New Police Bike with Speed Camera

Dave

Watch out, watch out, there's a new Safety Camera bike about!

The Sun reports today...

"A SPEED camera mounted on a motorbike has nabbed nearly 1,000 drivers ? and raked in £55,000 worth of fines in just 38 HOURS.

The £30,000 Honda Deauville zaps drivers on lanes and bends with a laser.

But last night the sneaky machine bought with the proceeds of other traps was slammed by motoring groups."

Doesn't the Safety Camera Partnership, the Police and the Government (including Local Authorities) realise that people they fine are not actually slowing down ? Sure they may for a few hours, or a couple of days but people just keep creeping back up above the speed limit. All fining motorists is achieving is to bring in more taxes/revenue so the Government (and local Police Authorities) can spend the money as they see fit. It doesn't have the effect of slowing people down which is the intended use of these Speed Cameras!

I agree people are breaking the law in travelling over the speed limit, but you also have to see the flip side of the coin that on a lot of Britain's roads it can actually become dangerous to drive below the speed limit because everyone is driving above it. Speed Cameras are only a solution if the Government doesn't want to give the Police Forces more money and allows the Police Forces to subsidies themselves.

Seeing that it's illegal to drive over the speed limit, can anyone operate a calibrated Speed Camera and submit it to the Police or a County Court or is it just the Police ? Hmm, I wonder. And if so, wouldn't it be good to not only see many members of parliament and high up Police Officials being caught speeding, not once, twice but many times. Perhaps that might get the case across ? We all do it, we're not proud of it, but we do it, and they do it too!

Reducing the speed in key areas, especially school areas is a good thing to do, but out on open roads with a Police Bike tucked away in a layby ? Get real!

RANT OFF

Image and Story Content within quotes are copyright of The Sun.

alFR · Occasional Visitor Joined: Aug 11, 2004 Posts: 27

Yeah, you're right. Tell you what, while we're at it maybe we should campaign to have shop exit security systems removed or building alarms deactivated because they're catching too many shoplifters and burglars, thus allowing the courts to collect fines or, even worse, spend our taxes keeping the offenders in jail.

"I agree people are breaking the law in travelling over the speed limit, but you also have to see the flip side of the coin that on a lot of Britain's roads it can actually become dangerous to drive below the speed limit because everyone is driving above it."

I'd love to see the accident statistics to back this up.

I really can't understand why drivers think breaking the law in this area is perfectly OK and that they shouldn't get penalised if they do. Don't speed, you won't get fined. It's not rocket science is it?

Oh, while I'm ranting, if people think that anyone uses speed camera databases for any other reason than to tell them where they can go as fast as they like without fear of being caught on a camera, they're living in a dream world. If, as you infer, cameras are just being placed as revenue raisers and not as a safety measure at accident blackspots, there can't be any advantage to slowing down for the majority of them apart from avoiding getting caught, can there?

Nunners · Occasional Visitor Joined: Aug 09, 2004 Posts: 10

I'm with Dave on this one - No I've never been caught speeding - and actually i tend to drive on or around the speed limit, but the Government and Camera Partnerships and starting to take th p*ss.

Cameras etc and purely money making devices - if someone can show me relevant statistics as to them reducing accidents then yeah, I'm all for them - but they don't.

Around schools etc yep again, makes perfect sense, but at the same time, when schools are starting/finishing, it causes more chaoes.

The whole road system in this country is never going to work, until three things are done:
- governments improve public transport 100 fold
- cars have speed limiters by law
- an integrated intelligent transport policy is thought up, implmented and not argued about.

Until then, we might as well increase our tax bill by 100 times to cover the costs of fixing the roads, subsidising the public transport, and lining Gordon Brown (or whoever the later Chancellors will be) pockets.

