I got a bloody camera clock me allegedly at 36mph at 3:40am on my way home from work. Nothing on the road, f***ing joke, needless to say I consulted my friends "Avoid paying fines" book and have demanded the photo's and not admitted to anything. It's not the money its the points, I think 3 points for 36mph at 3:40am is pathetic.
This was a story in yesterday's Evening Sub-Standard...I guess I'd better start losing some weight.
A speed camera on every corner to enforce new 20mph limit
Hundreds of speed cameras should be put up to enforce a reduced urban limit of 20mph, says an influential road safety group.
It also calls for a blitz on motorists more likely to cause accidents - such as fat drivers who are prone to dozing off and elderly drivers who may no longer be safe behind the wheel.
The report from the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety - which advises MPs and the Government - says local authorities want to introduce digital cameras which measure speed over a set distance to enforce the 20mph limit.
Such cameras - as opposed to those which log a cars speed at a single point - regularly catch out thousands of drivers at roadworks on motorways.
However, the type requires Home Office approval to be operated at lower speeds. The report says the Government should make it a priority to grant it.
The speed camera measure is one of a number aimed at ensuring the annual number of road casualties starts falling again.
The advisory council argues for more 20mph zones in built-up areas and the setting of a target to reduce deaths on the roads to half the present level - about 3,200 a year - over the next decade.
"One significant impediment to lowering speed limits and expanding the 20mph network is that, at present, standard cameras are not type-approved to enforce limits below 30mph," it says.
Traffic humps and chicanes are used instead but are unpopular, expensive, cause problems for emergency vehicles and add to emissions.
"Time-over-distance cameras offer an effective alternative enforcement tool," it concludes.
"Many local authorities, and Transport for London in particular, are keen to explore the possibilities of using time-over-distance cameras."
The Department of Transport said it was up to local councils to make decisions on cameras and 20mph zones, and up to the Home Office to grant typeapproval for camera equipment.
A camera blitz on speeding must be accompanied by a war on motorists' dangerous lifestyles - with the very fat, the very old, and the very young to be targeted, adds the report.
It says the Government must even tackle poverty in its efforts to reduce road deaths - pointing out that children in the poorest areas are five times more likely to be killed in a road accident than those in the wealthiest areas.
The report says "sedentary lifestyles" make drivers more prone to an accident.
On the problem of older drivers it notes: "The UK population is ageing and likely to keep driving further, in larger numbers and for longer than previous generations.
"With the increased frailty and potentially declining capabilities, an older population poses a significant challenge to the road safety profession."
The report, called Beyond 2010 - a holistic approach to road safety in Great Britain, says all new residential developments must pass a "pint of milk test" - whether a resident can reach a shop to buy a pint of milk in under ten minutes without using a vehicle.
Edmund King, of the RAC Foundation, said: "Motorists will accept 20mph limits where they make sense - but they don't want them everywhere."
The AA Motoring Trust said: "The question drivers have to ask themselves is this - are they prepared to meet some pretty draconian measures and loss of freedom to achieve these extremely tough road safety targets."
I don't see what all of the fuss is about. If you're in a 30mph area and are doing 34mph you're driving over the limit. Whether that limit is appropriate or not is of course a different matter, but as long as it's clearly signposted then you can't really have any complaints.
People who complain about this are the same ones who moan about geting a ticket for parking on double yellows "when I was only gone for 5 minutes". They're also the same ones who complain that the traffic is a problem (because people are parked in the wrong places?) and that they pay too much tax when they are the ones pumping shit up into the atmosphere all because they are too lazy to walk down the road for a paper.
[cite]Posted By: Gump[/cite]I thikk the point people are trying to make is that speed cameras are there to gain revenue rather than for safety issues....I was caught on the A303 once, the nearest village was miles away...
I know that's what people say, but the point is still that if you don't go over the limit then you wont get done. If you do go over the limit then you takes your chances. It's simple really - common sense. It's an informed decision that people take, so you can't really bleat if you get caught every once in a while - and let's face it, it IS only every once in a while compared to how often people drive over the limit.
