New UK speed cameras unavoidable
Stop flashing me
SPEED CAMERAS, no one really likes them, but here we are again facing another litter of cameras - and this time they say we can't possibly avoid them.
This is all well and good - a pat on the back for making our roads safer places to drive - but do we really need to be monitored Big Brother stylie wherever we go?
Apparently so. These new cameras known as Specs3 will appear in clusters of 50 working in a network and will monitor every driver's average speed as they travel.
Similar cameras have been deployed in recent years, mainly on motorways with ongoing road works, however these were easily avoidable by coming off at a junction before the next one caught you - these new and improved versions will be pasted at every entrance and exit meaning, short of ploughing through a corn field, you can't escape.
These cameras can be placed up to 15 miles apart from each other and still automatically read number plates and transmit this data in an instant to a penalty processing centre.
Police have trialled the cameras in London already and say that the results were promising. A second set of trials will conclude in Northern Ireland this week.
Road Safety Minister, Jim Fitzpatrick said this week that , “When the Home Office approves the equipment, I think there will be great interest among the safety-camera partnerships. They will give a more sophisticated edge to cameras than the blunt instrument we have at the moment.”
Speed cameras have been proven to be helpful as the number of casualties on the M1 halved after the original average-speed cameras were introduced on a contraflow between junctions 6a and 10.
However, there are also many convincing arguments against them, such as the fact that you can get stuck behind a very slow driver and get caught for ove rtaking.
The Association of British Drivers, which campaigns against speed cameras also made an interesting point about the Specs3 as they would make, “People put the car in cruise control and the mind in neutral. It’s so boring driving through these sections at a constant slow speed that people are going to drop off.”
Specs3 will cost typically £300,000 per network and are likely to be deployed first on long rural A roads, while some local authorities have plans to use Specs3 to enforce 20mph limits on networks of residential roads - yippee we hear you cry.
The Home Office is expected to approve this technology by the beginning of next year, the first fines issued by the time we motor off on our summer holidays - watch out for them as they will be appearing in their hundreds. µ
L'Inq
Times
Comments
Good
I can just see a dozen posts saying "why? what's the point? please no!" etc. etc.But one disagrees, those sort of comments come from those who will break the speed-limit, and as a driver who stays below the limit (aka LAW) I welcome these cameras. One doesn't see a problem with a system that helps prevents boy-racers and the like.
However...the cost is the only issue I have, I wonder how much it'll cost to have these made/installed.
who wants to play!
betcha there will be many a person trying to find the most effective way of taking down the entire system via 1 camera.camera's are fine when there is kids ect around, or in area's where there are dangers to enforce the limit.
But those who know the roads and when there are dangers around will get fed up of always having to do the 20mph speed limit.
I personaly thing it's great fun to wind back the accelerator on my bike when i know/can see the road is clear of obsticles and dangers.
Yeah right
What a bloody joke. If it is meant to stop fatalities, then why don't release actual numbers!Not all fatalities can be stopped by cameras. It is unavoidable that if you have a million cars on the road 10 will have some kind of problem. So the question is, when you look at the numbers in perspective of say. The number of fatalities in proportion to cars on the road, in proportion to the cost of a single camera, to the amount of revenue it generates with citations. You would probably see that the real reason for this cameras is not to protect people. At that price it would be a long time before the goverment paid back its investement. A better thing to do would be to make cars safer, how is that by adding things like rollcages and other modification a car becomes more secure. Even if the camera is meant to give citations, it would still be like killing one mosquito with a fogger.
remember it's for your own good...
So, looking down the road, so to speak, you'll be living with networks of cameras automatically transmitting tens of thousands of licence plate numbers to a centralized database every hour of every day.Seems like you can either learn to enjoy life in your masters' fishbowl, stand up for yourselves, or emigrate to a country whose government still has some respect for privacy (or fear of its citizens).
Wrong approach
Ok, maybe I'm missing something here, but why do the government allow cars to be sold that do 2x the speed limit plus. If, according to their laws, no cars should ever go over 70mph why don't they simply force the car manufacturers to not make/sell cars that can? (Obvious really, they'd make less cash from the car industry & less cash from fines.)On the other hand my flatmate regularly motorway drives at 120+ and has never had a fine, so the cameras obviously don't work that well!
Another stealth tax
Americans have the right idea: rebel or shoot the cameras. Enough with the proverbial British stiff upper lip. FIGHT BACK!! I agree with Missingxtension that the stats aren't easily obtainable because they don't support the "facts" that speed is a major cause of accidents. And the cost of each network of cameras could employ thousands of police who could stop knife crime, muggings, etc. Driver are the easy target... again.My 67 year old mother-in-law thought that only hooligans got speeding tickets until she got one for driving 34 mph in an empty and wide 30 mph road at 7AM on Sunday morning on an empty road to get her newspaper. Now she is anti-cameras with 6 points on her licence (got her both ways in 10 minutes!!!) Hate to be perverse, but until all the "good citizens" experience this camera tax, the government will keep slipping it to us.
