View Full Version : Speeding Ticket
Geordie Stu
28-01-13, 07:32 PM
Britain's first ever speeding ticket was handed out in August 1896 after an East Peckham man was clocked at four times the legal limit travelling down Paddock Wood High Street.
Walter Arnold was travelling at 8mph and fined one shilling
Britain's first ever speeding ticket was handed out in August 1896 after an East Peckham man was clocked at four times the legal limit travelling down Paddock Wood High Street.
Walter Arnold was travelling at 8mph and fined one shilling
His lights were also illegal because the candle had the wrong type of wax and the flag he was waving was the wrong shade of red ;) ;D :D Somethings never change in transportation......
Conehead
28-01-13, 08:17 PM
On the topic of speeding and never having the pleasure of getting one.
From the date of the incident to the date of receiving the ticket, how long would this take for a camera fine.
Only asking out of curiosity, not like I would ever speed. :-? :-? ::) ::) ::) ::)
Also for a camera to snap you speeding would it have to be before the end of the line markings on the road or would you be safe if it happened just after the lines.
Once again, only asking out of curiosity. :-/ :-/
They caught on to that cash cow right from day one ;D
I believe it takes two photos of you at a specified time gap.
It then calculates your speed by working out how long it took you to get from the closest marker line to the furthest marker line; then it's a simple calculation to see if you're speeding.
I've only ever been done once 72 mph in a 50 mph zone (10 years ago)
3 points & £60 fine....
Conehead
28-01-13, 08:53 PM
I believe it takes two photos of you at a specified time gap.
It then calculates your speed by working out how long it took you to get from the closest marker line to the furthest marker line; then it's a simple calculation to see if you're speeding.
I've only ever been done once 72 mph in a 50 mph zone (10 years ago)
3 points & £60 fine....
Cheers Rabb. I should be ok if thats the case. I blame the X5 trying to show off next to me, thus forcing me to show off. :-[ :-[ :-[
I believe it takes two photos of you at a specified time gap.
It then calculates your speed by working out how long it took you to get from the closest marker line to the furthest marker line; then it's a simple calculation to see if you're speeding.
I've only ever been done once 72 mph in a 50 mph zone (10 years ago)
3 points & £60 fine....
Cheers Rabb. I should be ok if thats the case. I blame the X5 trying to show off next to me, thus forcing me to show off. :-[ :-[ :-[
Where was the camera?
If it was in "Bath & North East Somerset" you'll probably be alright as their cameras are no longer in operation. If it is in Wiltshire - The cameras are still in operation.
Conehead
28-01-13, 10:33 PM
I believe it takes two photos of you at a specified time gap.
It then calculates your speed by working out how long it took you to get from the closest marker line to the furthest marker line; then it's a simple calculation to see if you're speeding.
I've only ever been done once 72 mph in a 50 mph zone (10 years ago)
3 points & £60 fine....
Cheers Rabb. I should be ok if thats the case. I blame the X5 trying to show off next to me, thus forcing me to show off. :-[ :-[ :-[
Where was the camera?
If it was in "Bath & North East Somerset" you'll probably be alright as their cameras are no longer in operation. If it is in Wiltshire - The cameras are still in operation.
The camera (that I did not speed past ;D ;D) was on A303 next to Solstice Park just before Amesbury (Heading West). I think I was doing about 69 next to it and over lines but opened her up quickly almost at the last line. Was concentrating on road and didn't check how quick the speed was piling on. I think I should be ok, just worrying myself.
Conehead
28-01-13, 10:34 PM
Sorry for hijacking this post ;D ;D ;D
If it was in "Bath & North East Somerset" you'll probably be alright as their cameras are no longer in operation. If it is in Wiltshire - The cameras are still in operation.
I didn't realise the Wiltshire scameras were working :o
Yep, two pics are a backup speed check if the radar reading is questioned.
There was a case a fwe years back where a van was clocked doing over 80. The driver disputed this and the pics were duly examined..... they showed he was in a traffic jam!!! The radar had picked up the revolving fan on the roof.
Demonbaker
29-01-13, 11:13 AM
I believe it takes two photos of you at a specified time gap.
It then calculates your speed by working out how long it took you to get from the closest marker line to the furthest marker line; then it's a simple calculation to see if you're speeding.