I don't understand how it is that normal law-ab iding citizens somehow think they are immune from laws as soon as they get in their cars. Crazy.
30mph is too fast in residential areas - and indeed people usually do more like 35.
Reduce the limit to 20 or 25 mph to save lives, especially those of children. And where distance speed-cameras can be installed, speed-humps and some of the mini roundabouts can be taken out.
[cite]Posted By: Gump[/cite]I thikk the point people are trying to make is that speed cameras are there to gain revenue rather than for safety issues....I was caught on the A303 once, the nearest village was miles away...
I know that's what people say, but the point is still that if you don't go over the limit then you wont get done. If you do go over the limit then you takes your chances. It's simple really - common sense. It's an informed decision that people take, so you can't really bleat if you get caught every once in a while - and let's face it, it IS only every once in a while compared to how often people drive over the limit.
I don't understand how it is that normal law-ab iding citizens somehow think they are immune from laws as soon as they get in their cars. Crazy.
spot on! as well as the "i've gone overdrawn so i've been charged £30 how unfair..."
erm...don't spend what you don't have then!?!?!?!?!?
The AA Motoring Trust said: "The question drivers have to ask themselves is this - are they prepared to meet some pretty draconian measures and loss of freedom to achieve these extremely tough road safety targets."
I always hate rubbish like this, what freedoms are people losing? the right to fly down a rat run in a residential area at 35 mph?
Go over the speed limit and get get caught, then tough, you broke the law, deal with it, ditto for anyone on any thing jumping red lights, before Ketman or WSS pipe up.
[cite]Posted By: Southendaddick[/cite]Until then if you get caught doing 1mph over the limit or 20mph, its your own fault, dont whinge about it.
How can doing 1mph over be an issue? Spedos are up to 5% inaccurate and more so the older the car gets....Its bollocks that people are being fined for something that might not be their fault.
[cite]Posted By: Southendaddick[/cite]Until then if you get caught doing 1mph over the limit or 20mph, its your own fault, dont whinge about it.
How can doing 1mph over be an issue? Spedos are up to 5% inaccurate and more so the older the car gets....Its bollocks that people are being fined for something that might not be their thought.
You'll get a slapped wrist at 31mph, but a fine at 33mph.
The real agenda here is firstly to raise money, secondly to improve crime detection rates (as you have an instant crime and culprit), thirdly to increase motorist journey times so that driving becomes less attractive relative to our third world public transport system and fourthly to increase stress on the motorist for the same reason.
This government has no respect for human life (Maidstone and other hospitals back that up) so "safety" is just spin to try and convince the gullible that it is a good idea.
[cite]Posted By: LenGlover[/cite]The real agenda here is firstly to raise money, secondly to improve crime detection rates (as you have an instant crime and culprit), thirdly to increase motorist journey times so that driving becomes less attractive relative to our third world public transport system and fourthly to increase stress on the motorist for the same reason.
This government has no respect for human life (Maidstone and other hospitals back that up) so "safety" is just spin to try and convince the gullible that it is a good idea.
[cite]Posted By: LenGlover[/cite]The real agenda here is firstly to raise money, secondly to improve crime detection rates (as you have an instant crime and culprit), thirdly to increase motorist journey times so that driving becomes less attractive relative to our third world public transport system and fourthly to increase stress on the motorist for the same reason.
This government has no respect for human life (Maidstone and other hospitals back that up) so "safety" is just spin to try and convince the gullible that it is a good idea.
Blimey, is that the Daily Mail take on it now?
Don't read the Daily Mail so don't know. It's my take though.
The issue as was stated is that while doing 31 in a 30 or even 35 in a 30 is breaking the law it is an easy crime to detect and carry out sentence on straight away. Burglary however is a slightly tougher crime to solve hence seems top be a lower prority on the constabularies list of things to do.
Dangerous driving is the real problem and pedestrians and cyclists could do with more enforced eduaction on road safety.
