Topic: Arnachy in the U.K.

[BeSeeingYou]

I found this website devoted to the destruction of speed cameras in the U.K.  Any of our British members want to admit to any pyrotechnics?  

There is a picture on page 4 of two guys trying to down one with a motorcycle.


http://www.speedcam.co.uk/gatso.htm

[scottly]

They just sentenced a guy in AZ for killing a civilian, who was working in a photo radar vehicle. There were lots of anarchy incidents here, also. The state is pulling the cameras. They had hoped to raise money with them, but it seems the only profits went to the contracted suppliers. Hundreds of thousands of tickets have been issued over the last few years.   

[BeSeeingYou]

It seems the main complaint on that website is that some are located/hidden behind speed limit signs where there is a change in speed and other questionable locations with the main objective being revenue generation.  Those units are the main target of the vandals.

[scottly]

Yes, the cameras are all about generating revenue. There is one on Hwy 69, just North of here. I noticed, when they first placed it, that it was just after a gentle rise flattened out, so as to catch people caught unaware that their speed had increased as they crested the rise. Cruise-control has saved me several times. On my way to town today, there was a ladder propped up on one of the posts, and a van parked near-by. I think they were in the process of dismantling it.

[rhos1355]

I wonder why viewing those images of burnt out gatsos warms the cockles of my heart.
Am I, deep down an anarchist?

[Gordon]

While I don't like the idea of being monitored by machinery, I know that I'm supposed to slow down to the new, lower speed limit before I get to the new, lower speed limit sign.  That's something they teach in driver's ed.  Is this not the same in the UK?  I also know that coming down a hill or cresting the top of a hill is no excuse for exceeding the speed limit. 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the use of speed cameras, but those are some pretty poor reasons for saying they're a bad idea.  Those are the same excuses most drivers would give when caught doing the exact same thing by a flesh-and-blood cop.

It's an interesting topic, and I'm very grateful that I don't have to deal with too many speed cameras where I live.  The only one I see on a regular basis is in a van sitting on the tree-lined median of a wide, straight stretch of road that cuts through town with no side streets intersecting, and a speed limit of 30mph.  I regularly go 40-45mph on that road on my motorcycle and give a wave as the camera flashes, but I never go over 35 in my car because there's a license plate on the front.  Regardless of what vehicle I'm in, though, if I get a ticket for speeding I'll pay up and not complain because the speed limit is posted and I know the risk I'm taking.         

[flybox1]

we dont have speed cameras here, per say, but we do have more and more intersection cameras, catching drivers running intersections on red lights.
They have a motion sensor and snap a picture of the vehicle license if its enters the intersection on a red light.  there are signs posted at least 1 intersection before the cameras.  drivers still seem to want to get their picture taken.  
A big moneymaker to say the least.

[Duke McDukiedook]

I dunno, I just see it as another intrusion of big brother and lazy policing.

If you say you are REALLY worried about driver safety, park a constable at the problem places, don't put a damn camera there.

[Spikeybike]

here ... if you get a ticket from a human cop for running a red light,  the fine is 75 bucks .... that same violation, from a camera costs 100 bucks ...   i wanna know what the hell's up with THAT

our traffic cameras are primarily used to stop people from running red lights ... they're all at intersections

[Sam Green Racing]

Talk about arnachy, I'm thinking of assassinating the head of United Utilities, the company that supplies the north west of England with water.
A week last Friday, they slapped a hose pipe ban on us. It's not stopped raining since and Liverpool and several towns in Lancashire were flooded, the ban remains and I can't use the hose pipe to water the trough over my door or my hanging baskets that are sheltered from the rain by the overhang of my roof.

Sam.

[flybox1]

here ... if you get a ticket from a human cop for running a red light,  the fine is 75 bucks .... that same violation, from a camera costs 100 bucks ...   i wanna know what the hell's up with THAT

they probably can charge more because its irrefutable evidence.


....and because they can get away with it.

[Duke McDukiedook]

here ... if you get a ticket from a human cop for running a red light,  the fine is 75 bucks .... that same violation, from a camera costs 100 bucks ...   i wanna know what the hell's up with THAT

our traffic cameras are primarily used to stop people from running red lights ... they're all at intersections

The private company that installed that camera probably gets some money from each ticket I'm sure.

[flybox1]

here ... if you get a ticket from a human cop for running a red light,  the fine is 75 bucks .... that same violation, from a camera costs 100 bucks ...   i wanna know what the hell's up with THAT

our traffic cameras are primarily used to stop people from running red lights ... they're all at intersections

The private company that installed that camera probably gets some money from each ticket I'm sure.

Nah, but each hi-res/day-night camera, installed, networked, hardwired or wireless, runs the city about $8k. thats $32k per intersection.

[BobbyR]

I consider them in the same way I view illegal wiretapping it should unconstituational. Whatever fate befalls this equipment is no loss to humainty.

