Re: OT: Speed Cameras

[Nick Clark]

Or Venice!

Nick

-Original Message-
From: "Norm Baugher"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: 2/13/04 11:09:28 PM
To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
    Subject: Re: OT: Speed Cameras

Some places in Europe, owning a car, IMHO, is ridiculous. e.g. Munich.
Cheers,
Norm
Adelheid will back that up 

Re: OT: Speed Cameras

[graywolf]

Who am I to speak for the world. I am not as well traveled as that. Yes, USA.

--

mike wilson wrote:
Hi,

graywolf wrote:

In 1950 almost any decent sized city had a great public transport system, now
only a handful do. 


That would be cities in the USA, right?  You could go and live in Russia
or many central European countries, who all have excellent public
transport systems.  When they are not cheesing off their ethnic
minorities.  Switzerland has a superb integrated tranport system.
I, on the other hand, cannot get from one end of England to the other in
less than 12 hours at the moment.
mike


--
graywolf
http://graywolfphoto.com
"You might as well accept people as they are,
you are not going to be able to change them anyway."

Re: OT: Speed Cameras

[mike wilson]

Hi,

graywolf wrote:
> In 1950 almost any decent sized city had a great public transport system, now
> only a handful do. 

That would be cities in the USA, right?  You could go and live in Russia
or many central European countries, who all have excellent public
transport systems.  When they are not cheesing off their ethnic
minorities.  Switzerland has a superb integrated tranport system.

I, on the other hand, cannot get from one end of England to the other in
less than 12 hours at the moment.

mike

Re: OT: Speed Cameras

[Frits Wüthrich]

Well, I thought about that, but I never saw anything mentioned about
that. I wonder if they have some hidden cameras? Or the cameras watch
each other as well.


On Thu, 2004-02-12 at 22:50, Robert Gonzalez wrote:
> And what monitors the cameras monitoring the speed cameras?  More cameras?
> :-D
> 
> 
> Frits Wüthrich wrote:
> 
> >We now have cameras to monitor the speed cameras, so the shooter can be
> >fined as well.
> >
> >
> >On Wed, 2004-02-11 at 01:30, Herb Chong wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>they did a pilot project in Texas a few years back. gave up when all of the
> >>test cameras ran out. all of them were shot to bits.
> >>
> >>Herb...
> >>- Original Message - 
> >>From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>To: "pentax list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 3:35 PM
> >>Subject: Re: OT: Speed Cameras
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Filming various speed cameras that have been vandalised and even chopped
> >>>down in Oxfordshire.
> >>>
> >>><http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/ae_news_story.php?id=32564>
> >>>
> >>>Captain Gatso strikes again - there's even a guy called Angle Grinder Man
> >>>- I filmed a camera today that had been neatly severed from its moorings!
> >>>these guys are serious, oh boy.
> >>>  
> >>>
> 
-- 
Frits Wüthrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: OT: Speed Cameras

[Robert Gonzalez]

And what monitors the cameras monitoring the speed cameras?  More cameras?
:-D
Frits Wüthrich wrote:

We now have cameras to monitor the speed cameras, so the shooter can be
fined as well.
On Wed, 2004-02-11 at 01:30, Herb Chong wrote:
 

they did a pilot project in Texas a few years back. gave up when all of the
test cameras ran out. all of them were shot to bits.
Herb...
- Original Message - 
From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "pentax list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 3:35 PM
Subject: Re: OT: Speed Cameras

   

Filming various speed cameras that have been vandalised and even chopped
down in Oxfordshire.
<http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/ae_news_story.php?id=32564>

Captain Gatso strikes again - there's even a guy called Angle Grinder Man
- I filmed a camera today that had been neatly severed from its moorings!
these guys are serious, oh boy.
 

Re: OT: Speed Cameras

[graywolf]

They were predicting all that stuff in the 1950's. You will see them when you 
see people living on the moon and on mars and every home has a suitcase nuclear 
reactor. When 300mph monorails criss cross the country. And the bus driver does 
not give you the finger as he drives past you waiting at the bus stop.