Before anyone whines at me about doing 30 in a residential area is too much I will say that I agree. 30 in a residential area is too fast and too easy for people to ignore, and it annoys me immensley when I see cars fly up car lined roads with poor visibility.
I also see a lot of cyclists ignoring road laws (I can't bump my vehicle up onto the pavement as I feel to avoid traffic) parents and schools seriously need to educate children on road safety as with the increased amount of vehicles on the road comes an increased danger. I would be a rich man if I had a pund for every time I've had to take evasive action because of children running out from nowhere (in between parked cars) into the road. Only because of my careful driving have I not hit one.
My thoughts though are pretty clear on the other speeding thread (think it was titled about an industrial estate and snowballed from there).
What aggravates the public is the screens that are hidden behind when the truth is I cannot think of a school near me that has a speed camera near it. Their primary function is income generation.
[cite]Posted By: Carter[/cite]After giving out over £900 of my last paycheck in national insurance and income tax I have a very different view on that!!!
But the tax system and people breaking speed limits are two very different things
Comments
I got pulled over for doing 31mph in a 30 and got a 15 minute lecture "I think you were going faster but I only clocked you at 31mph"
If it's for safety why do they need to hide in a bus shelter!!
Scumbags
A speed camera on every corner to enforce new 20mph limit
Hundreds of speed cameras should be put up to enforce a reduced urban limit of 20mph, says an influential road safety group.
It also calls for a blitz on motorists more likely to cause accidents - such as fat drivers who are prone to dozing off and elderly drivers who may no longer be safe behind the wheel.
The report from the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety - which advises MPs and the Government - says local authorities want to introduce digital cameras which measure speed over a set distance to enforce the 20mph limit.
Such cameras - as opposed to those which log a cars speed at a single point - regularly catch out thousands of drivers at roadworks on motorways.
However, the type requires Home Office approval to be operated at lower speeds. The report says the Government should make it a priority to grant it.
The speed camera measure is one of a number aimed at ensuring the annual number of road casualties starts falling again.
The advisory council argues for more 20mph zones in built-up areas and the setting of a target to reduce deaths on the roads to half the present level - about 3,200 a year - over the next decade.
"One significant impediment to lowering speed limits and expanding the 20mph network is that, at present, standard cameras are not type-approved to enforce limits below 30mph," it says.
Traffic humps and chicanes are used instead but are unpopular, expensive, cause problems for emergency vehicles and add to emissions.
"Time-over-distance cameras offer an effective alternative enforcement tool," it concludes.
"Many local authorities, and Transport for London in particular, are keen to explore the possibilities of using time-over-distance cameras."
The Department of Transport said it was up to local councils to make decisions on cameras and 20mph zones, and up to the Home Office to grant typeapproval for camera equipment.
A camera blitz on speeding must be accompanied by a war on motorists' dangerous lifestyles - with the very fat, the very old, and the very young to be targeted, adds the report.
It says the Government must even tackle poverty in its efforts to reduce road deaths - pointing out that children in the poorest areas are five times more likely to be killed in a road accident than those in the wealthiest areas.
The report says "sedentary lifestyles" make drivers more prone to an accident.
On the problem of older drivers it notes: "The UK population is ageing and likely to keep driving further, in larger numbers and for longer than previous generations.
"With the increased frailty and potentially declining capabilities, an older population poses a significant challenge to the road safety profession."
The report, called Beyond 2010 - a holistic approach to road safety in Great Britain, says all new residential developments must pass a "pint of milk test" - whether a resident can reach a shop to buy a pint of milk in under ten minutes without using a vehicle.
Edmund King, of the RAC Foundation, said: "Motorists will accept 20mph limits where they make sense - but they don't want them everywhere."
The AA Motoring Trust said: "The question drivers have to ask themselves is this - are they prepared to meet some pretty draconian measures and loss of freedom to achieve these extremely tough road safety targets."
People who complain about this are the same ones who moan about geting a ticket for parking on double yellows "when I was only gone for 5 minutes". They're also the same ones who complain that the traffic is a problem (because people are parked in the wrong places?) and that they pay too much tax when they are the ones pumping shit up into the atmosphere all because they are too lazy to walk down the road for a paper.
No sympathy here.
I know that's what people say, but the point is still that if you don't go over the limit then you wont get done. If you do go over the limit then you takes your chances. It's simple really - common sense. It's an informed decision that people take, so you can't really bleat if you get caught every once in a while - and let's face it, it IS only every once in a while compared to how often people drive over the limit.
I don't understand how it is that normal law-ab iding citizens somehow think they are immune from laws as soon as they get in their cars. Crazy.
Reduce the limit to 20 or 25 mph to save lives, especially those of children.
And where distance speed-cameras can be installed, speed-humps and some of the mini roundabouts can be taken out.
Luckily i'm doing more manouvres now, so less of the going 40 down Bostall hill...
spot on! as well as the "i've gone overdrawn so i've been charged £30 how unfair..."
erm...don't spend what you don't have then!?!?!?!?!?
Certainly not big but I wouldn't say you're not clever!
The country needs a massive overhaul of speed limits.
There are many 30's that should be 20's and 60's that should be 40's.
There are also 40's that should be 60's and 70's that should be 80's.
Until then if you get caught doing 1mph over the limit or 20mph, its your own fault, dont whinge about it.
I always hate rubbish like this, what freedoms are people losing? the right to fly down a rat run in a residential area at 35 mph?
Go over the speed limit and get get caught, then tough, you broke the law, deal with it, ditto for anyone on any thing jumping red lights, before Ketman or WSS pipe up.
How can doing 1mph over be an issue? Spedos are up to 5% inaccurate and more so the older the car gets....Its bollocks that people are being fined for something that might not be their fault.
You'll get a slapped wrist at 31mph, but a fine at 33mph.
This government has no respect for human life (Maidstone and other hospitals back that up) so "safety" is just spin to try and convince the gullible that it is a good idea.
Blimey, is that the Daily Mail take on it now?
I drive over the limit, usually 33-35 in a 30 and 75-85 in a 70.
I would have the hump about getting done at 31/32 but would still cop whatever they punished me with. Fair cop gov.
Don't read the Daily Mail so don't know. It's my take though.
Did Jon Gaunt write that?
The issue as was stated is that while doing 31 in a 30 or even 35 in a 30 is breaking the law it is an easy crime to detect and carry out sentence on straight away. Burglary however is a slightly tougher crime to solve hence seems top be a lower prority on the constabularies list of things to do.
Dangerous driving is the real problem and pedestrians and cyclists could do with more enforced eduaction on road safety.
Before anyone whines at me about doing 30 in a residential area is too much I will say that I agree. 30 in a residential area is too fast and too easy for people to ignore, and it annoys me immensley when I see cars fly up car lined roads with poor visibility.
I also see a lot of cyclists ignoring road laws (I can't bump my vehicle up onto the pavement as I feel to avoid traffic) parents and schools seriously need to educate children on road safety as with the increased amount of vehicles on the road comes an increased danger. I would be a rich man if I had a pund for every time I've had to take evasive action because of children running out from nowhere (in between parked cars) into the road. Only because of my careful driving have I not hit one.
My thoughts though are pretty clear on the other speeding thread (think it was titled about an industrial estate and snowballed from there).
What aggravates the public is the screens that are hidden behind when the truth is I cannot think of a school near me that has a speed camera near it. Their primary function is income generation.
But the tax system and people breaking speed limits are two very different things
http://www.charltonlife.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6568
here
http://www.charltonlife.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=3733
here
http://www.charltonlife.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=3731
here
http://www.charltonlife.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=914
lets not keep going over old ground please
Ahhh you're just jealous! ;)
CL was much better when Lookie was in charge. We could talk about Rangers and Celtic, Immigration and go over old ground to our hearts content....
All people who get caught speeding should have to pay £50 a month into Valley Gold. What's that for again? ;0)
That would be fine if the flasks were where you could see them!
You find them hidden under flags which land on your head, tartan rugs and all sorts.
It's nothing but a money making exercise:-)