| northwind |
05-10-06 03:27 PM |
We'ev had this conversation before Squirrel :) So to get it out of the way...
For exactly the reasons above- you don't get caught because of speed cameras, you get caught because you were speeding. Camera or officer, makes no difference, the offence is the same. Now, I'm not saying that speeding's the worst crime in the world, I just think the medium of being caught's irrelevant. Get caught be a speed camera and everyone's on your side, because we all hate speed cameras. Get caught by a warm policeman and you don't get the same reaction, even if you're doing the same speed on the same street. Nobody considers it unfair for shoplifters to get caught by video evidence ;)
I'd sooner all the UK's speed limits get reviewed for the real world, that speed cameras if they exist at all be a part of an overlal road policing policy not the main body of it, that policing reflect the increase of "stealth crimes" like driving without insurance or unroadworthy vehicles, that more traffic cars be put back out there to catch illegal and dangerous drivers,all of that. I reckon they should stop fitting speed cameras until every major red light has a camera on it, because jumping reds is my most hated road habit. But the problem's that some police districts are run by halfwits, not speed cameras. They're just a box on a stick. And as long as people fixate on speed cameras, all that other stuff's going to remain the same. Brunstrom'd be a p***k if photography had been invented, the problem is the operator not the tool.
Now... Since the actual poster didn't do any of the stuff that annoys me, this is all getting a bit off topic :)
|