In 1950 almost any decent sized city had a great public transport system, now 
only a handful do. Non of them seem to realize that waiting 15 minutes for a 
trolley in a covered stop was a lot different from waiting an hour and a half 
for a bus in the rain. Now they seem to think you should drive 5 miles to a bus 
stop and wait for a bus, when you can finish the trip in your car in less time 
than the wait.

--

Bob W wrote:

Hi,


I reckon that within 30 years it will be illegal to operate a ground car
manually.


we'll all have personal jet packs by then!

--
graywolf
http://graywolfphoto.com
"You might as well accept people as they are,
you are not going to be able to change them anyway."

Re: OT: Speed Cameras

[William Robb]

- Original Message - 
From: "Peter Alling"
Subject: Re: OT: Speed Cameras


> As a software engineer you don't know how much that
prospect frightens me...

I thought the same thing.
Although there are a lot of people whose driving would be
improved by having them taken out of the loop.

William Robb

> At 03:35 PM 2/10/04, Cotty wrote:
> >On 10/2/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
disgorged:
> >
>
> 
>
>
> >I reckon that within 30 years it will be illegal to
operate a ground car
> >manually.
> >
>

Re: Even further OT and a rant to boot (Re: OT: Speed cameras (Re: taxi in motion))

[John Coyle]

Of course my last message was sent before spell-checking and completion!
Fumbling fingers fumbled and stuffed up!

Nothing more to add except my poor little car bears the scars of more than
one idiot's complete ignorance of both how to drive and the road rules!

John Coyle
Brisbane, Australia
- Original Message - 
From: "D. Glenn Arthur Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 3:33 PM
Subject: Even further OT and a rant to boot (Re: OT: Speed cameras (Re: taxi
in motion))


> Even further OT because I'm not even going to mentioon the cameras...
>
> Bob W wrote:
> > I heard on the radio today, as I was speeding home from work, that
> > only about 7% of road accidents here are caused by the driver
> > speeding. I can't find anything on the BBC website to back this up.
> > But it's likely to cause a few more grumbles about the police
> > (mis)directing their efforts towards the motorist instead of going
> > after the real perps. Of course, the assumption there could be
> > unfounded: the drivers could still be the cause of the accident - but
> > not by speeding.
>
> I don't have a forest of data to refer to, but I spend enough
> time on the road that personal observation is not insignificant.
>
> Counting up the accidents and close calls that I've observed or
> been in, there have been very few in which speed was the only
> meaningful factor.  If you allow me to exclude the stupid things
> I did before age 21, I think the number drops to zero or one.
>
> If you count the ones where speed was a _contributing_ factor
> to the accident or close call having occurred, you get a handful
> more, but if you really want to see lots of speed-related ones,
> you have to add in the ones where speed was not a factor in
> _causing_ the problem, but did make the consequences or potential
> _consequences_ _of_ the event worse.
>
> Of the ones where speed was part of the cause, about a third
> of those had all vehicles travelling below the posted speed
> limit.  ("Too fast for conditions", but not exceeding the
> speed limit.)  In my not-so-humble opinion, many of the rest
> were really due to "too fast for conditions" and not the fact
> that someone was over the posted limit.
>
> What _does_ cause most of the near-misses and collisions that
> I've seen?
>
> Failure to signal lane changes, often coupled with...
>
> Failure to check mirrors before lane changes
>
> Tailgating
>
> Inattention (it would've been a safe following distance
> if you'd noticed the brake lights when they came on)
>
> Failure to heed traffic control devices (stoplights,
> stop signs, roadway markings)
>
> Road rage (convenient that we have a name for it now),
> showing off, and "neither rule of law nor rule of
> ettiquette apply to me today because everybody should
> be able to read my mind and tell how much of a hurry
> I'm in right now".
>
> If the police made no other change than to shift all the effort
> they currently expend on catching speeders to catching tailgaters,
> that alone would make our highways far safer.  If they also go
> after improper lane changes, intensely enough that people learn
> to be afraid to make those mistakes, the change would be amazing.
> Even if they dropped speed enforcement altogether on controlled-access
> highways to do so.  (Speeding in residential areas and business
> districts might still need to be policed.)
>
> But speeding is extremely easy to _quantify_.  It's easy to
> assign a number to, and it's easy to _measure_.  So it's an
> easy ticket.  It's all scientifical and stuff:  "Your honor,
> the defendant was travelling at 86 MPH in a 65 MPH zone using
> RADAR."   "That's 21 MPH over the posted speed, so it's one
> more point and a lot more money than it would've been at 84
> MPH.  Guilty.  Next!"  (I exaggerate slightly, but just try
> to raise doubts about the measurement in traffic court and
> see how much like that it winds up sounding.)  A scientific
> instrument generated a NUMBER which means it's _objective_
> and _mathematical_, whether that number is _meaningful_ or
> not (and without any question of the _precision_ of the
> number a lot of the time).
>
> Besides, the police (a majority of them in Maryland, not
> quite so many in northern Virginia or Pennsylvania) tailgate.
>
> If I get pulled over for 85 MPH on I-95 at 3:00 AM when there
> is nobody within five miles but me and the state trooper,
> it's the same mathematically assigned penalty -- the same
> violation -- as if I get pulled over at 85 MPH at 3:

Re: OT: Speed Cameras

[Frits Wüthrich]

We now have cameras to monitor the speed cameras, so the shooter can be
fined as well.


On Wed, 2004-02-11 at 01:30, Herb Chong wrote:
> they did a pilot project in Texas a few years back. gave up when all of the
> test cameras ran out. all of them were shot to bits.
> 
> Herb...
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "pentax list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 3:35 PM
> Subject: Re: OT: Speed Cameras
> 
> 
> > Filming various speed cameras that have been vandalised and even chopped
> > down in Oxfordshire.
> >
> > <http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/ae_news_story.php?id=32564>
> >
> > Captain Gatso strikes again - there's even a guy called Angle Grinder Man
> > - I filmed a camera today that had been neatly severed from its moorings!
> > these guys are serious, oh boy.
> 
-- 
Frits Wüthrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: Even further OT and a rant to boot (Re: OT: Speed cameras (Re: taxi in motion))

[Ryan Lee]

Not trying to be pedantic, but "Every k over is a killer" I think you
meant.. While on the topic of cars- yesterday half past midnight I was
cycling back and passed thru Queen St and they closed the road off, and left
and right of it they had colorful fluorescent tubes every 10 metres or so.
Saw a film crew too and I asked a traffic controller what was happening.
Apparently they were filming an ad for the latest Mitsubishi Lancer (it even
had European license plates!). I contemplated the possibility of getting
home to get the camera and a tripod to get a shot to slip into that 'taxi in
motion' thread, but decided against it because I'd probably have been chased
away by the on site security, or hassled by dodgy sorts that late. Oh well..

Cheers,
Ryan

- Original Message - 
From: "John Coyle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 5:27 PM
Subject: Re: Even further OT and a rant to boot (Re: OT: Speed cameras (Re:
taxi in motion))


> Glenn, you touched on one of my pet peeves.  In Queensland, the current
> slogan is "Every k over kills" - catchy, huh?

Re: OT: Speed Cameras

[Bob W]

Hi,

> I reckon that within 30 years it will be illegal to operate a ground car
> manually.

we'll all have personal jet packs by then!

-- 
up, up and away!
 Bob

Re: OT: Speed Cameras

[Peter Alling]

I knew I like Texas for some reason...