I hate these things
These things are going to be upgraded eventually to include MOT & Insurance & driver licensing capabilities. Great I hear everyone shout, but hold on to your elations, I bought a new car last week phoned the insurance got it changed over but it took 6 yes thats right 6 days to register on the insurance database. So theoretically if these cameras had the other capabilites installed I'd get a bl**dy fine through the door that I'd then have to fight for doing absolutely nothing wrong. These things are so shonky at reading no plates that most speeding motorists arent pursued for fines becasue they cant be 100% certain it read it right & dont believe the crap you see on TV police shows their in car anpr is rubbish according to a traffic officer I know. I'm all for technology making roads safer but only when it works properly!@ TheDon
no cost to the taxpayer TD, googles funding it for their next money cow, theyll stream the live (or should that be dead ??) action of the aftermath of serious crashes to the peeps in the tailback on the motorway so they dont get bored :O)
More profit making scams
To "TheDon", I wouldn't worry too much about the costs they only put them in to make profit. If they didn't make profit they wouldn't bother. If you believe the hype that they cut road accidents then more fool you. Personally I think they should spend the cash putting more police officers out there, knife and gun crime on the increase but what the hell lets put a few more cameras out there and make some cash!Convincing arguments?
"However, there are also many convincing arguments against them, such as the fact that you can get stuck behind a very slow driver and get caught for ove rtaking."Erm, no. If you're stuck behind a very slow driver, then once you overtake them, you can hog it *without* getting caught, because the equipment measures average speed.
So the "convincing argument" is actually the other way around, because the equipment *encourages* speeding after being stuck behind a slow vehicle.
Given that the local coppers will be "taking refreshment", believing their jobs to be done already, there will be more artics and agricultural tractors speeding.
So yeah, it's a completely bad idea, but not for the reasons you mention.
In the future...
... people won't drive cars any more, the cars will drive themselves. The cars will negotiate amongst themselves things like micro trip planning and there will be no need for traffic signals or stop signs or anything like that, which will be too inefficient. The cars will drive from point A to point B without stopping and will flow around each other and there will never be another traffic jam or gas wasted idling.People will still be allowed to drive but only for fun like on go-kart tracks or on the computer. For instance, I never get stuck in a traffic jam on Gran Turismo 5 so it is much less frustrating!
cops on the beat
Why not just put coppers back on the beat as it was once upon a time a go ?Anyway who is going to fund this technology in this recession when banks keep going bust?
Why do we all sit back and take it?
Hmmm. I notice that the link goes straight to the penalty processing center.Having read everything in the report, I see that after an initial outlay, this will generate a lot of money for whoever owns it.
I see nothing about how it's actually going to improve safety.
Another lie
Just like the old cameras, these will not fine tailgaters as long as they stay within the pathetic speed limit! Never mind them driving two feet behind you... And the rule of dealing with them by slowing down, does not work for bikes! So a biker escaping one of these idiots could get fined. Anyway, where else do you have such a pathetic speed limit on motorways?!Alternaitve dangerous driving
I've moved to Canada where the speed limit is 110kph (or about 70mph), and while most people generally do between 100-130kph (or 65-85mph) the real danger is the monotony of cruise control over long distances (especially on the straight roads of the Canadian prairies)You see people doing all sorts of things instead of paying attention to where they're going, I've even seen people reading!
Seems like these cameras will be replacing one danger with another.
Speed Limiters
As has been mentioned, if the government really wants to clamp down on motorway speeding, why not limit every car sold in the UK to 70mph?No speed camera network needed, job done. It couldn't possibly be for the revenue from fines could it? If Speeding on motorways is such a problem, don't sell cars that can go over 70.
Now we'll have motorists who spend more time staring at the speedo rather than the road.
Spec creep incoming
Never mind worrying about the speed cameras being used to catch speeding motorists. The end-point is to have them linked to a national database to use their automatic number-plate recognition talents to keep track of every vehicle in the country.excellent!
Seeing as specs cameras picture the front of your vehicle and I ride a motorcycle, I fully endorse them. Perhaps they could replace all the GATSOs with them? Please? Maybe it will inhibit all the dangerous driving habits like fiddling with radio/GPS/phone/kids, shooting out of junctions without looking or sudden manouvers without signalling. Over the years, one of the things I've noticed about obviously drunk drivers is their strict adherence to speed limits. It really will make the roads such a safer place.If speed is such a vital control, perhaps all new cars should be fitted with a GPS speed limiter which would actually stop drivers from exceeding the limit?
What a waste of public money at this crucial credit crunch.
