Coming soon: The speed camera you cannot beat
- Thread starter basmic
- Start date
Read about this in the Daily Mail, can't really see them being any more of an issue than normal speed cameras to be honest, once you know where they are just slow down from warp speed while you go through the trap then hoon it back up to triple figures. Just watch for the kids.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,236
^^What he said^^ 
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2003
- Posts
- 13,608
- Location
- Back with a Vengeance.
do the cameras cost more to install and maintain then they bring in as revenue?Booner! said:
Before the Anti-speed camera crew arive too much im just going to say something about the cameras.
I drive roads that you would love to belt down just to get home quickly after a days worth of driving and there are only 2 things that stop me. The fear of death and the fear of getting a mahoosive bill in my letter box along with losing my licence due to some random camera on the side of the road or in the bushes.
So i dont know about you lot but i know that knowing that cameras are or even could be around and even around town while im driving keeps my speed down a bit
I drive roads that you would love to belt down just to get home quickly after a days worth of driving and there are only 2 things that stop me. The fear of death and the fear of getting a mahoosive bill in my letter box along with losing my licence due to some random camera on the side of the road or in the bushes.
So i dont know about you lot but i know that knowing that cameras are or even could be around and even around town while im driving keeps my speed down a bit
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2003
- Posts
- 13,608
- Location
- Back with a Vengeance.
ive said it before and no doubt i'll say it again.
they could put a camera on every corner for me, if it meant they'd remove every speed bump in the UK.
they could put a camera on every corner for me, if it meant they'd remove every speed bump in the UK.
![[TR]SweetSpotOz](/styles/overclockers/avatars/6.png){kind=avatar}
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 6,183
- Location
- everywhere
"Paul Smith, of the Safe Speed road safety campaign, said: "The fact that you do not know you have been flashed adds more uncertainty, which is never a good thing for safety. "
What a muppet.
You don't know you've been flashed so you carry on as is. That is not uncertainty compared to getting flashed and not knowing whether you were within the 10%.
What a muppet.
You don't know you've been flashed so you carry on as is. That is not uncertainty compared to getting flashed and not knowing whether you were within the 10%.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 6,183
- Location
- everywhere
What is Paul Smith's point then?
You are completely oblivious that anything has happened which is likely to affect concentration than a conventional camera.
You are completely oblivious that anything has happened which is likely to affect concentration than a conventional camera.
markyp23 said:
If cameras don't flash, then you never know if you've been caught until the NIP arrives. This means that people could get more and more paranoid about their speed and concentrate more on that (one of the clear side effects of cameras anyway) than actual danger factors on the road.
I (and Paul Smith) oppose cameras because I support policies that save lives, which means addressing the issues that are causing them to be lost, what's your rational for supporting them?
Last edited:
