rubberknees50 wrote: So humping in the road is a safety measure?

LOL.....

I still believe that councils putting speed humps in the road are commiting a breach of the peace.....Ivan ?

If a road has a speed limit of 30 mph, then it is safe to do 30 mph at some time, by putting in speed humps they are blocking the queens highway.

Hi All,

Having witnessed the problems most driver have in the Farnborough area when they "stumble" upon one of the MANY speed humps I would prefer not to see anymore...

Mind you some statistic studying civil servant will deside that speed humps are the way forward and start putting them on the motorways instead of cameras!!!

Did I just stick up for speed cameras?

Cheers,

Bryce,

The speed humps on a specific area of Farnborugh are the same as Goldryder mentions except that they are tarmac but they have decided that, not only do we need them in each lane so if you have an ounce of common sense you would straddle them without needing to drop much speed (but less than 30mph), they then decide to put them in the parking bays...  What happens is:

A) people slow to 5mph, then continue up the rest of the road at 5mph...

B) people drive down the middle of the road, part on the wrong side forcing oncoming traffic to have to swerve/stop

C) "MAX POWER" racers floor it betwen humps, making a tit of themselves with exhaust roar/tyre screech in their bodykit covered Astra/Nova/Coras/Saxo/106 etc.

And now the road looks a mess, different coloured surfaces, many humps, 2 Zebra crossings within 300 metres of each other, new mini round-about, all on 700 metres of road, too much to take in without looking for cars/people/bikes/cats/dogs/police.  Actually maybe point a) is the way to go!

But then this is from the council who decide to change a 2 way road into a one way system as a trial, then 4 months later announce that they can't afford to commison a traffic study to monitor the effect it has on all the other roads in the area - (total madness if they ever left their nice warm offices!). 

God, I'm getting old! Even my girlfriend has started to call me Victor!

Cheers,

 Barnet Council in London, were one of the first to install humps and promoted them as the greatest thing since sliced bread--Deaf to ALL complaints from Residents-Ambulances-Council services-Fire dept, Council replied you wanted something done about rat runs & speed issues.

After a year or so, with the fury of the TAX Payers getting louder, the council decided to remove them, and RED Ken said Barnet would loose All grants for other unrelated subjects---its called Blackmail in  Tinpot dictator speak, in this socalled democracy country.So the Humps were Removed, improvements were made to other roads in the area,s which increased the flow of traffic--so drivers stopped the Rat Run driving. Everyone happy!!!!!----Except RED Slime .

The term rat run always amuses me.

It seems to refer to the legitimate usage of side roads by taxed and insured vehicles that are entitled to be there, but householders think shouldn't !

On Johns and mine favourite subject of Speed scameras, an offshoot of these lovely little tax boxes, is people who wanted to exceed the speed limit by a few mph on a wide, open A road, with few potential hazards etc etc, now do it on rather less safe b & c roads !

Good for road safety eh ?

I've seen them on approaches to schools.

An interesting little thought for you on gatso's, ( and only gatso's ).

Telephone mast : 1.8 Ghz, high in the air , public believes them to be dangerous.

Microwave oven : 2.4 Ghz.

Gatso : 30 - 33 Ghz, head height !

Telephone masts need planning permision, speed cameras don't.

Someone is spreading cow pooh somewhere.

johno1066 wrote: Yep, Am on to one at the moment, mobile, parked on double yellow lines and outside a school entrance. If anyone wants pictures I can provide them!!

E-mail me the pictures I'll put them on here for you !

One point for you, Gatso is the make of one type of scamera, as I'm sure you know, it uses radar scatter to measure speed.

It is very unlikely to be used in a mobile van ( not impossible, but unlikely), they will generally be real time video with either infra red, or inductive sense trigger ( the latter will be plugged into a post somewhere).