I've only ever been done once 72 mph in a 50 mph zone (10 years ago)
3 points & £60 fine....
Cheers Rabb. I should be ok if thats the case. I blame the X5 trying to show off next to me, thus forcing me to show off. :-[ :-[ :-[
Where was the camera?
If it was in "Bath & North East Somerset" you'll probably be alright as their cameras are no longer in operation. If it is in Wiltshire - The cameras are still in operation.
I think you will find its the other way round. Cameras have been switched off in Wilts for over a year now, also no camera vans. Somerset still very much live.
They still have the camera van on the dual carriageway going up towards the motorway from Bath but I think both those cameras are off.
50mph speed limit on a dual carriageway is ridicules >:(
DaytonaDog
29-01-13, 04:58 PM
On the topic of speeding and never having the pleasure of getting one.
From the date of the incident to the date of receiving the ticket, how long would this take for a camera fine.
Only asking out of curiosity, not like I would ever speed. :-? :-? ::) ::) ::) ::)
Also for a camera to snap you speeding would it have to be before the end of the line markings on the road or would you be safe if it happened just after the lines.
Once again, only asking out of curiosity. :-/ :-/
You should receive paperwork within 14 days of the date of the incident, and the paperwork should be in the form of a NIP (Notice of Intended Prosecution), and a requirement for the name and address of the driver/rider at the time of the incident. Normally there is also paperwork showing the evidence against the driver/rider and the various options to deal with the speeding offence dependent on how much over the limit a person was travelling at, i.e. driver awareness course, Fixed Penalty Notice, Court etc etc.
Squashed_Fly
29-01-13, 05:05 PM
According to my 'driver awareness course' last week, wiltshire is being switched back on very shortly....
They still have the camera van on the dual carriageway going up towards the motorway from Bath but I think both those cameras are off.
50mph speed limit on a dual carriageway is ridicules >:(
I quite agree it's absolutely madness >:( >:( >:( >:(
I'm all in favour of rigidly sticking to the 30's in towns etc and wish they were enforced but putting stupid, idiotic, low limits like 50 on a clear, straight, dual carriageway like that is plain stupid....argh feel better now :)
Geordie Stu
29-01-13, 05:24 PM
They still have the camera van on the dual carriageway going up towards the motorway from Bath but I think both those cameras are off.
50mph speed limit on a dual carriageway is ridicules >:(
I quite agree it's absolutely madness >:( >:( >:( >:(
I'm all in favour of rigidly sticking to the 30's in towns etc and wish they were enforced but putting stupid, idiotic, low limits like 50 on a clear, straight, dual carriageway like that is plain stupid....argh feel better now :)
That stretch is 50mph due to the queues of traffic that can build up going into Bath. Both layby's are regular spots for the mobile speed cameras.
Squashed_Fly
29-01-13, 05:25 PM
I'm all in favour of rigidly sticking to the 30's in towns etc and wish they were enforced but putting stupid, idiotic, low limits like 50 on a clear, straight, dual carriageway like that is plain stupid....argh feel better now :)
If people didn't keep dying there, it wouldn't be a problem! lol
Reduced speed limits can only put in place on an otherwise national zone for a reason. Sometimes a reason you or I might not be aware of!
One thing I didn't realise, is camera vans are not allowed to put the money made back into the police forces, they have to go back into local safety projects. The guy leading the course I had to do, said all the money in hampshire pretty much solely goes back into running the Air Ambulance service.
Having now done the course, and being apprehensive about it beforehand, I think it should be a mandatory requirement every 5 years for any license holder to attend one. How many of you know your CURRENT highway code?
I only did my driving test 5 years ago, and my bike one 2 years, but already lots had changed that I hadn't realised!
They still have the camera van on the dual carriageway going up towards the motorway from Bath but I think both those cameras are off.
50mph speed limit on a dual carriageway is ridicules >:(
I quite agree it's absolutely madness >:( >:( >:( >:(
I'm all in favour of rigidly sticking to the 30's in towns etc and wish they were enforced but putting stupid, idiotic, low limits like 50 on a clear, straight, dual carriageway like that is plain stupid....argh feel better now :)
That stretch is 50mph due to the queues of traffic that can build up going into Bath. Both layby's are regular spots for the mobile speed cameras.
