Protesting speed cameras
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Fellow cyclists, are you suffering from air pollution caused by cars?
Next: High Way Code omission
From: Specs on 9 Jun 2010 08:22 On 9 Jun 2010 12:19:49 GMT, Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote: >since only a very tiny >minority are due to speed in excess of the limit. but "they" would argue the outcome is better at lower speeds -- Specs
From: Mortimer on 9 Jun 2010 08:25 "Adrian" <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:879f75FuhuU21(a)mid.individual.net... > bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were > saying: > >>>> They would have to admit that the cameras are there for revenue >>>> raising, then, since the van carries no warning about speed or any >>>> aspect of driving safely. > >>> Why? > >> The copper was not exactly trying to encourage a safe road speed, but >> waiting untill when they go 'over' the legal limit. Whereas, a sign >> displaying "speed kills", is actively trying to reduce speeding. >> Debatable about which achieves the best result. > > Depends what you mean by "best results". If the aim is to reduce road > casualties, then both are pissing in the wind, since only a very tiny > minority are due to speed in excess of the limit. > > If the aim is merely to reduce the speed of vehicles on that one stretch > of road, then I rather suspect that the van is more effective than a lone > loony waving a sheet about. Better still is a sign that lights up if you are over the limit to remind you that the limit is lower than you have judged to be a safe speed based on the road conditions at the time. There are a few roads near me which carry absurdly low limits for the road layout etc, and I welcome anything which reminds me (and keeps reminding me) to keep down to the limit. I find that I say to myself "the limit is 30... it's still 30... it's still 30" to prevent me subconsciously increasing back to a sensible speed for those road conditions.
From: Nkosi (ama-ecosse) on 9 Jun 2010 08:25 On 9 June, 13:01, "GT" <ContactGT_rem_o...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > "Chris Hills" <c...(a)chaz6.com> wrote in message > > news:huntva$sai$1(a)chaz6.eternal-september.org... > > > Near where I live a mobile police speed camera van frequently parks on a > > grass verge, on public property. Would it be legal to protest in the form > > of holding a sign or banner, perhaps with the words "Speed kills", > > deliberately behind the van to block the view of the camera? > > In our area, the mobile van parks in two places - one on a double yellow > line and the other on the verge next to a solid white line on a dual > carriageway. Both illegally parked and if a 'normal' car was parked there it > would be towed and the driver fined etc etc. I was caught by a scanmming van on a flyover over the M80 parked half on and half off the pavement at Glenbervie on the A9 as you know it one law for us and none for them. Nkosi
From: Adrian on 9 Jun 2010 08:26 Specs <spam(a)spam.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>since only a very tiny minority are due to speed in excess of the limit. > but "they" would argue the outcome is better at lower speeds I'd rather not have a collision in the first place, thanks.
From: Adrian on 9 Jun 2010 08:26
"Mortimer" <me(a)privacy.net> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > I find that I say to myself "the limit is 30... it's still 30... it's > still 30" to prevent me subconsciously increasing back to a sensible > speed for those road conditions. Is the signage not sufficient? |