speed camera in disguise ?

Originally Posted by Scoobs

I thought they were meant to act as a deterent, not a revenue earner.

........and what better deterrent is there than the thought that any van, trailer, lorry, icecream van, or bacon sandwich stand could be a camera van?

My issue is rarely with them actually enforcing the speed limit - we only complain because we occasionally stray over it. My issue is almost invariably with the location of these cameras/vans. I'm yet to see one place itself outside a school, or through a town center.

That's because most people don't speed unless it's safe to do so, but I'd rather they catch 1 tw@ in 1 day who blasts through a town center at lunch time at 60mph to impress his mates, than catch 20 people who do 70 or 80 rather than 60 along an A-road with little traffic and no hazards.

I guess the figures have to do the talking, so they'd rather catch 20 and let the tw@ go, regardless of how much more likely he is to kill somebody.

Originally Posted by sinbad

That's because most people don't speed unless it's safe to do so, but I'd rather they catch 1 tw@ in 1 day who blasts through a town center at lunch time at 60mph to impress his mates, than catch 20 people who do 70 or 80 rather than 60 along an A-road with little traffic and no hazards.

very well put sir!

[Spiderman]

Originally Posted by Scoobs

I thought they were meant to act as a deterent, not a revenue earner.

PMSL, pure comedy genius Scoobs. My sides are splitting as i wirte this.

This is where democracy falls flat on its ****!!! I mean ill bet there isnt a majority that want speed camera's! Sigh...

[G]

Originally Posted by leedsmatt7

they argue that its a safety thing so we support our budget been spent on them.

Its a safety thing because once you are caught, get three points and a £60 fine then more expensive insurance.............you slow down, hence they have achieved what they set out to do slow people down.

One of the arguements for them scrapping marked vans was all thanks to a video published on BBC where people were braking harshly when spotting a van and crashing. They are safer unmarked than they are marked.


EDIT: I'm not agreeing with them, although my post sound like that.....but they set out to do a job, and they do it succesfully. IF you dont slow down once being caught then you are obviously rich lol

This is a pretty good one as well:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ed-camera.html

John

[DavieSV]

I live next to 'A' division head quaters in derbyshire. The autherised petrol station is Sainsbury's where all the Police vehicals fill up. On the day of the Peaks ride out, I filled up behind a plain green camera van, split screen windows on rear and both sides and uniformed officer driving

[Dave20046]

Originally Posted by ThEGr33k

No they have to be clearly marked im sure...

WRONG

One almost got me earlier
His mates came back for me later though...and they didn't use lube.

Originally Posted by TonyS

Could the Police be breaking the law? Isn't it illegal to pass yourself off as an employee or agent of a company without the firm's permission? I don't think Autoglass would allow the use of their vans or company logo to persecute motorists.

Our local plod use a variety of different vans borrowed from local businesses to mount covert operations from. A good friend of mine in the force worked in electronic surveillance for a while and said local builders and plumbing firms would happily donate a van for the day as long as the police hired a replacement, as would BT. He would then cram it full of cameras and listening devices and leave it parked up where it needed to observe suspects. He reckoned it was very effective as it looked totally genuine and like it could be there working.

[Dave20046]

Originally Posted by G

Its a safety thing because once you are caught, get three points and a £60 fine then more expensive insurance.............you slow down, hence they have achieved what they set out to do slow people down.

One of the arguements for them scrapping marked vans was all thanks to a video published on BBC where people were braking harshly when spotting a van and crashing. They are safer unmarked than they are marked.


EDIT: I'm not agreeing with them, although my post sound like that.....but they set out to do a job, and they do it successfully. IF you dont slow down once being caught then you are obviously rich lol

Still don't agree with that, yes with some speeders the wreckless ones. But the ones who creep over a few mph as it feels safe should be penalised and then be forced to stare at their clocks and flinch at speedcameras?

pah.