The traffic queues there aint 24/7 and if a road user cant see traffic building up on that road and slow down accordingly they shouldnt be driving!
I'm all in favour of rigidly sticking to the 30's in towns etc and wish they were enforced but putting stupid, idiotic, low limits like 50 on a clear, straight, dual carriageway like that is plain stupid....argh feel better now :)
If people didn't keep dying there, it wouldn't be a problem! lol
Reduced speed limits can only put in place on an otherwise national zone for a reason. Sometimes a reason you or I might not be aware of!
One thing I didn't realise, is camera vans are not allowed to put the money made back into the police forces, they have to go back into local safety projects. The guy leading the course I had to do, said all the money in hampshire pretty much solely goes back into running the Air Ambulance service.
Having now done the course, and being apprehensive about it beforehand, I think it should be a mandatory requirement every 5 years for any license holder to attend one. How many of you know your CURRENT highway code?
I only did my driving test 5 years ago, and my bike one 2 years, but already lots had changed that I hadn't realised!
CURRENT HWC yep pretty familiar with that having just passed my Advanced bike test ;) It's still badly written, extremely boring and clearly read by few road users.
Fact is some speed limits are so ridiculous they are ignored.
I'm really not anti all speed limits just some eg the one in Bath is plain daft.
Sorry dont want to take this off topic...feeling better now. :)
Geordie Stu
29-01-13, 05:42 PM
I'm all in favour of rigidly sticking to the 30's in towns etc and wish they were enforced but putting stupid, idiotic, low limits like 50 on a clear, straight, dual carriageway like that is plain stupid....argh feel better now :)
If people didn't keep dying there, it wouldn't be a problem! lol
Reduced speed limits can only put in place on an otherwise national zone for a reason. Sometimes a reason you or I might not be aware of!
One thing I didn't realise, is camera vans are not allowed to put the money made back into the police forces, they have to go back into local safety projects. The guy leading the course I had to do, said all the money in hampshire pretty much solely goes back into running the Air Ambulance service.
Having now done the course, and being apprehensive about it beforehand, I think it should be a mandatory requirement every 5 years for any license holder to attend one. How many of you know your CURRENT highway code?
I only did my driving test 5 years ago, and my bike one 2 years, but already lots had changed that I hadn't realised!
CURRENT HWC yep pretty familiar with that having just passed my Advanced bike test ;) It's still badly written, extremely boring and clearly read by few road users.
Fact is some speed limits are so ridiculous they are ignored.
I'm really not anti all speed limits just some eg the one in Bath is plain daft.
Sorry dont want to take this off topic...feeling better now. :)
Nicky. I agree to Camera onthe dual carriageway heading out of Bath towards the roundabout is daft. However, the other on the same side coming down the hill isn't as there is a junction & then soon after the slip road on the the main A4 roundabout.
I believe it takes two photos of you at a specified time gap.
It then calculates your speed by working out how long it took you to get from the closest marker line to the furthest marker line; then it's a simple calculation to see if you're speeding.
I've only ever been done once 72 mph in a 50 mph zone (10 years ago)
3 points & £60 fine....
Cheers Rabb. I should be ok if thats the case. I blame the X5 trying to show off next to me, thus forcing me to show off. :-[ :-[ :-[
Where was the camera?
If it was in "Bath & North East Somerset" you'll probably be alright as their cameras are no longer in operation. If it is in Wiltshire - The cameras are still in operation.
I think you will find its the other way round. Cameras have been switched off in Wilts for over a year now, also no camera vans. Somerset still very much live.
Maybe we are all lucky, the majority of speed cameras around here in North Somerset have been completely removed, not that there were a huge number in the first place!! We should all think ourselves lucky when you look at the number of the things in the Midlands!!
If people re took driving tests every 5 years we wouldn't need speed limits
Bad driving kills not speed
Conehead
29-01-13, 10:09 PM
I agree with Swanny on this one plus they would use this as another source of revenue.
It's quite simple, you fail your test and you don't drive until you pass it, it would make the roads safer over night :)
Squashed_Fly
30-01-13, 03:18 PM
If people re took driving tests every 5 years we wouldn't need speed limits
Bad driving kills not speed
No, speed definately kills. It only doesn't if you don't hit anyone.
redken1
30-01-13, 03:42 PM
If people re took driving tests every 5 years we wouldn't need speed limits
Bad driving kills not speed
I find myself disagreeing with you on this. It would just be another tax. How many road users drive/ride everyday in the same way as they would under test conditions?
For example, no motorist is going to sit a driving test while using a mobile phone, yet such a sight is commonplace on our roads.
Passing a test does not automatically make you a better driver/rider
Squashed_Fly
30-01-13, 04:08 PM
Agree with Ken. But if people had to do the Driver Awareness Course it might help. I found it quite sobering, and it's definately made me drive a bit more carefully and to the speed limits.
Agree with Ken. But if people had to do the Driver Awareness Course it might help. I found it quite sobering, and it's definately made me drive a bit more carefully and to the speed limits.
Theres quite a few on here that have done the course ::) it did make me more aware of the limits, and in some instances, im actually going faster :D
Passing a test does not automatically make you a better driver/rider
If you brought in re-test it would clear the roads of those not good enough to pass todays test. There are a lot of terrible drivers out there.
Fly bad driving kills, a skill full driver is safer at higher speeds than a bad driver at any speed.
Squashed_Fly
31-01-13, 09:26 AM
Passing a test does not automatically make you a better driver/rider
If you brought in re-test it would clear the roads of those not good enough to pass todays test. There are a lot of terrible drivers out there.
Fly bad driving kills, a skill full driver is safer at higher speeds than a bad driver at any speed.
A bad driver is one who can't obey simple road rules, such as the speed limit etc. They are also ones who text, tailgate, apply make-up and all the other things as well. I'm sure all those people who had an accident and killed someone going fast, even when it 'wasn't their fault' thought they were really skilled drivers. I doubt it made them feel better though when that little girl ran out from between 2 cars and they ran her over.... ::)
Don't get me wrong, I'm not for one second saying I'm a saint. I'm certainly not. But doing the kind of mileage I do for my job, I get to see all sorts of drivers, and there is no such thing as a good, skilled driver when something happens unexpectedly.
Anybody who says speed doesn't kill, bad driving does, shouldn't be on the roads to start with. Inappropriate speed does kill. And yes, sometimes I drive inappropriately fast as well. But I'm not ignorant enough to think I'm a driving god who could save any accident from happening, as Swanny clearly does ::)
Anybody who says speed doesn't kill, bad driving does, shouldn't be on the roads to start with. Inappropriate speed does kill. And yes, sometimes I drive inappropriately fast as well. But I'm not ignorant enough to think I'm a driving god who could save any accident from happening, as Swanny clearly does ::)
At least I don't pretend I can sing :P
Squashed_Fly
31-01-13, 12:36 PM
At least I don't pretend I can sing :P
Me neither. But while people are happy to pay good money to listen to me, I'm more than happy to oblige ;0
Anybody who says speed doesn't kill, bad driving does, shouldn't be on the roads to start with. Inappropriate speed does kill.
You've contradicted yourself there SF. You appear to have taken on the mantle of WB's anti-speeding evangelist since you did your awareness course - how come you were on that, did you volunteer or was it the result of riding like a twat? Doing something silly in front of a police car if I recall.
Whilst the awareness courses and the like convey a very good message, don't get sucked into the old "speed causes 33% of all accidents" bollocks that the Safety Camera Partnership nazis use to justify their stealth tax operations. If you want to get completely literal about the issue, speed = velocity = movement. When was the last time that two stationary vehicles collided with each other? In any collision there is an element of movement. I read a breakdown of the causes of accidents in which excessive speed was the cause of just 7%, yet the SCPs trot out the 33% lie all the time, including causes such as "failure to judge the speed of an oncoming vehicle" - one of the primary reasons behind collisions at junctions (in addition to, or dressed up as SMIDSYs). For these accidents the cause is the failure to judge, not the speed itself of the innocent party. The response to this distorted use of data is to place speed cameras at junctions to slow traffic down so that morons who are incapable of judging the speed of a moving vehicle cause less damage, potentially penalising the innocent parties in a collision scenario to protect the guilty ones.
Does SF support (or even champion?) the widespread reduction of speed limits on open A and B roads? Please justify the 50mph limit introduced along nearly all the A338 between Great Shefford and Wantage. What was the point? There are only two places along most of this stretch where they could park a "Safety Camera Van" (their title, not mine) to enforce this infringement of our liberties, so why have they paid all the cost of legislating it and changing the speed limit signs?
Squashed_Fly
31-01-13, 07:05 PM
Nope, didn't volunteer. If you could read, you'd see I said that above. Nor am I anti-speeding. Again, if you could read, you'd see I already said that above. And doing something silly? well yes - I went over the speed limit. I would have thought that was obvious? Paying too much attention to trying to find my turn off, and not enough to my speedo to notice I'd crept up to 35 in a 30, and went past a hidden camera van.
But would I rather be hit at 10, or 100mph, I would imagine the answer is obvious, even to you. Therefore going faster does kill if you are unfortunate enough to have an accident. Oh wait, yes, I did say that above as well!
Personally, I don't care how fast people go, but if you think you can drive as fast as you like, just because you consider yourself a good driver, then by default you are a bad driver.
33%? Don't recall mentioning those figures? So I've been mis-read, mis-quoted, and mis-understood.
As for the 50 limit you mentioned, I don't know where you mean. But I'm fairly certain there is a reason. As much as we'd all like to think there is some evil force that can just change limits at will to catch people out and make money, it's simply not true. Maybe they are planning roadworks, perhaps it's a traffic calming measure. Maybe there have been accidents you aren't aware of?
Good little fly keep trusting your government to do the right thing ;D
If you could read, you'd be aware that I didn't attribute the 33% to you. Again, just like the SF of old, lashing out when somebody questions your writings. You don't necessarily die just because you're travelling more quickly when having an accident, there isn't a straightforward equation to prove that. The worst injuries I've sustained on a bike were from hitting a vehicle at about 30mph, yet I've walked away with barely a scratch from crashes at speeds far in excess of that.
If the conditions are good, the road empty enough then I'll make progress on a bike if I choose to. If they aren't, then I won't. It's all about risk assessment and judgement. By your criteria that makes me a bad driver does it?
You may choose to believe the mantra that speed is bad, speed is evil, that's up to you. I'll make my own choices, just don't preach at me.
Good little fly keep trusting your government to do the right thing ;D
;D ;D ;D
interesting debate again, i would like to throw this one in, your on a lovely straight road, nothing about, surely were all gonna twist the wrist yeah?? well just stop and think, because this happened to me a few days ago when driving the bus ( out of Atworth towards Bath) approx 1pm a bloody deer jumped straight over a hedge, and just stopped and looked at the bus, luckily i stopped just, but if i had been on the bike who knows, and know im not taking sides, but it can happen :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT8GbYL35oU
interesting debate again, i would like to throw this one in, your on a lovely straight road, nothing about, surely were all gonna twist the wrist yeah?? well just stop and think, because this happened to me a few days ago when driving the bus ( out of Atworth towards Bath) approx 1pm a bloody deer jumped straight over a hedge, and just stopped and looked at the bus, luckily i stopped just, but if i had been on the bike who knows, and know im not taking sides, but it can happen :)
I know exactly what can happen :o Not that I can remember any of it but luckily I'm still here! And I still speed on the open road. Just more wary than I was before! :)
BB
Brilliant.....Ive missed you guys hehe
Welcome Back Scotty and SF........banter, disagreements and argumentative postings............ace stuff....you're both great :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)
Conehead
31-01-13, 09:02 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT8GbYL35oU
I loved this Swanny. Think I'm gonna save lives and speed everywhere. :-? :-? :-?
redken1
31-01-13, 09:08 PM
Kev, had to check your post again, you did say 'twist the wrist' and not shake, didn't you?
:D :o ;) ;D :P
PS; some old wounds just never heal ;) :D
Kev, had to check your post again, you did say 'twist the wrist' and not shake, didn't you?
:D :o ;) ;D :P
PS; some old wounds just never heal ;) :D
Yes, sad isn't it ;D ;D ;D
Income from fines generated from fixed camera sites went directly to the government exchequer who financed their operation in the first place via road safety grants to local councils. It was the cutting of 40% from these budgets in 2010 that encouraged a number of councils to stop operating them. It might be a nice thought that this income somehow found its way to more deserving causes however the truth is somewhat different.