They are also exempt parking regulations, in my experience even if where it is parked compromises safety.

johno1066 wrote: [QUOTE=Peter Fenwick] According to that report gatsos do cut down the number of accidents. May I suggest Peter, that you read the following then visit the Safespeed site. www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/search/display.var.522448.0. speed_cameras_fail_to_cut_accident_rate.php http://www.safespeed.org.uk/notso.html - http://www.safespeed.org.uk/notso.html

I wasn't saying I agreed with the notion that speed cameras reduced accidents, all I was saying was that according to the report that Goldryder first started the thread about, they do.

Nigel,

Your comment about telegraph poles, microwaves and speed cameras. I'll do a little research on that one.........

johno1066 wrote:  We need to wake up people.

And do what?

As soon as someone comes up with a sensible way forward on how to tackle this then nothing will happen. The only solution offered on this site so far is to vote for someone else. Simply blaming the current government is nieve. If you think that any other major political party would do things differently then IMO you are mistaken. In order to get this you need to think of a way to get the general public as a whole on side. That way you can force the issue onto the political agenda.

The real trouble that enthusiastic motorists like ourselves have is that to most people we just sound like we want to get away with speeding.

Peter.

Not telegraph poles mate, radio telephone masts, the type used by vodaphone etc.

And this argument only applies to "transmitting" cameras, such as gatso's.

John

The highway code is not driving law, and shouldn't be treated as such, I agree with your sentiments but I think your unlikely to get anywhere, the people who are ultimately in charge of these things make the rules anyway, they know we the general public don't like them, but they don't really care.

You would also be surprised at the amount of support these devices have, like Peter says, most of the arguments we put forward just make it look like we want to break the law at will, and not be punished for it.

"As soon as someone comes up with a sensible way forward on how to tackle this then nothing will happen. The only solution offered on this site so far is to vote for someone else. Simply blaming the current government is nieve. If you think that any other major political party would do things differently then IMO you are mistaken. In order to get this you need to think of a way to get the general public as a whole on side. That way you can force the issue onto the political agenda."

The Solution as requested many times by the Public, is to put Police back on the Streets in numbers, instead of doing office work.10,000 extra police which were employed under the Bliar master plan, have disappeared, as well as the Trafpol and their Departments.You obviously havent noticed.

If the present police numbers are too low, which they are--take on 15000/20000 Extra Civilian staff to release Plod back where they belong, but due to utter incompetence by the senior police admin , possibly caused by daily Slime interference--they use Camera.s for everything instead of a "Police Driver who can smell em out" as a Cheshire Trafpoll chief said on TV prog last week.This man needs promoting to UK chief of Police, but maybe Too clever for Bliars system--a chief using his brain and Experience--unknown words in no 10.WE want More trafpol not camera,s-- excuses and Lies.

So for ALL the promises made over the years, not much has changed except we pay more for less.The Public opinion only concerns a govt at Election time, so PF-- we have to constantly remind the Govt of the day--good job we dont believe a word they spin out---that they can be kicked out of power like anyone else.

I think what Peter is saying is it isn't just this government, any elected government of whatever party is going to have the same policies on this issue.

Like many, I'm not happy with the daft way (and positions) that more and more cameras are be deployed in, but I don't think the way we all vote will change that. Not sure what will, unless they start not making as much money and become unprofitable!

Ok John, give me your arguments against speed cameras, and i'll try to play devils advocate with you, weve done this before on here.

I'll answer on your other post regarding the car.

johno1066 wrote: I was interested to read Andy McNab's article in the Sunday Mail magazine with regards to how those in France dealt with wheelclamps and then cameras. Essentially the local town hall decreed that cars parked over the paid for time by even a few minutes, would be clamped. The solution, shopkeepers had a large set of bolt croppers and the driver would simply take the clamp off, the authorties gave up. A potatoe sack had been placed over one camera, when the operator changed the film, he himself replaced the potatoe sack, result, the camera was removed. Not verifiable by any means but having lived in France for 5 years I can quite believe it.

I live in France, and work in Holland and can well believe that such actions have been taken by the locals. That said the government there has cottoned on to the revenue making abilities of the cameras and they are popping up at an alarming rate as they seem to be all over europe. Once they get used to the near passive income from the scameras they'll not tolerate any shenanigans that hurts the extra income.

B 7 VP wrote: The Solution as requested many times by the Public, is to put Police back on the Streets in numbers, instead of doing office work.10,000 extra police which were employed under the Bliar master plan, have disappeared, as well as the Trafpol and their Departments.You obviously havent noticed.

The issue regarding not enough Police is totally separate from this one. People want more Police on the streets in order to deal with issues regarding voilence, yob culture etc. I don not recall anyone saying that we needed more police on the streets to deal with traffic offences.

From conversations I have had, problems with traffic offences are pretty low on peoples list of issues that concern them. Although many people have been stung by cameras, most people would not choose which way to vote based on a parties policy with respect to them.

The Conservatives know this, other wise they would have used it as an issue to campaign on for the election. Either that or they agree with the current camera policy. 

Also a lot of people think speed cameras are a good idea. Sure people who use this forum and other motoring groups of enthusiast don't, but we are the minority. I would be willing to bet that if you went to your local nursery and spoke to mothers dropping of toddlers you would find a lot of support for them.

If you want to change things we need to make the issue one which is supported by the public as a whole, or at least a big enough section of society that the government and the opposiition parties take notice. In order to do this you first need to sell you views to the public. Not only that but you need to conter the propoganda that is out there. have you noticed the programmes about the traffic cops on the BBC. What do you think the purpose of these is? IMO this is selling issues like speed cameas and the notion that speeding is the latest motoring evil to the viewing public. To promote your views, change peoples opinions or even get them to care enough will take money or the backing af a news paper.

Discussing it on here is like preaching to the converted.

 PF-------- once again you miss the point, IF you put plod BACK on the streets--including Trafpol-- you have Mobility to answer the call when Chav decides to break into YOUR house, to finance drug habits.Trafpol also pulls YOU over to lecture YOU about your driving standards--which YOU dont forget--BUT--RESPECT and REMEMBER for the future.

This action encourages YOU to Work WITH the Police in the future--you know-"Police Request the publics assistance in ---It will NOT happen anymore, THIS Is part of the Bliar PayBack--YOU WILL suffer.Citizens could be counted on to go to the assistance if the bobby asked you--NO more--THIS from honest members of the public-Why???? cos they are sick of being treated as a criminal-because they are a Driver.!!!!!!!!!!! while Slime chav pay zero.

People don't go to the assistance of officers- or come forward to police appeals, for a wide range of reasons, it's not only drivers doing it (or not) as a protest.

I agree more police are needed on the streets, but as has been said, even if it was approved, it takes time to train more officers.

B 7 VP wrote:  PF-------- once again you miss the point, IF you put plod BACK on the streets--including Trafpol-- you have Mobility to answer the call when Chav decides to break into YOUR house, to finance drug habits.Trafpol also pulls YOU over to lecture YOU about your driving standards--which YOU dont forget--BUT--RESPECT and REMEMBER for the future.

I didn't miss your point at all. All I was saying was that the general public had not asked for more police on the streets to deal with traffic offences. It was to do with making people feel safe.

I said this because you said "the solution as suggested by the public is to put mopre police back on the streets........"

All I was saying is that this solution has nothing to do with the issue of speed cameras and traffic police.

People don't come forward to help the Police because either they have this stupid notion that you don't 'grass' people up. This is a common view among certain sections of society or they are scared or retribution.

B 7 VP wrote: This action encourages YOU to Work WITH the Police in the future--you know-"Police Request the publics assistance in ---It will NOT happen anymore, THIS Is part of the Bliar PayBack--YOU WILL suffer.Citizens could be counted on to go to the assistance if the bobby asked you--NO more--THIS from honest members of the public-Why???? cos they are sick of being treated as a criminal-because they are a Driver.!!!!!!!!!!! while Slime chav pay zero.

Are you telling me that because someone has been given a speeding ticket that they would not come forward if they had information on a robbery, murder or rape etc?