Tealeaf · Occasional Visitor Joined: Aug 11, 2004 Posts: 5

clivers · Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2004 4:07 pm Post subject:

well they have one on the island as well now.
obviously it catches motorists with no insurance and drunken teens and allsorts of other crime NOT

http://www.iwcp.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=1252&ArticleID=833896

NMatthew · Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2004 4:12 pm Post subject:

While I am driving I like to have as much information available to me as possible. That way I think I'm in the best position to understand what is going on around me and to take appropriate action. That's why I have always carried a paper atlas in the car. I have used a simple Trafficmaster device to warn of delays and then been forewarned of possible queuing ahead. I have an RDS radio set to TP. And now TomTom.

It is of course easy to argue that drivers should always be aware of their surroundings, drive according to the conditions and so on and that any such driver aids are unnecessary. However, don't you find yourself slowing down on a dual carriageway as you approach flashing lights on the opposite carriageway because there may have been an accident that has spilled debris onto your side of the road? You surely don't blithely head into the unknown at 70mph in the face of evidence that something amiss is just up ahead do you?

If safety cameras are placed at accident blackspots then the location of those blackspots is potentially useful information to drivers, including those law-abiders sticking to the limits. It helps to be more vigilant (maybe a temporary concentration level of 110% can be summoned up for a short while). I use CheckPOInt and the PocketGPS Safety Camera database to warn of potential accident blackspots, perhaps they are places when it's easy to mis-read the road.

It may be debatable that cameras are revenue-raising devices and placed to catch speeders rather than at accident blackspots. Personally I would prefer to do away with the cameras (I don't speed - much - but it's too easy to get caught out on a wide empty road), but I'd think about keeping their locations in a sat nav system just to know where someone once thought the road unsafe.

It is wrong and unfair to suggest that the safety camera database is only useful to law breakers.

Neil
_________________
Audi TT Coupe Quattro
BMW 535d M Sport Touring

simmybear · Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2004 6:39 pm Post subject:

I saw this beauty on Saturday on the A605 between Thrapston and Peterborough - the hidy hole they were using is within an area clearly labeled as having Speed cameras so they were playing fair. It's also on a route that is largley single lane and is classed as an accident blackspot.

Whilst I don't agree with all speed cameras I would happily have seen the idiot who was sat on my tail at about 3 feet away as he didn't agree with me driving at the speed limit booked with all possible prejudice!!

(I didn't have my GPS on at the time but i think it was at reference GATSO 3196 on the SC database)

Simmybear

Skippy · Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2004 7:37 pm Post subject:

There seems to be a fair number of people with strong opinions on both sides of this debate. Maybe we should have a forum for the "Safety Cameras/Speed Scammers" debate where we can all rant at each other Pistol Shoot Out

(and keep the other forums a bit more civilized Smile

)

spook51 · Posted: Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:36 am Post subject:

You can hardly miss this 'sneaky machine', can you? Day-glo stripes, panniers open, overweight six-foot plod clad in fluorecsent yellow holding a hairdryer - if I ever see it I'm unlikely to mistake it for anything, am I? Unlike the unmarked (from the rear) white vans I saw in in lay-bys on the A449 last week; only when you're close enough to read the lettering on the side are you likely to spot the camera on the rear window.
In Somerset, six Safety Camera Partnership Galaxys have dayglo stripes and operate with the tailgate open; those on the A499 work 'steathily' on a dual carriageway with no pedestrians, few junctions and (on the times I used it) very little traffic - they're the ones that should be named and shamed, 'safety' is being used as a cover for blatant revenue collection and that's very wrong. It devalues the importance of genuine road safety initiatives and undermines whatever respect remains for the police.

Skippy · Posted: Thu Aug 12, 2004 7:53 am Post subject:

The-OX · Occasional Visitor Joined: Jul 17, 2004 Posts: 2

I also have to agree with Dave that the proliferation of cameras is basically a money making exercise. I have seen large number of cameras being erected in my local area where this is no history of accidents. What is even worse is they moved a 30mph sign 300 yards further out to the bottom of a hill then erected a camera 100 yards after.