Squashed_Fly
01-02-13, 08:53 AM
Well, without knowing the actual facts (which I doubt many if any of us are actually privvy to), the fact that since the cameras were switched off in Wiltshire, the accident and death stats went up, I guess proves that people can't be trusted to make safe decisions without some kind of fear of consequence. Apparently the worry you might kill someone is far less scary than the possibility of paying a fine or losing your license! The local fixed cameras are being switched back on shortly.
Tina, I'm not really 'back', just a frequent visitor! I won't consider myself back until I get out of the cage and back on 2 wheels! ;D
But you're right, it has been a while!
latest figures are available if you care to look. In summary, the 2011 National Statistics are:
There were a total of 203,950 casualties of all severities in road accidents reported to the police, 2 per cent lower than in 2010. 1,901 people were killed, 3 per cent higher than in 2010, 23,122 were seriously injured (up 2 per cent) and 178,927 were slightly injured (down 3 per cent). Motor vehicle traffic increased very slightly over the same period.
The number of fatalities rose for pedestrian and car occupants, by 12 and 6 per cent re-spectively compared to 2010 but fell for other types of road user. Motorcyclist fatalities fell by 10 per cent, pedal cyclists by 4 per cent and 22 per for bus and coach occupants.
The number of fatalities was 32 per cent lower and killed or seriously injured casualties were 17 per cent lower than the 2005-2009 average. The rates per billion vehicle miles were 31 per cent and 15 per cent respectively lower than the 2005-2009 average
Statistics are just that - statistics, and they need to be interpreted for what they actually mean. The last set of published figures for wiltshire show a drop in deaths and serious injuries on the roads - these are 2010 figures. The 2011 figures haven't been published yet for Wiltshire but since as a county we have lower than average figures compared to national levels historically, my guess is they will be slightly lower than that average.
Well, without knowing the actual facts (which I doubt many if any of us are actually privvy to), the fact that since the cameras were switched off in Wiltshire, the accident and death stats went up, I guess proves that people can't be trusted to make safe decisions without some kind of fear of consequence. Apparently the worry you might kill someone is far less scary than the possibility of paying a fine or losing your license! The local fixed cameras are being switched back on shortly.
Tina, I'm not really 'back', just a frequent visitor! I won't consider myself back until I get out of the cage and back on 2 wheels! ;D
But you're right, it has been a while!
Some areas are investing in new digital equipment to replace the film based cameras and bring a return to fixed safety camera. So far, none of these are local to us. This is being made possible because all of the income generated from speed awareness courses (as opposed to speeding fines) is retained by the police and its with this revenue that the new technology is being introduced. So, blame the 1.8 million motorists who paid £70 odd quid each for a speed awareness course instead of paying the fine and taking the points ;)
Edit: Also remember it was and still is the local authorities decision to operate the fixed cameras or not. Not every authority switched them off in 2010/11.
Squashed_Fly
01-02-13, 10:37 AM
This is being made possible because all of the income generated from speed awareness courses (as opposed to speeding fines) is retained by the police
Not true according to them... It is being invested back into things like the Air Ambulance service, and other safety ideas.
I don't know if that's true, the only people who do are the police and the AA who run the course. And if Swanny is to believed, all the facts you read are made up anyway! lol
Motorcyclist fatalities fell by 10 per cent,
So switching the cameras back on is bad news for us??? :-/
Ducatista
01-02-13, 11:21 AM
So switching the cameras back on is bad news for us???
No, No and NO - you cannot draw those kind of conclusions.
I think you will find that inuries went UP so one possible explanation is that emergency health care has improved.
However you can not draw conclusions without looking at
- amount of traffic
- health care difference e.g. the introduction of an air ambulance
- weather
etc. etc. etc.
You cannot simply associate any drop/increase with speed cameras when there a dozens of other factors.
I bet that if we have 12 ft of snow that bike fatalities drop significantly.
That doesn't mean that riding in 12 ft of snow is good idea ;)
In that case you'd have to look at the amuont of traffic factor.
In fact I'm pretty sure you'll find that there are fewer KSI's for motorcyclists in winter.
That doesn't mean you can conclude it's safer to ride in winter - it's because there is a lot less motorcycle traffic !!
Be careful of drawing the wrong conclusions.
