officers will deal with it as most forces patrols have been cut since the introduction of the "money makers".
And don't tell me the beat officers will deal with it as most forces patrols have been cut since the introduction of the "money makers".
no money in that though so the bloke stays in his van now.
s h y t e
#18
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Mayfair
Posts: 657
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by StuartL,Dec 18 2005, 04:45 PM
Have you considered slowing down in built up areas or when there's vans at the side of the road?
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Eastbourne
Posts: 785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by StuartL,Dec 18 2005, 10:10 AM
Because you shouldn't be breaking the speed limit (i.e. driving unsafely in an easily measurable fashion) anyway. Whether or not there's a speed camera there.
Personally I don't think speed cameras, gatsos or mobile vans should ever have to advertise their presence. How can they be effective if the only people they're catching are those stupid enough not to be paying attention and looking for them? And what are the consequences of making the cameras visible in such a manner that it's worth a speeding driver spending time and attention looking for them? If the cameras are invisible it's not worth the driver looking for them and instead can pay attention to the road ahead.
Or just not break the speed limit in the first place...
Personally I don't think speed cameras, gatsos or mobile vans should ever have to advertise their presence. How can they be effective if the only people they're catching are those stupid enough not to be paying attention and looking for them? And what are the consequences of making the cameras visible in such a manner that it's worth a speeding driver spending time and attention looking for them? If the cameras are invisible it's not worth the driver looking for them and instead can pay attention to the road ahead.
Or just not break the speed limit in the first place...
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: North Yorks
Posts: 10,979
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by StuartL,Dec 18 2005, 06:10 PM
Because you shouldn't be breaking the speed limit (i.e. driving unsafely in an easily measurable fashion) anyway. Whether or not there's a speed camera there.
Just as always staying within the limit does not always equal driving safely.
Speed cameras do not make roads safer, the figures have been entirely telling (when the spin applied by the various interested parties has been removed) - roads are no safer with speed cameras placed on them. In fact, informing drivers of upcoming hazards and re-engineering dangerous junctions etc. has proved to be a far better road safety tool.
But illuminated signage and better designed roads cost money, and the value of life is apparently not great enough to warrant investment on the scale needed. Far easier to convince the more gullible members of the population that speed kills and then tax the unwary for minor indiscretions.