Think about it all the government services are the same as they have been, very poor as compared to private.The other guy blair always chat poo, about pumping billions of cash into public services. Only now today (10th) i hear some of these public services have put millions of pounds into icelandic banks.... now maybe it's just me, but what the hell are they doing with all this extra cash?
They should either employ more people and pay them otherwise give the cash back to central government. How are they able to invest all this public cash in some foreign country and now lost it all.... what a shame, good. SOBs deserve it.
Transport for London had some millions and police had 20million i think.
Developing countrys have corruption and all but these - so called democracys are not perfect either!
Investors are loosing faith in their stupid system, i reckon everyone should just take their sh*t out and keep it in the floorboard or something like that. Before these greedy retards gumble it and loose it all!
i've said plenty.
bye.
Jon.
Not Good...
Typical first comment -- "its the LAW, I drive within the LAW" and so on. I'm fortunate to live in a part of the world that has an enlightened attitude towards speed. Its not just some abstract number but a guideline, a guideline that varies either side of the nominal value depending on conditions. If I speed I get a ticket, but its really for 'excessive' or 'unsafe' speed not because I exceeded some magic number.The most effective anti-speeding tool we have is a display of your speed that lights up as you approach it. It doesn't generate any revenue but its cheap to put up and it works (solar powered, of course). We're also required to set speed limits at reasonable levels if we wish to have radar enforcement -- no setting a 30mph limit on a dual carrageway and nailing people driving at 34mph, that's illegal (has been since the 30s, stops people from using this sort of thing as a revenue generator).
that's all well and good....
...but when are they going to invent and "old duffer" camera? the elderly account for WAY more accidents than the terminaly lead-footed.Revenue Raising
This is just another tax to squeeze people of their hard earned cash so that the government can waste it.PLEASE
DONT EXPORT THESE TO THE USfurk em
Destroy all cameras. Paint em, burn em or cut them down. Ignore all tickets sent out, its too hard for them to chase them all up so they let you get away with it. There are loads of ways to get out of tickets. Use every method to say ferk off. You take this lying down next they will have cameras in your house! This Govt is big brother and need to be slapped. I dont ever remember asking for this and we got it anyway. I know lots of people dont want it, so it gets bigger. We are having the piss taken out of us.How to Get RID of Liquor Store.
Believe it or not, alcoholsales congregate simple criminal element. I found in My Citie ransackings, that install Camera aimed at Liquor stores' corner, stop signs & bus stop are enough. Liquor Store Boards UP.Maybe BEST Use of Camera Survielence2Date.
drashek
Time to leave
These cameras will make far more than they cost, if they won’t make more money than the current cameras they would not be introduced, cameras have no judgement. It is far more risky driving at 70 through fog, rain and snow than driving at 90 in good conditions. There are worse offences constantly occurring on the motorways, tailgating, overtaking on the left and weaving in and out of traffic are all more likely to result in an accident than simple "excessive speed" however these rarely result in prosecution as they are expensive to detect and prosecute.2 problems...
1 - my car's speedo starts at 15 mph and god knows how accurate it is even then!2 - my CBR's number plate is on the back of the bike ;) thank you retarded policeman! :D
NOT Advocating
I don't condone the practice, but where I live the application of "paintball graffiti" applied to these puppies has gotten to be a real game. Apparently the "kids" have figured out what the capture angle of the lens is and can avoid being seen. I've never seen it done, but I suspect shooting straight up and hitting the hood is pretty effective. They're courting personal disaster in my opinion but so far the game's afoot and the local authorities just can't keep up.Rev.1
Paintball anyone?How willl the Brits destroy these?
There's a website devoted to posting pictures of destroyed "Gatso's". Pretty cool that people destroy them. Check out the site for some funny pictures of these burned, blown up and run over cameras.In the US we don't have many of these but if they try the result will be the same. Burned, blown up and run over cameras.
Motorists Against Detection
http://www.speedcam.co.uk/welcome.htm
@Another stealth tax
"keep slipping it to us"BOHICA
Bend Over Here It Comes Again
Joke
These things are total joke, they are placed in spots that are completely useless, as for usin g them to enforce 20mph limits theres no wonder the country is congested if we have this rubbish to contend with. These things cause people to have to sit and constantly check their speedo's which makes the whole process of driving more dangerous.Stealth Tax - Yes
Waste of Public Funds - Yes
Sucess Unproven - Yes
And im sure people will sit and comment well i dont break the speed limit, its all very well saying that, but these things are begging for an accident to be caused by people trying to keep to the speed limit and not going slightly over! Ridiculous.
We've always been at war with East Asia.
All I have to say is, I'm glad they aren't here in America. Otherwise, I'd join the fight in vandalizing these wastes of our tax dollars.I suppose the difference is that here, we have guns. Silenced Glock 17, anyone?
Oh dear here we go again...
I, like "missingxtension" have been looking for a definitive Official figure on road deaths and injuries (KSI) so far apart from a few headline percentages there seems to little data readily available. Taking one little gem I did find much beloved of the reduce speed NOW brigade (“A 1mph change in average speed causes a 5% change in accidents” - Transport Research Laboratory report "Speed, Speed Limits and Accidents" published 1994 (ref S211G/RB). Perhaps everyone reducing their average speed by 20mph would solve road accidents forever ;-)On a slightly less frivolous note I fail to see how a scamera system that has no concept of weather, road conditions would be more effective at improving road safety than say for instance, returning trained traffic police to the numbers they were. Driving down an otherwise empty motorway at 78MPH on clear dry summer evening would generate a ticket, doing 70MPH (assuming it is NSL of course) in the fog on a busy dual track A road wouldn’t... Police officers are also rumored to be far better at spotting those unable to understand “hands free”, the drunk being careful not to exceed 25mph while wobbling all over the road or the car which even Arthur Daly would be embarrassed to sell to be driven on the road.
Sensible traffic laws, speed limits and enforcement I will accept (if sometimes grudgingly), blatant attempts at revenue generation get my back up.
Unbelievable...
Big brother is watching you. They check our spending habits, follow us round city centres with cctv and now they will be able to track us wherever we drive. A quick look on a central database and they can find out where you are! This gives me the creeps.lol@UK
Why bother calling yourselves a democracy now? No wonder i left such a ridiculous place.W#nkers!
I hope someone builds some private roads with no speed limits, just a toll. I would gladly pay to be able to let me hair down and foot down.20mph limits are ridiculous on main roads, the side roads are 30mph but the large main road is 20mph. Absurd.
Fit every politician's car, their wives and kids cars with constant speed surveillance equipment. Also fit it to every police officer, local government employee etc. If they don't speed then we can follow their example.
Alternatives
With modern technology there are better ways of keeping drivers to the speed limit. Unfortunately none put money in the government's, council's or police authorities pockets. It would be so easy to install a transmitter which sends a signal to a receiver in the car, telling the receiver what the speed limit is for that stretch of road. The signal is changed when the car enters the next speed zone. Should the car be speeding (easily assessed from either a gps signal or directly from the speedo, this speed signal being couple to the receiver) an alarm in the vehicle would sound, alerting the driver to the fact he is going to fast. The only way of silencing the alarm being to get the speed back under the speed limit. This ensures the driver's attention is fixed on the road and it's hazards and not constantly watching the speedo. Attention to the actual driving is increased and therefore the roads made safer. Of course the gatso and other gizmos still have their place but making the driver aware that he / she has slipped over the speed limit at the time is better than a week or so later when you get the fine through the post. Combatting speeding is best done the time it happens not after it happened.Oh and where can we install the transmitters and get power for them? Lamposts would be convenient, for the rural roads, well speed is usually pretty constant on them and if it does change there is usually a signpost (often lit) so the power is there, small wind turbines / solar panel would be more than enough to generate required power elsewhere. This method would also free up a lot of time for the courts etc and funds wasted there could be used for far better purposes.
there is a petition... atleast its a start to show your opnion
http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/noavspeedcameras/Too slow for me
Why don't they just skip this entire money-wasting scheme, and fit the GPSs and computer-control systems in our cars now. No more accidents, no more drink/drug/mobile-driving.I saw it on Top Gear, so it must be possible. ;)
Waste of money
Here's why it's a waste of money:1. Less cops on the roads so while they fine the fully paid up speeder, the bloke with no insurance, no brakes and the kid dancing on the back seat while they are too busy on the phone to tell it to belt up goes unhindered as long as he drives below 77mph.
2. Paperwork cock ups, it happens all the time so when you use one of these roads and ANPR is used you'll get a PCN drop on your mate and HAVE to contest it, unless your insurance and road tax are kosher
3. Stopping boy racers: It won't, do you think those boy racers are so stupid they'll just race on the motorways? No, the'll go somewhere else where there are no cameras and race there.
4. Speed Kills: I don't get this one, I understand if you hit a wall at 100 and the same wall at 10 mph you'll stand more of a chance of dying at high speed. But that isn't how it happens in real life is it? Poor arguement I know but statistics don't really bear this one out in reality.
It's a tax, pure and simple. Those that say 'good' well you will get caught by it one day whether that's mistakenly forgetting your insurance or tax or inadvertently speeding.
"REGRESSION TO THE MEAN"
"Speed cameras have been proven to be helpful as the number of casualties on the M1 halved after the original average-speed cameras were introduced on a contraflow between junctions 6a and 10."And what of the 4 year report of speed camera effectiveness letting slip that typically only ~20% of the fall can be attributed to the 'scheme effect' (and that includes other measures too).
"Proven" my ass!
JUST SAY NO!
http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/No2netspdcams/