Re: warning speed camera

Excessive

exactly right

will have the biggest impact to reduce road casualties rather than

at the moment it just seems to be in places where they can catch people. right dirty tricks just lately as well. right before speed signs for a higher limit, right behind trees, no speed signs anywhere but there are cameras and no-one except the locals know what the limit is.

In message , Dirk Diggler writes

If you can't maintain proper observation while monitoring your speed then you shouldn't be on the road.

That's where you're going wrong, then. All through driving instruction we are told (and read in the Highway Code) of maximum speed limit signs so why do you now feel that you have to maintain a constant 30mph? Reminds me of roundabouts - driving licenses make people forget how to approach and use them.

Quick single lane reference guide... No lamp posts or repeater signs? 60mph Lamp posts without repeater signs? 30mph

If you're snapped by a camera and you feel you were driving within the specified limit, get some photos of the approach to the camera and use them in your defence. You could also alert the local press.

kinda reminds me of...

Man#1: Aye, in them days we was glad to have the price of a cup of tea!

Man#2: Aye, a cup of cold tea!

Man#4: Without milk or sugar!

Man#3: Or tea!

Man#1: Aye, in a cracked cup and all!

Man#4: Oh, we never had a cup. We used to have to drink out of a rolled-up newspaper!

Man#2: Aye, the best we could manage in those days was to suck on a piece of damp cloth!

Man#3: Aye, but we were happy in those days, though we were poor.

Man#1: Because we were poor! My old dad used to say to me: Money doesn't buy you happiness!

Man#4: Aye, he was right, I was happier then and I had nothing. We used to live in this tiny old house with great big holes in the roof.

Man#2: House! You were lucky to live in a house! We had to all live in one room, all twenty-six of us, no furniture, half the floor was missing, and were all huddled together in a corner for fear of falling!

Man#3: You were lucky to have a room! We used to 'ave to live in a corridor!

Man#1: Oh, we used to DREAM of living in a corridor. It would have been a palace to us. We used to have to live in an old water tank in a rubbish pit. We got woke up every morning by having a load of rotting fish dumped all over us! House! Huh!

Man#4: Well, when I say house, it was only a hole in the ground covered by a sheet of tarpaulin, but it was a house to us!

Man#2: We were evicted from our hole in the ground. We had to go and live in a lake!

Man#3: You were lucky to have a lake! There were a hundred and fifty of us, living in a shoebox in the middle of the road!

Man#1: Cardboard box?

Man#3: Aye!

Man#1: You were lucky. We lived for three months in a paper bag in a septic tank. We used to have to get up at six in the morning, clean the paper bag, eat a crust of stale bread, go to work down at the mill, fourteen hours a day, week in, week out, for sixpence a week, and when we got home, our dad would thrash us to sleep with his belt.

(slight pause)

Man#2: Luxury. We used to have to get out of the lake at six o'clock in the morning, clean the lake, eat a handful of damp gravel, work a twenty-hour day at the mill for tuppence a month, and when we got home, our dad would thrash us to sleep with a broken bottle, if we were lucky!

Man#3: Well, of course, we 'ad it tough! We used to have to get up out of the shoebox at twelve o'clock at night, and lick the road clean with our tongue. We 'ad two bits of cold gravel, and worked a twenty-four hour day at the mill for six or seventy-four years, and when we got home, our dad would slash it to us with a bread knife.

Man#4: Right. I had to get up at ten o'clock at night, half an hour before I went to bed, drink a cup of sulphuric acid, work twenty-nine hours a day down at the mill and pay the mill owner for permission to come to work, and when we got home, our mother and father would kill us and dance on our graves singing Halleluja.

Man#1: Aye, and you try telling young people of today that. And they won't believe you.

Man#4: Aye, they won't!

oo look ive top posted! ill go and destroy all my computer equipment because im obviously not fit to use it.

mustn't feed the troll.... temptation overpowering....

bah!

resorting to insults is always the classic sign of a s***ty little sniper. no-one really cares about top-posting these apart from a few small minded individuals. if im quoting then i try and snip but again no-one really cares.

surely even you can see that no-one agrees with you purely by looking at the messages in this group?

dont tell me let me guess, you're either a BMW driver or a 4x4 driver?

by the way dont bother replying cos you're killfiled anyway.

Nonsense. it only gets complicated when using a mobile phone, eating a sandwich and trying to turn down the radio at the same time.

Sorry, I was thinking car not bike there

You'll lose yourself an audience then, if that's what you believe.

Speed is the new Religion.

Ha!

• In that case, please put me in touch with the devil. :)

• Let's hope this one doesn't last as long as the previous one.

• Funny you should say that - when I was talking on the phone to Susan Beck - spokesperson of "National Safety Camera Liaison" - it became obvious to me that she based her opinions on blind faith.

• For true enlightenment, please visit my web site.

(sniped pointless Monty python sketch)

Indeed.

Jesus wept. ;)

Been at the melatonin again?

LOL!!!!!!!!

:>In alt.uk.law Paul Smith writted:

:>: If we did remove all speed limits (and one day in the not so near :>: future it might be a good idea) The vast majority would continue to :>: drive at safe and appropriate speeds.

:> As I've pointed out before, and you do not seem to have taken on :>board, it is the remaining proportion that we are worried about.

: Good. So you'll have a comment to make about the fact that the vast : majority are being penalised by the speed cameras while the drunks and : the reckless go free.

Unfounded premise and non-sequiteur. These groups do not necessarily go free, nor does it have any bearing on whether speeding is of itself a dangerous activity. There are endless examples of drivers who are both reckless and speeding, as if it is indeed necessary to differentiate between the two. This group can be caught be speed cameras, at least for the speed if not for the recklessness. If the police catch someone speeding, they automatically breathalyse.

: It's obvious to me that speed camera policy is causing dangerous : offences to be ignored.

:

:> By analogy, ten years ago, the vast, vast majority of doctors safely :>and appropriately issued death certificates. Unfortunately, this :>libertarian and trusting system let Harold Shipman kill with impunity.

: Now you're talking about utopia. We'll never have a system that cannot : be abused. Plugging one loophole just opens others.

No, it allows us to concentrate on others. Drunken driving, by analogy, is now utterly unacceptable to the vast majority of people. The police still have to deal with it, but in nothing like the numbers that they used to. This allows them to concentrate on other antisocial speeding behaviour.

:> In any system, whether it's speed limits or death certification, the :>consequences of the stupidity or malice of a small number of people has :>to be guarded against for the benefit of the majority.

: Within the limits of remaining effective at its primary objective - : yes I agree. But the speed camera thing is not delivering its stated : primary objective (i.e. casualty reduction)

eh? You own graphs show that the casualty rate is still going down. We've done these statistics to death in another thread and your data analysis and interpretation still leaves much to be desired.

:> Incidentally, and correct me if I am wrong, you have mentioned previously :>that you have advanced driver qualification. In any case, I quote from the :>IAM website

: This, sadly, is just evidence of the IAM bowing to political : pressures. They are probably right to do so because it helps their : voice to be heard high in the DfT where they sit on road safety : committees - I believe they do good there.

You have evidence that they give a different message on speeding to government in these committees?

: Are you an IAM member? (btw, I'm not - I paid for my advanced driver : training)

No. I will probably go for my adv. driver training when I can spare the cash, but not before...

BTW, I'm sure that, like me, you're getting a touch tired of this thread. Feel free to have a final say, but unless you seriously start to advocate flailing knives on vehicles in residential areas, I may call it quits at this.

Best wishes, Gavin