They do get a piece of every ticket. The owner of the vehicle is fined since they cannot establish who was driving.

[Duke McDukiedook]

I learned the way KCMO gets around the constitutionality baloney is it is not a moving violation, I'll have to talk to the guy at the office that almost got stuck with one of these tickets to see what they pin it as.

If it is a moving violation then you are allowed to have your day in court and your accuser (constable) must testify as to your wrongdoing in court.

Last time I checked computers can't testify and give testimony in court.
 

[BobbyR]

I learned the way KCMO gets around the constitutionality baloney is it is not a moving violation, I'll have to talk to the guy at the office that almost got stuck with one of these tickets to see what they pin it as.

If it is a moving violation then you are allowed to have your day in court and your accuser (constable) must testify as to your wrongdoing in court.

Last time I checked computers can't testify and give testimony in court.
 

Yes that is true, I noticed that they fine you, but do not add points to your license. So they are fining your car, I thought the driver was the one that was licensed to operate, and the vehicle was licensed to be operated. Someone will challenge this and not let it go, and maybe win.

[BeSeeingYou]

I consider them in the same way I view illegal wiretapping it should unconstituational. Whatever fate befalls this equipment is no loss to humainty.

They do get a piece of every ticket. The owner of the vehicle is fined since they cannot establish who was driving.

This is what happened here in Minneapolis/St. Paul.  They had those cameras that would snap a photo when you went through a red light.  It did not stand up to a court challenge and they have been taken down.  I believe it hinged on what you state about not establishing who was driving.

[BobbyR]

I consider them in the same way I view illegal wiretapping it should unconstituational. Whatever fate befalls this equipment is no loss to humainty.

They do get a piece of every ticket. The owner of the vehicle is fined since they cannot establish who was driving.

This is what happened here in Minneapolis/St. Paul.  They had those cameras that would snap a photo when you went through a red light.  It did not stand up to a court challenge and they have been taken down.  I believe it hinged on what you state about not establishing who was driving.

There is hope for the Republic!

[BeSeeingYou]

I wonder why viewing those images of burnt out gatsos warms the cockles of my heart.
Am I, deep down an anarchist?

I have to admit I like the gasoline soaked tire technique.

[GammaFlat]

In Schaumburg, IL, they're removing (or have removed) their "red light violation" cameras.  It seems that well over 90% of the tickets issued were for improper "right on red" which was not congruous with the original intent. 

My local town (in NW Indiana) is navigating through the legal issues of getting "red light violation" cameras installed. 

I'm generally not a red light violator, so I don't feel "violated".... until my first ticket  

On a related topic, there were state troopers in Illinois at a toll stop hiding behind the toll structure looking for seat belt violations.  They caused several accidents and a backup in traffic for miles.  In my mind, worse than cameras for all the damage they did. 

[scottly]

The way the stationary cameras in AZ work, is with coils embedded in the road, with two cameras. One camera takes a pic of the rear (only, on most cars here) plate, and the other takes a pic of the driver. If you, as the owner of the vehicle, can show that your drivers license photo is not the same as the driver in the pic with the ticket, they dismiss it. They can't make you divulge the identity of the actual driver. (The case I am familiar with was my best friend's step son).
Also, the reason the state decided to discontinue the practice was that it cost too much money. I suspect Redflex, the contractor, got a payment from the state for every ticket they issued, whether paid or not. Talk about a conflict of interest!
In all fairness, the cameras on Hwy 69 DID slow down traffic, even if only for a short stretch. People were routinely going 70-75 MPH in a 55 zone.       

[Sam Green Racing]

On the news about an hour ago, government to slash 56 million from funding for speed cameras.
One town in the UK has just completed a 12 month survey where the cameras were all turned off and covered up. There was no difference in the accident rate.
Go figure.

Sam.

[lordmoonpie]

On the news about an hour ago, government to slash 56 million from funding for speed cameras.
One town in the UK has just completed a 12 month survey where the cameras were all turned off and covered up. There was no difference in the accident rate.
Go figure.

Sam.

About time too - Swindon abandoned them some time ago and there's a north yorks force that only ever uses mobile cameras, never fixed ones. However, the UK remains the most speed camera infected country in the world and it's all about revenue generation, don't let them kid you that it's about accident reduction. A recent review showed that less than 10% of cameras were sited in accident black spots. Some places like up around North Staffs area there are so many cameras you almost get accidents as people brake hard at every camera instead of managing their speed a little better....

A friend of a friend of a friend (ahem!) an Irish gentleman shall we say, managed to despatch a Gatso camera near congleton with a very small bit of semtex allegedly. Scary that he knew where to get it!!

[Sam Green Racing]

  It was Swindon that I refered too Simon. Do you remember that idiot a few years back that tried to blow one up and got jailed. The camera cought him in action. It made national TV.

Sam.

[mcpuffett]

We have had 2 cameras cut down with stihl saws in the past couple of years  , we have another money making machine up here called vosa  , cheers Mick.