If this is the case then I am amazed that anyone would think like that. Anyone with any decency would not act in this way. A speeding ticket can be, depending on the circumstances (lets not forget some are well deserved), anoying, unjust and it can make you resent the police/government, but lets get it into perspective. In comparioison to helping the police solve a serious crime it pails into insignificance.

Ok mate, I'll post my answers in a different colour, I wish you luck I too have been a little way down this road, the answers will be from my own experience.

johno1066 wrote: Okey dokey, Nigel, here we go! 1. 80% of Gatso cameras are inaccurate and do not meet type specification which hasn't yet been contested by Serco or the Police scientific department,nor has such an arument been testes/allowed to pass) in a court of law. They have been type approved by the home office. 2. Section 172 of the road traffic act contradicts article 6 of the human rights convention and the said act. Will i'm sure be proven within the near future. This was ruled against in a British court ( possibly Scottish I cant remember) 3. The fact that every citizen has a right to silence and is free from self incrimination, whom also are innocent until PROVEN guilty. You do have a right to silence, but then can't rely on anything you haven't said, but now want to say in court. 4. Being forced to sign a document when in fact the law can't force you to sign anything. It would appear they can if they change the rules to make it so. 5. Incriminating yourelf or others when in fact a false accusation or incrimination would bring more serious charge such as perverting the course of justice or even perjury if under oath. So don't falsely accuse someone ! 6. Again, contrary to the human rights convention, Section 172 does not allow for the passing of sentence nor punishment that is greater than that of the first, article 7 of the human rights convention "Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the criminal offence was committed". Why then are you open to more serious penalties if you don't sign the NIP and why are other charges brought when you fail to nominate the 'driver' and be accused of not showing due dilligence? Because a Mr John Prescott made it so, which rather intestingly, my local scameraship still deny ! This is supposedly to stop the courts being jammed up with people pleading not guilty, I don't believe it but there you go. 7. Article 6 section3 states "to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him" Why then will the manufacturers whom also calibrate the cameras not to attend court to defend their devices accuracy? Because so far they have not been required to do so, we know it stinks but the anti car brigade are very strong at the moment 8. Accidents have been rising since 1993 when in fact they had been decreasing since the early 80's anyway. around about the same time as the destruction of the Police service and the introduction of speed cameras, why are deaths still increasing when speed cameras are increasing. Because speed, although a factor, is not the one and only cause of accidents, we all know this, even those writing the rules. 9. A third of all deaths and serious injuries are attributed to speed. Where is the scientific evidence to support this claim, when in fact the Transpoer research laboratory reports indicate the actual number is less than 8%. This number includes those accidents involving drink drivers, those whom are under the influence of drugs and those whom have been involved with Police chases etc. Even the Polcie themselves. The evidence to support that claim is very flimsy indeed, but if nothing moved, there would be no collision, so it does have some basis. Its an advertising slogan, and should be treated as such. I could go on all night, but who has noticed within the last 5 years or so, that whilst speeding may be down, the standard of driving has got much much worse!!

Right, back to black !

You are correct in everything you have said, but you have not given me one good reason to have these devices removed.

The rules need changing so things can be challenged, which is where people like you, I and the organisation ABD come in, but this will take time, we laughed at the anticar lobby to start with, rather than taking the threat seriously, we are now reaping the "benefits" of that mistake.

Speed cameras enforce the law, it is illegal to break the law, period.

The cow poo surrounding the cameras is the governments mistake.

I wish you luck, but in reality I think your efforts may be better spent challenging the stupily low limits being imposed on us, rathet than challenging devices placed there to enforce those limits.

johno1066 wrote: ....many people however just give up because they can't, won't or are too intimidated to fight their corners, whether it be contesting the accuracy of the cameras or identifying any flaws within the system and its procedures.