Crosbie
01-02-13, 12:17 PM
Adding my pennies worth to this fun debate.... ;)
I think speed cameras in 30zones and built up 40 zones is a great idea (mobile or fixed). There is a clear risk of anything happening in these areas from emerging traffic, kids/pets running out of a graden into the road or from behind cars.
Once your out of a built up area you should (if you have anything about you) be able to judge a safe speed to travel at taking account of you surroudings where you have much better visability of roads and verges. As long as you are paying attention to what you should be i dont see a problem with travelling on an empty/ish road at 80 - if you see a car at a junction change you position in good time, if your not able to do that in time you have mis judged the safe maximum speed you can travel at.
Prime example of cameras causing/potentially causing accidents include; the video posted but a few weeks back of a Porshe over taking a motorbike group up to 115mph i believe seeing a camera and slamming the brakes on to avoid a fine (failed) if there was no camera he would likely have either come off the accelerator gently pulling up behind the next lot of traffic or continued if safe to do so (summising).
The other story which was posted a year back now i think was an old boy travelling on a motorbike on a motorway above the limit, he had many years under his belt supposedly with no accidents. He saw a camera van slammed the brakes on as a kneejerk reaction and crashed - resulting in his death. :-/
Now tell me, cameras dont cause accidents - not always but they do.....
End! :D
This is being made possible because all of the income generated from speed awareness courses (as opposed to speeding fines) is retained by the police
Not true according to them... It is being invested back into things like the Air Ambulance service, and other safety ideas.
I don't know if that's true, the only people who do are the police and the AA who run the course. And if Swanny is to believed, all the facts you read are made up anyway! lol
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/9536358/Speed-cameras-are-coming-back.html
Hampshire and IOW Air Ambulance Service is a registered charity and receives no public funding. Income is soley derived from corporate sponsors and community fundraising.
Someone should smash all the scameras down
Crosbie
01-02-13, 01:04 PM
Someone should smash all the scameras down
But in a careful way as to not cause damage to the local vegetation. They also need to ensure they don’t break the camera lens otherwise we will end up with broken glass on the road which would cause more problems with vehicles skidding on flat tyres. It would also need a suitably qualified electrician to ensure it was electrically safe (preferably before being smashed down). I suppose there should be a public consultation before and after to firstly agree a suitable time and then to evaluate the effectiveness of smashing down the cameras.... ;D
Someone should smash all the scameras down
Or move to France - http://www.visordown.com/motorcycle-news--general-news/french-police-sabotage-speed-cameras/21821.html
The French ones are on the ground, I'm sure they wouldn't last 5 mins over here ;D
Crosbie would you have to wear a high viz vest while smashing them down?? :-/
***Edit*** I'd love to move to France 8-)
Crosbie
01-02-13, 01:49 PM
Crosbie would you have to wear a high viz vest while smashing them down?? :-/
I wouldnt have to but anyone else would! Also you would need steel toecapped boots, gloves, goggles/glasses, a hard hat, a mobile platform and a license to operate on one.
Do as i say not as i do..... I think i should work in politics :o ;D
A question for the safety nazis: If speed cameras truly are a safety device to save lives, why are they not situated outside every school in the country? :-?
Squashed_Fly
04-02-13, 06:32 PM
I would imagine it's because relatively few accidents happen outside schools?
When you see school signs, and yellow zigzags, and lollipop ladies (or persons!), most people slow down. The accident blackspots (again I would imagine, I have no evidence of this), are where people assume it's safe to do over the speed limits, and there are hidden dangers, like roads where traffic emerges, or a park nearby where children might run out in the road, or higher proportion of disable people who can't across quickly, but we assume they will cross in plenty of time so don't slow down until it's to late?
Not sure why riding/driving safely makes you a nazi? Surely you can travel safely without wanting to gas millions of Jews?
Explain the 50mph speed limit and camera on the dual carriageway coming from Bath to Bathford then. How is a dead straight section of dual carriageway a black spot?
Senna(Dan)
04-02-13, 07:08 PM
Swanny,
Budgets mean the road gets checked once every 20 years as a 50mph zone, whereas national speed limit is every 10. All about the budgets mate.
Squashed_Fly
04-02-13, 07:08 PM
I don't know, what you asking me for? Lol
Call the safety camera partnership and ask them!
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.