Foamed Gatso - someone listened to Clarkson!
- Thread starter Muncher
- Start date
Ahh yes, I recognise that camera.
Right before a HUGE roundabout onto the A12/A120, and the only things that are anywhere near it are about 8 garages and a pub - which never has any more than about 4 people in it at any one time.
And why there are 3, yes 3, cameras, on a stretch of almost straight, clear road 3 miles long, I really really want to know.
Right before a HUGE roundabout onto the A12/A120, and the only things that are anywhere near it are about 8 garages and a pub - which never has any more than about 4 people in it at any one time.
And why there are 3, yes 3, cameras, on a stretch of almost straight, clear road 3 miles long, I really really want to know.
JRS said:
So true. I have worked for 6 years for a transport consultancy doing traffic calming schemes, roads outside schools etc, and to my knowledge, we have never recommended a Gatso be installed anywhere.
So who installs them? Not people who are trying to make the roads safer that's for sure!
JRS said:
That isn't the argument.
The statement I'm making (which you are obviously having an issue with) is that a camera CANNOT cash in without you, the motorist.
It is exactly the same argument as "A gun doesn't kill people, people do".
It is actually the same argument as "Speeding cars don't kill people, it's bad drivers" (which is obviously something you believe in).
Yet the truth, whereby if you drive past a camera at the speed limit results in you NOT getting a speeding fine and points seems so difficult to comprehend.
I'm not talking about where the camera is placed.
I'm not talking about if it really is in a location to improve safety.
However if you cannot spot a massive yellow speed camera and make adjustments to your speed accordingly I would question just how alert to your surroundings you really are (aimed at no one in particular - the use of the word "you" is general).
A speed camera has no intelligence - it is a simple device.
You as a motorist speeds past it, it takes a snap.
Don't and it doesn't.
*Shrugs* - Seems simple enough to me
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
stoofa said:
Yes, it's true, but it's just as pointless and irrelevent as comments like:
'If you don't drive anywhere, you won't have to pay for petrol' in response to complaints about fuel tax
'If you don't live here, you won't have to pay income tax' in response to tax complaints, etc etc.
All true, but totally pointless and not even worth mentioning.
Must admit I'm with stoofa on this one. I dont deny they are a basically revenue generating machines, but its really not that hard to not get snapped by one.
Plan A - dont speed.
Plan B - only speed when there are no cameras about.
Maybe I'm just lucky where I live and drive but the only cameras I've seen have been so well telegraphed in advance you'd have to be a complete muppet to get snapped by one.
FWIW, I dont speed at all in 30,40 or 50 zones - not even by 5mph. I do cruise at 85-90 on the motorway though.
Plan A - dont speed.
Plan B - only speed when there are no cameras about.
Maybe I'm just lucky where I live and drive but the only cameras I've seen have been so well telegraphed in advance you'd have to be a complete muppet to get snapped by one.
FWIW, I dont speed at all in 30,40 or 50 zones - not even by 5mph. I do cruise at 85-90 on the motorway though.
Last edited:
Sagalout said:
You're right, it isn't that hard - which is why I've never been caught speeding, emphasis on the caught. Doesn't stop me resenting the fact that rather than have the marvellous invention known as "traffic police" on the road we have dumb yellow boxes sat in stupid places that can only do one thing - photograph people driving faster than some arbitrary (and in many cases ludicrous) speed limit.
Why don't you see cameras outside the schools near where I live? Why don't you see them on the road my parents live on, which is the scene of many a high-speed bike crunch and regularly sees people doing 50 despite there being a 30mph limit? Why is it that 'round here you don't you see them anywhere where they might actually have some kind of use beyond paying for their own existence? Answers on a postcard, 'cause I can't figure it out.
stoofa said:
Glad we agree on something. But just because I have this uncanny ability to spot the stupid yellow box halfway down the road doesn't mean I should merely accept that they are needed, when in a large number of cases they quite plainly aren't.
corrected[TW]Fox said:
Don't speed, don't get fined.