At 07:30 PM 2/10/04, you wrote:
they did a pilot project in Texas a few years back. gave up when all of the
test cameras ran out. all of them were shot to bits.
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "pentax list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 3:35 PM
Subject: Re: OT: Speed Cameras
> Filming various speed cameras that have been vandalised and even chopped
> down in Oxfordshire.
>
> <http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/ae_news_story.php?id=32564>
>
> Captain Gatso strikes again - there's even a guy called Angle Grinder Man
> - I filmed a camera today that had been neatly severed from its moorings!
> these guys are serious, oh boy.
I drink to make other people interesting.
-- George Jean Nathan  

Re: Even further OT and a rant to boot (Re: OT: Speed cameras (Re: taxi in motion))

[John Coyle]

Glenn, you touched on one of my pet peeves.  In Queensland, the current
slogan is "Every k over kills" - catchy, huh?
But my Honda has been to the repairers 8 times -
My wife caught the front spoiler on a foot-high post in a car park - twice!
I scratched the rear bumper on a low wall in our driveway.
Banged from behind going round a corner at maybe 20kmh by a tailgater.
Banged from behind on a straight road at 15 kmh approaching traffic lights.
Reversed into while stationary at lights
Reversed into while backing out of a car parking bay.
T-boned at 20 kmh in a car park by a driver leaving a parking spot.

Not one of these has happened because of speed!

On the other hand:
Tyre valve blew out at 135 kmh on a country road - no problem, cruised on
three wheels into a fortuitously -located service station only 80 metres
away.  My nephews piled out, pit-stopped the car, we were away again in < 5
minutes.  No damage excpet to tyre.
On the freeway, 110 kmh, motor-cyclist loses it and slides across 5 lanes.
Van in from of me starts doing the rhumba and winds up sideways on in the
median strip.  Car behind me is standing on it's front wheels and the
driver's visibly having palpitations.  No damage to anyone, including the
motor-cyclist.
Multiple times - blind man alongside me changes lanes - I must be invisible,
'cos he wants my space, and he ain't gonna let my being there stop him
having it
John Coyle
Praxis Data Solutions (www.epraxisdata.com)
Brisbane, Australia
- Original Message - 
From: "D. Glenn Arthur Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 3:33 PM
Subject: Even further OT and a rant to boot (Re: OT: Speed cameras (Re: taxi
in motion))


> Even further OT because I'm not even going to mentioon the cameras...
>
> Bob W wrote:
> > I heard on the radio today, as I was speeding home from work, that
> > only about 7% of road accidents here are caused by the driver
> > speeding. I can't find anything on the BBC website to back this up.
> > But it's likely to cause a few more grumbles about the police
> > (mis)directing their efforts towards the motorist instead of going
> > after the real perps. Of course, the assumption there could be
> > unfounded: the drivers could still be the cause of the accident - but
> > not by speeding.
>
> I don't have a forest of data to refer to, but I spend enough
> time on the road that personal observation is not insignificant.
>
> Counting up the accidents and close calls that I've observed or
> been in, there have been very few in which speed was the only
> meaningful factor.  If you allow me to exclude the stupid things
> I did before age 21, I think the number drops to zero or one.
>
> If you count the ones where speed was a _contributing_ factor
> to the accident or close call having occurred, you get a handful
> more, but if you really want to see lots of speed-related ones,
> you have to add in the ones where speed was not a factor in
> _causing_ the problem, but did make the consequences or potential
> _consequences_ _of_ the event worse.
>
> Of the ones where speed was part of the cause, about a third
> of those had all vehicles travelling below the posted speed
> limit.  ("Too fast for conditions", but not exceeding the
> speed limit.)  In my not-so-humble opinion, many of the rest
> were really due to "too fast for conditions" and not the fact
> that someone was over the posted limit.
>
> What _does_ cause most of the near-misses and collisions that
> I've seen?
>
> Failure to signal lane changes, often coupled with...
>
> Failure to check mirrors before lane changes
>
> Tailgating
>
> Inattention (it would've been a safe following distance
> if you'd noticed the brake lights when they came on)
>
> Failure to heed traffic control devices (stoplights,
> stop signs, roadway markings)
>
> Road rage (convenient that we have a name for it now),
> showing off, and "neither rule of law nor rule of
> ettiquette apply to me today because everybody should
> be able to read my mind and tell how much of a hurry
> I'm in right now".
>
> If the police made no other change than to shift all the effort
> they currently expend on catching speeders to catching tailgaters,
> that alone would make our highways far safer.  If they also go
> after improper lane changes, intensely enough that people learn
> to be afraid to make those mistakes, the change would be amazing.
> Even if they dropped speed enforcement altogether on controlled-access
> highways to do so.  (Speeding in residential areas and business
> districts might still need to be policed.)
>
> But speeding is extremely easy to _qua

Re: OT: Speed Cameras

[Peter Alling]

As a software engineer you don't know how much that prospect frightens me...