Of course people shy away from taking on the government in the courts. They have too much to loose. Also who want's to fight a battle you stand little or no chance of winning.

johno1066 wrote: Already we have an all powerful environmental lobby, intent on banning any vehicle that they consider to be a 'gas guzzler' 4x4s are their prioriy at the moment,

Your real problem here is that you can't disprove their theories on the effects vehicles like this have.

Why? because no one really knows. There are several different camps on this issue all with their own theories but when it comes down to it no one can prove of disprove anyone elses theory.

The reason the environmentallists have such a strong lobby at the moment is because they have a lot of support. More and more prominent scientists are backing the view that mans actions are having an effect on the climate. On top of this Hollywood got involved with 'The day after tomorrow' which will have had a big impact on the way the public view the issue.

The other more important point is, if they are right and we do nothing we are heading for an environmental time bomb which will cause the death of millions of people. If we do what they wish and give up our gas guzzling cars but they turn out to have been wrong then it's a pain but no one dies.

The problem is that if they are right the consequenses of doing nothing are so catastrophic that is it not worth doing it just in case? (Playing devils advocate for a moment)

It is very hard arguement for the car lobby to win.

My view, as someone with a chemistry back ground and a reasonable understanding of the science involved is that the climate is changing, for the worse. If it isn't caused by us then there is nothing we can do anyway so we should just prepare for the worst. If it is caused by us then by the time the world as a whole acts to change it we will be past the point of no return anyway.

johno1066 wrote:   But then wait! hangon, 30 years ago, didn't people vote for a free trade agreement within Europe, the EEC. Or did they vote for a United States of Europe. No could never happen surely.Perphaps that's what this Government is doing, making laws so proposterous that the people have to use the European courts, whom then give the Government a slap on the wrists, people say "well Europe isn't so bad after all, then before we know it we're in.

I don't think you need to worry about Europe for the time being. After all the people have spoken. They didn't vote for a United states of europe which is why the French said no and the Dutch said no.

However give a bit of time and we may well become the 51st state of America! People bang on about Europe but how much of what happens in this country is determined by US policy....

johno1066 wrote: Hmm, having lived in the US for abit, now that I would like to see. A constitution that matters, a 9L truck, cheaper petrol prices, the right to buy however many guns I can fit into my truck, on a drivers license! The right to shoot the burglars who invade my home,cheap flying, hmmm tempting.

LOL....I used to quite fancy the idea of living in America until I realised that there speed limts are lower than ours and enforced with just as much vigour. Not to mention that in some states what you and your wife/girlfirend get up to in the bed room is dictated by the courts. The fact that in some towns they have a limit on how many beers you can drink in one sitting, about three If I remember correctly. Then lets not forget the fact that it's only the land of the free if you agree with the right wing christian fundamentallists.

Land of the free? More like nation of nutters!

Appologies to any American readers. Much of this is from Bill Brysons 'Notes from a big country'. Since he actually is American I think he view is quite valid.

Just been reading the above, all very interesting....

I have no problem with Gatso's, I think there placement is a little suspect and feel that if more were placed outside schools,colleges,shopping centres and other busy "populated" areas it would be hard pressed for any of the arguments against cameras to be valid.

One thing we have to remember is that to be able to drive a car is not a right, it's something you earn by passing your driving test and abidding by the rules of the road (the law).  Exactly the same as it's against the law to break into someone's house and still something that they have because you want it or you want the money it cost - no, what you do is get a job, earn the money and buy it yourself. 

Now I speed, I often travel at 80 to 90 mph on motorways, I see this as safe in the right conditions BUT accept that I am breaking the law, I also accept that I could be caught and punished for doing so, if I get caught often enough I will lose the privelge to drive my car.  How can I complain? 

If I break into enough houses and get caught then I would expect to get stopped, by going to prison.  It's the samething, there are rules/laws that in this society we all live by.  These rules have to be enforced one way or another.

I travel about 20K miles a year, I speed, and I don't speed - if I see a camera I pass it at the limit (according to the speedo on the car/bike I am in) and I have never had a ticket.  So I have no issues with the accuracy of the cameras.  If I was foolish enough to risk speeding and I got caught it would be my fault, not the Police/camera partnership/goverment etc.  I was speeding, in my car so it's my fault.

