Red light cameras
Originally Posted by Moggy,Jul 8 2009, 09:55 AM
Appears they have found a loophole in the regs to get around the need to have some evidence of accidents by installing speed cameras in currently installed red light cameras 

It will probably only cause more junction accidents, as red light cameras tend to.
But that will be ignored...
Originally Posted by MB,Jul 8 2009, 12:18 PM
I also totally agree with red light cameras - I can't see how anyone could argue otherwise.
But this is underhand and just one more nail in the coffin for driving freedom.
But this is underhand and just one more nail in the coffin for driving freedom.
Mark you sound like you are clearly annoyed by this, and I have to agree with you. You could write to your local MP and/or the local paper complaining about them.
I've written to my local MP complaining about some speed bump, and the damage they cause to vehicles, and sure enough I got a response, it wasn't the response I wanted but at least he took the time to reply.
I've written to my local MP complaining about some speed bump, and the damage they cause to vehicles, and sure enough I got a response, it wasn't the response I wanted but at least he took the time to reply.
Originally Posted by MarkB,Jul 8 2009, 11:13 AM
The loophole is, and always has been that 'vicinity' is a huge distance away.
I can't remember where I read it but some cameras had been put on a 30mph road which ran below a m/way because there were a number of accidents on the m/way above
Originally Posted by j8mie,Jul 8 2009, 12:48 PM
Mark you sound like you are clearly annoyed by this, and I have to agree with you. You could write to your local MP and/or the local paper complaining about them.
I've written to my local MP complaining about some speed bump, and the damage they cause to vehicles, and sure enough I got a response, it wasn't the response I wanted but at least he took the time to reply.
I've written to my local MP complaining about some speed bump, and the damage they cause to vehicles, and sure enough I got a response, it wasn't the response I wanted but at least he took the time to reply.
Originally Posted by j8mie,Jul 8 2009, 01:48 PM
Mark you sound like you are clearly annoyed by this, and I have to agree with you. You could write to your local MP and/or the local paper complaining about them.
I've written to my local MP complaining about some speed bump, and the damage they cause to vehicles, and sure enough I got a response, it wasn't the response I wanted but at least he took the time to reply.
I've written to my local MP complaining about some speed bump, and the damage they cause to vehicles, and sure enough I got a response, it wasn't the response I wanted but at least he took the time to reply.
A drill and some self expanding foam seems effective otherwise.
I'm surprised there hasn't been vigilante groups formed.
Originally Posted by Moggy,Jul 8 2009, 01:53 PM
Better, IMO to write to the speed camera partnership first in a non commital questioning way. 5 min email will suffice.
Originally Posted by Moggy,Jul 8 2009, 09:43 AM
They have to have some form of evidence of accidents in the vicinity to install speed cameras. Might be worth finding out.
As JC pointed out on the Top Gear episode when they had the Minister for Transport on and they were discussing speed cameras. The speed camera on the M4 near Heathrow was installed after someone jumped off a bridge!
Originally Posted by MB,Jul 8 2009, 12:31 PM
Guess the severity is less though Nick?
I've seen an accident by someone who ran a red light and it wasn't pretty!
I've seen an accident by someone who ran a red light and it wasn't pretty!
There are others though, where the inevitable gridlock causes stupid penalties.
Like everything these days, it seems that a fundamentally sensible idea has been corrupted into a Pythonesque joke by simple-minded politiciunts.
Speed limits themselves were never statistically proven, before their talibanesque imposition; the 30mph limit was introduced at the same time as a raft of other sensible traffic flow improvements and was 'proven' on the back of those!