I have been caught on far more occasions than I would like by these f'ing machines :x ; 35 in a 30 at 5:30am; :x 60 in a 50 (M606 joining M62) out of Bradford) on a Saturday at 9:30am, i.e. no rush hour, :x 48 in a 40 heading into Doncaster from A1, 9:30 on Saturday morning, very light traffic. :x

Now if someone can give me a reasonable explanation what danger I was to anyone else, driving or not, I would be amazed.

I agree that speeding is dangerous, at the wrong times but I would refer to this as more driving without undue care and consideration. In the old days "when I was a lad!" long before speed cameras were even thought of you may have got pulled over. But the police would take into consideration other factors like, road and weather conditions and may simply let you off with a caution, unlike now when you are condemned immediatley.

A comment I found from another site in reference to the slogan "Speed Kills". Here are some suggestions: "Lack of observation kills" "Tailgating kills" "Concentrating too much on where speed cameras are situated kills" "Lack of roundabout knowledge kills" There are more but I'm sure you get my drift. It's not always speed that kills it's lack of common sense or the belief that in a car you're invincible.

My rant over !

oddsock · Posted: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:19 am Post subject:

spook51 wrote:
You can hardly miss this 'sneaky machine', can you? Day-glo stripes, panniers open, overweight six-foot plod clad in fluorecsent yellow holding a hairdryer - if I ever see it I'm unlikely to mistake it for anything, am I?

One of the main difference that I can see between 'sneaky machines' and normal camera vans is that they are highly mobile and can park on a verge where vans have to be safely parked .In our area the main road is the A449- A40 link between the M4 and m50 so you have to asume there may be a cam van where there is a Parking place so there is a parking sign and you have a warning in advance .."P" sign .."so called accident black spot"
and drive accordingly.. dave

Scotes · Occasional Visitor Joined: Jun 09, 2004 Posts: 20

I'm glad to see our friends on the other side of the pond start getting

off at the idea of traffic enforcement for the sake of revenue enhancement. It seems like you guys generally have well on fair warning of speed cameras/guns making this a veritable speed trap.

We don't have the speed cameras over here but we've got plenty of red light cameras and if you look into them a bit they are directly tied to revenue enhancement to the degree that Los Angeles County through out over 7000 red light camera citiations this past year (in one lump mind you) because of camera fixing. The vendors installing the cameras generally pay (and get payed) on a per ticker basis and when camera were installed at a number on intersections with 4 second yellow times the reduced the yellow time by up to .5 seconds. In short - if safety were the true issue many things could be done but revenue is the motivating force and I think this holds true to your speed cameras. Cars today car handle significantly higher speeds on properly maintained highways - but instead they'll skimp on driver training and provide lackluster enforcement of laws already on the books that really cause accidents - unsafe lane changes, slow driving, tailgating.

/rant

CommonSense · Occasional Visitor Joined: Aug 12, 2004 Posts: 1

I think everybody has missed the point here:

Acording ACPO guidelines the whole point of speed cameras is to deter the motorist from speeding. If they end up making money out of the system, then it has clearly failed because the motorist is not slowing down!

I don't advocate speeding and don't advocate the revenue earning capacity of the camera either - I can see both sides of the fence. BUT, the cameras are not doing their job are they if they are making that much money out of it?

How about turning this whole thing on its head? How? I learnt the other day that someone was caught speeding, suitably fined and their license ammended with points. I'd like to sue the police for NEGLECT OF DUTY as they have clearly NOT PREVENTED this motorist from speeding which puts the GREATER NUMBER OF MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AT RISK.

For this to work sufficient GREATER NUMBER OF MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC need to adopt the same principle of course.

In fact whenever you receive a speeding ticket - CONTEST IT AS A MATTER OF COURSE. You can always accept it at the end of the, but if eveyone did this, can you imagine the deluge of paperwork the police would be buried under... might make them think twice about being so trigger happy!

spook51 · Posted: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:45 pm Post subject:

	PocketGPS
	Web