Another argument I often hear is "I didn't know what the limit was", again how is this a valid argument - look at the highway code, it it's not a marked limit but there are regular lamposts then it's 30mph (not n motorways obv.), otherwise, use your eyes, the clues are normally there!  And if you are not sure then be careful, drive at 30mph!

We can all disagree with the way some limits are set, the way some cameras are positioned but something I see reguarly around Farnborough is Police in traffic cars, parked in side roads near schools/shops with speed guns stopping people for speeding in 30mph, speed there and you should get the book thrown at you for being so stupid.  I have no problem with cameras on motorways if it means that the Traffic Police can concentrate on catching idiots near schools while still maintaning a degree of law/order on motorways.

Now driving standards... thats another issue...

Cheer,

Bryce.

Been quite a thoughtful topic this one, and one I have followed with interest.  As far as speed goes I agree if you exceed the limits you take your chance as it is illegal, whether we agree with the way it is enforced or not.

In line with Peter's comments on the environment changing for the worse, on the news earlier they asked Bill Oddie for opinions, he refused to name names but I think the gist was progress can't be made unless we all work together, and while European governments refuse to listen to anything they don't want to hear, and the US refuses to do anything at all, nothing can happen to change things.

I do like the list of silly laws, every country has them!

And exactly what happens when drivers come across a Police car at 60mph in lane 1 or parked up on one of those humps with a speed gun pointing at them? 

The outcome is the same as for speed cameras (apart from it takes ages to get past the Police car at 68mph!!!).  This is a argument regarding driving standards not the method of Policing the limits we agree to obey by taking and passing our driving test.

I have no right to drive at 50mph in a 30 limit and no right to drive at 90mph on a motorway, I make a decision that in some circumstances it's safe for me to speed - but it's not right, is it?

Then again, I am lucky enough to own a motorcycle and attend track days where I can go quickly in a safe enviroment and get it out of my system!

Cheers,

Bryce.

johno1066 wrote: vehicle. In fact i no longer ride on the roads because the standard of driving is so low and there's simply no fun in it anymore. Self preservation is a key element too, especially when some Doris in her Volvo would pull out of a side road, then declare, "sorry love, I didn't see you". Driving under the speed limit DOES NOT in itself make a safe driver, it's fiction. Concentrating on the road, the conditions, looking at what other drivers in cars are doing, checking over the shoulder/blindspots prior to overtaking, respecting others even though they may be infuriating are IMO more crucial than keeping an eye on the speedo every 5milliseconds. .

As an ex motorbiker I have to agree with this, I like speed but the stadard of driving these days is appalling and getting worse. I often find myself sitting behind someone "infuriating" but unable to safely overtake, only for some plonker to come flying past both of us in a suicidal place. And how annoying is it when someone at a side road/junction looks, sees you coming, then at the last second pulls slowly out in front of you? Most of my time on bikes was spent watching out for idiots, I still think a requirement of the driving test should be a couple of months on a moped, you realise how vulnerable you are and see how others bad driving can affect you!

 " Most of my time on bikes was spent watching out for idiots, I still think a requirement of the driving test should be a couple of months on a moped, you realise how vulnerable you are and see how others bad driving can affect you"

Agree 100%--But it wont happen-Much to Sensible , like including a SkidPan session and a Motorway session in a NEW 2 Part Test.

These idea,s have been stated for 25 + years, DFT couldnt care a So much easier to blame road users , than implement a stricter driving test wth higher standards, which would keep the number of drivers/Riders down.Germany has a very strict exam in parts, like we should have started.I got knocked off Bikes twice, once on the M4 M/way in the middle lane

As far as I'm aware they never did, they certainly don't now, it is however available to you.

The BMWCC do a good job on this too, Howard Walker, Jeff Heywood, and I believe our very own John Safe organise these events throughout the year at a very very reasonable cost, actually cheaper than I can do it through the police.