peteuk wrote: > --- In [email protected], "Ron Jones" <r...@...> wrote: >> >> peteuk wrote: >>> --- In [email protected], "Bru" <bruce@> wrote: >>>> >>>> Road pricing as a replacement for fuel duty is a daft idea too. >>>> >>>> Fuel duty is actually a very logical method of collecting income >>>> from motorists. >>>> >>>> The more miles you do, the more you pay. However, the more >>>> economical your car, and the more economically you drive it, the >>>> less you pay. >>> >>> >>> Oh -so true ! >>> >>> I would take it a stage further, scrap the road fund duty and add it >>> to the fuel duty. >>> >>> Hooray - no more tax discs. >>> >>> As things stand commercially at the moment we would have to replace >>> them with the "I am insured" disc. As with the tax disc one would >>> only get one if there was valid MOT also. >> >> Unnecessary - ANPR will sort out those. > > > Non- sequetor there Ron ! > > What are you suggesting would be unnecessary ? > Remember an anpr thingy cannot act itself. > > Pete
Yes, but it's fitted in plenty of police cars and it does work almost by itself, only when it "sees" a car with no insurace or MOT does it alert the bobbies in the car. Try watching "Police Interceptors" (I think that's the title), where Esses Police have got Evos and Subarus with it in. That programme aslo shows that it's fitted to many static cameras on the M25 - where they go slow enough to be able to read :-) Ron Jones Process Safety & Development Specialist Don't repeat history, unreported chemical lab/plant near misses at http://www.crhf.org.uk Only two things are certain: The universe and human stupidity; and I'm not certain about the universe. ~ Albert Einstein