At 03:35 PM 2/10/04, Cotty wrote:
On 10/2/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:




I reckon that within 30 years it will be illegal to operate a ground car
manually.


Cheers,
  Cotty
___/\__
||   (O)   |  People, Places, Pastiche
||=|  www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
I drink to make other people interesting.
-- George Jean Nathan  

Even further OT and a rant to boot (Re: OT: Speed cameras (Re: taxi in motion))

[D. Glenn Arthur Jr.]

Even further OT because I'm not even going to mentioon the cameras...

Bob W wrote:
> I heard on the radio today, as I was speeding home from work, that
> only about 7% of road accidents here are caused by the driver
> speeding. I can't find anything on the BBC website to back this up.
> But it's likely to cause a few more grumbles about the police
> (mis)directing their efforts towards the motorist instead of going
> after the real perps. Of course, the assumption there could be
> unfounded: the drivers could still be the cause of the accident - but
> not by speeding.

I don't have a forest of data to refer to, but I spend enough
time on the road that personal observation is not insignificant.

Counting up the accidents and close calls that I've observed or
been in, there have been very few in which speed was the only
meaningful factor.  If you allow me to exclude the stupid things
I did before age 21, I think the number drops to zero or one.

If you count the ones where speed was a _contributing_ factor
to the accident or close call having occurred, you get a handful
more, but if you really want to see lots of speed-related ones,
you have to add in the ones where speed was not a factor in
_causing_ the problem, but did make the consequences or potential
_consequences_ _of_ the event worse.

Of the ones where speed was part of the cause, about a third
of those had all vehicles travelling below the posted speed
limit.  ("Too fast for conditions", but not exceeding the
speed limit.)  In my not-so-humble opinion, many of the rest
were really due to "too fast for conditions" and not the fact
that someone was over the posted limit.

What _does_ cause most of the near-misses and collisions that
I've seen?

Failure to signal lane changes, often coupled with...

Failure to check mirrors before lane changes

Tailgating

Inattention (it would've been a safe following distance
if you'd noticed the brake lights when they came on)

Failure to heed traffic control devices (stoplights,
stop signs, roadway markings)

Road rage (convenient that we have a name for it now),
showing off, and "neither rule of law nor rule of
ettiquette apply to me today because everybody should
be able to read my mind and tell how much of a hurry
I'm in right now".

If the police made no other change than to shift all the effort
they currently expend on catching speeders to catching tailgaters,
that alone would make our highways far safer.  If they also go
after improper lane changes, intensely enough that people learn
to be afraid to make those mistakes, the change would be amazing.
Even if they dropped speed enforcement altogether on controlled-access
highways to do so.  (Speeding in residential areas and business
districts might still need to be policed.)

But speeding is extremely easy to _quantify_.  It's easy to
assign a number to, and it's easy to _measure_.  So it's an
easy ticket.  It's all scientifical and stuff:  "Your honor,
the defendant was travelling at 86 MPH in a 65 MPH zone using
RADAR."   "That's 21 MPH over the posted speed, so it's one
more point and a lot more money than it would've been at 84
MPH.  Guilty.  Next!"  (I exaggerate slightly, but just try 
to raise doubts about the measurement in traffic court and
see how much like that it winds up sounding.)  A scientific
instrument generated a NUMBER which means it's _objective_
and _mathematical_, whether that number is _meaningful_ or
not (and without any question of the _precision_ of the 
number a lot of the time).  

Besides, the police (a majority of them in Maryland, not 
quite so many in northern Virginia or Pennsylvania) tailgate.