It's the usual crap from people as if they have a god given right to speed that get's my goat, and I assume stoofa's too.
It's a limit (and law,) not a guide that you see in those red circles. Either you obey them and don't get fined, or break them and run the risk of being nabbed.
simple.. yet to some, just impossible to understand.
And has already been mentioned, breaking them serves no purpose but to waste more public money. Perhaps you should hate yourselves (those who do vandalise them) as much as you hate the cameras themselves?
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 6,705
- Location
- Cambs
Driven for many years and have never had a fine or been stopped by the plod and the yellow boxes aren't easy to miss.
But I do resent the law surrounding them, I do belive they infringe on a basic human right in that they force people to declare there own guilt prior to proper representation and legal process. I also agree they are a poor substitute for proper improvements to the roads and proper policing of the roads.
For those reasons I happilly applaud anyone who feels the need to foam em
But I do resent the law surrounding them, I do belive they infringe on a basic human right in that they force people to declare there own guilt prior to proper representation and legal process. I also agree they are a poor substitute for proper improvements to the roads and proper policing of the roads.
For those reasons I happilly applaud anyone who feels the need to foam em
Dj_Jestar said:
I see....my point of view is "crap". Well, thanks for letting me know. For the record - I don't think I have a "god give right" to speed, I just happen to think that when it's appropriate there is naff all reason for me not to put my foot down a touch harder.
Dj_Jestar said:
Oh, I see. So not only is my viewpoint "crap" but I'm also too stupid to understand the above simple fact as well. Well thank God that you're around to educate me....
Sagalout said:
Money to replace the camera "should" come out of the partnership, not public funding if memory serves me right.
So in theory, damage enough camera's and the partnership will loose money for new camera's since its being used to replace damaged ones.
Hope that makes sense.
Robb
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 4,457
- Location
- between Blandford Street and Mars
It's funny. My friend has 3 points. He insures his car (in his own name), MOT's it, pays the Tax, looks after it, hell, he even paid for it. He just happened to be stray over the limit, although, rather than kill anyone, he reached a huge 36mph in a 30mph limit. He admits that he was thinking about work and not paying enough attention to the road, and likewise accepts his liability and the potential that he could have caused an accident by lack of attention.
When someone ran into the back of him the other day that person didn't have any points. Mind you, they didn't have a license to put them on anyway, nor Tax, MOT or even insurance. He left the scene of the accident tto, at high speed.
My mate tracked him down as he thought he recognised the scrote at the time. The guy admitted liability and offered to pay for the damage. He then decided that the cost of the damage was too much and told my mate to spin.
My mate got fed up and went to see the police about it. He was told that, if he pushed the case, he would be arrested and charged with not informing the police of the accident. When he asked about the scrote he was told "what can we do about that? There's only your word that he was involved".
It's a crazy world, is it not?
So, in my view Gatso's are a sledgehammer to crack a nut. They punish the minor offences, but let the major offences go free.
I hope the ANPR system solves problems like this. my mate is now a few hundred quid out of pocket because of someone who should never have been allowed on the road in the first place.
When someone ran into the back of him the other day that person didn't have any points. Mind you, they didn't have a license to put them on anyway, nor Tax, MOT or even insurance. He left the scene of the accident tto, at high speed.
My mate tracked him down as he thought he recognised the scrote at the time. The guy admitted liability and offered to pay for the damage. He then decided that the cost of the damage was too much and told my mate to spin.
My mate got fed up and went to see the police about it. He was told that, if he pushed the case, he would be arrested and charged with not informing the police of the accident. When he asked about the scrote he was told "what can we do about that? There's only your word that he was involved".
It's a crazy world, is it not?
So, in my view Gatso's are a sledgehammer to crack a nut. They punish the minor offences, but let the major offences go free.
I hope the ANPR system solves problems like this. my mate is now a few hundred quid out of pocket because of someone who should never have been allowed on the road in the first place.