If I get pulled over for 85 MPH on I-95 at 3:00 AM when there
is nobody within five miles but me and the state trooper, 
it's the same mathematically assigned penalty -- the same
violation -- as if I get pulled over at 85 MPH at 3:00 PM when
that highway is starting to fill up for rush hour.  Meanwhile,
the fellow who tailgates me at a three-quarter of a second
following distance at 75 MPH for four miles can do so right 
next to a cop at either hour, and he won't get pulled over for 
it.  If he gets pulled over for something else, tailgating 
_might_ get added on, but he won't be pulled over _for_tailgating_.
And the person who cuts me off without signalling, going 55 MPH 
while I'm doing the limit at 65, forcing me onto the shoulder 
because there's not enough room for me to avoid him with only
my brake pedal, will only be charged for that if we actually
collide.

Now if I'm going 85 MPH when the slowpoke pulls out in front
of me, speed is a factor.  Not the only cause, but a factor.
But if I'm doing the speed limit, he's still put me at risk,
and excessive speed doesn't come into play.  If you want 
funding for speed cameras and an excuse for writing more
tickets, the number you cite is the number of accidents where
"speed was a factor", n

Re: OT: Speed Cameras

[Steve Jolly]

Aric wrote:
So much for the punishment fitting the crime.
I don't see why fining someone a fixed fraction of their income (for 
example) instead of a fixed amount is a worse way of making the 
punishment fit the crime.

Next thing you know, they'll
be handing down longer prison sentences for people with long-lived
ancestors.  Shades of Harrison Bergeron.
People already (sometimes) get let out of gaol early if they're dying... 
I don't see the idea being taken much further though. :-)

S

OT: Speed Cameras

[Aric]

So much for the punishment fitting the crime.  Next thing you know, they'll
be handing down longer prison sentences for people with long-lived
ancestors.  Shades of Harrison Bergeron.

Aric

-Original Message-
From: Rob Brigham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 6:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: OT: Speed Cameras


If you're flush with money then maybe best to avoid speeding in Finland...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3477285.stm

Jussi Salonoja, the 27-year-old heir to a family-owned sausage empire, was
given the £116,000 ticket after being caught driving 80km/h in a 40km/h
zone!

Re: OT: Speed Cameras

[Herb Chong]

they did a pilot project in Texas a few years back. gave up when all of the
test cameras ran out. all of them were shot to bits.

Herb...
- Original Message - 
From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "pentax list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 3:35 PM
Subject: Re: OT: Speed Cameras


> Filming various speed cameras that have been vandalised and even chopped
> down in Oxfordshire.
>
> <http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/ae_news_story.php?id=32564>
>
> Captain Gatso strikes again - there's even a guy called Angle Grinder Man
> - I filmed a camera today that had been neatly severed from its moorings!
> these guys are serious, oh boy.

Re: OT: Speed Cameras

[mike wilson]

Hi,

Cotty wrote:
> 
> 
> Learned some interesting facts - there are nearly 300 speed cameras in
> the Thames Valley Police area, and in Oxfordshire alone, only 6 of these
> are loaded with recording cameras at any one time ...

Fewer in Northumberland 8-)

> 
> That's less than 10% of cameras (TVP encompasses Berkshire and
> Buckinghamshire as well) active - but you don't know which ones until
> they flash :-)

They _all_ flash.  But only some have film

> I reckon that within 30 years it will be illegal to operate a ground car
> manually.

You are certainly in the right time frame.  Given the increase in
traffic, I will be perfectly happy to let a machine do it for me by
then.

mike

RE: OT: Speed Cameras

[Rob Brigham]

If you're flush with money then maybe best to avoid speeding in Finland...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3477285.stm

Jussi Salonoja, the 27-year-old heir to a family-owned sausage empire, was given the 
£116,000 ticket after being caught driving 80km/h in a 40km/h zone!

> -Original Message-
> From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: 10 February 2004 20:35
> To: pentax list
> Subject: Re: OT: Speed Cameras
> 
> 
> On 10/2/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
> 
> >Imagine how much in fines that added up to!? I've been 
> through the M62 
> >and A616 ones - the cameras are quite distinctive and visible from a 
> >long way off. They can potentially also do some quite devious stuff. 
> >For example the threshold in a 50mph zone might be set at 58mph, but 
> >they could be set to remember all offenders travelling over 
> 55mph and 
> >if you do it say 3 times, they will fine you (habitual speeder). I 
> >suspect the golden age of the car is truely over in this country at 
> >least :-(
> 
> After all this chat about speed cameras (and flashing), what 
> did I do today? Speed cameras!
> 
> Filming various speed cameras that have been vandalised and 
> even chopped down in Oxfordshire.
> 
<http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/ae_news_story.php?id=32564>

Captain Gatso strikes again - there's even a guy called Angle Grinder Man
- I filmed a camera today that had been neatly severed from its moorings! these guys 
are serious, oh boy.

Learned some interesting facts - there are nearly 300 speed cameras in the Thames 
Valley Police area, and in Oxfordshire alone, only 6 of these are loaded with 
recording cameras at any one time ...

That's less than 10% of cameras (TVP encompasses Berkshire and Buckinghamshire as 
well) active - but you don't know which ones until they flash :-)

Not counting mobile cameras.

Last summer I filmed one of the mobile operators at the spot where he did two bikers 
and recorded the fastest ever speed on UK roads (that a speeding offence was recorded) 
- 144 mph. I looked down the laser sight and it was v. interesting - easy to pick off 
oncoming traffic. He told me where his favoured spots are ;-)

Don't matter much, I'm in a Discovery and that's 0-60 in 12 weeks, LOL.

I reckon that within 30 years it will be illegal to operate a ground car manually.




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   |  People, Places, Pastiche
||=|  www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk

Re: OT: Speed Cameras

[Cotty]

On 10/2/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:

>Imagine how much in fines that added up to!? I've been through the M62 and
>A616 ones - the cameras are quite distinctive and visible from a long way
>off. They can potentially also do some quite devious stuff. For example
>the threshold in a 50mph zone might be set at 58mph, but they could be
>set to remember all offenders travelling over 55mph and if you do it say
>3 times, they will fine you (habitual speeder). I suspect the golden age
>of the car is truely over in this country at least :-(

After all this chat about speed cameras (and flashing), what did I do
today? Speed cameras!

Filming various speed cameras that have been vandalised and even chopped
down in Oxfordshire.



Captain Gatso strikes again - there's even a guy called Angle Grinder Man
- I filmed a camera today that had been neatly severed from its moorings!
these guys are serious, oh boy.

Learned some interesting facts - there are nearly 300 speed cameras in
the Thames Valley Police area, and in Oxfordshire alone, only 6 of these
are loaded with recording cameras at any one time ...

That's less than 10% of cameras (TVP encompasses Berkshire and
Buckinghamshire as well) active - but you don't know which ones until
they flash :-)

Not counting mobile cameras.

Last summer I filmed one of the mobile operators at the spot where he did
two bikers and recorded the fastest ever speed on UK roads (that a
speeding offence was recorded) - 144 mph. I looked down the laser sight
and it was v. interesting - easy to pick off oncoming traffic. He told me
where his favoured spots are ;-)

Don't matter much, I'm in a Discovery and that's 0-60 in 12 weeks, LOL.

I reckon that within 30 years it will be illegal to operate a ground car
manually.




Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__
||   (O)   |  People, Places, Pastiche
||=|  www.macads.co.uk/snaps
_
Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk

OT: Speed cameras (Re: taxi in motion

[Bob W]

Hi,

> 99% of vehicular accidents in Australia are speed related, keeps the plebs 
> nodding OK and the revenue stream flowing.

motorists here have given the police a lot of stick over recent years
for using the cameras as revenue-collection devices. So now they are
mostly highly visible, which seems to make them more effective as
speed reducers.

I heard on the radio today, as I was speeding home from work, that
only about 7% of road accidents here are caused by the driver
speeding. I can't find anything on the BBC website to back this up.
But it's likely to cause a few more grumbles about the police
(mis)directing their efforts towards the motorist instead of going
after the real perps. Of course, the assumption there could be
unfounded: the drivers could still be the cause of the accident - but
not by speeding.

-- 
Cheers,
 Bob