Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[KillerWatt]

If the cameras were truly about road safety, then why the fook isn't there one outside my kids school?

I'll tell you why....it's because those that generally abide by the law (who do occasionally blip over) already drive at way below the 30 limit outside of schools because thats what the conditions dictate (ergo, no money to be made).

The non law abiding (TWOC'rs, unregistered, pi$$heads, etc) don't give a toss for cameras...because they know full well they won't get the NIP in the first place.

To the "pro" camera brigade....start putting them outside schools, hospitals, etc and I will quite happily believe that it is all about safety.......but while you put them (behind signs and bushes) on dual carriageways and then artificially lower the limit.....don't think for one minute I'm the sort of c*nt who will swallow your bull$hit.

[crazyjoetavola]

If the cameras were truly about road safety, then why the fook isn't there one outside my kids school?

I'll tell you why....it's because those that generally abide by the law (who do occasionally blip over) already drive at way below the 30 limit outside of schools because thats what the conditions dictate (ergo, no money to be made).

The non law abiding (TWOC'rs, unregistered, pi$$heads, etc) don't give a toss for cameras...because they know full well they won't get the NIP in the first place.

To the "pro" camera brigade....start putting them outside schools, hospitals, etc and I will quite happily believe that it is all about safety.......but while you put them (behind signs and bushes) on dual carriageways and then artificially lower the limit.....don't think for one minute I'm the sort of c*nt who will swallow your bull$hit.

Easy Killer watch the BP.  This is not about placing cameras for reasons of safety per se but more about the application of ill thought out legislation in the most cost effective way possible and dressing it up so a gullible populace thinks that it's being done for their own good

I have driven at class 1 level so am well aquainted with making due progress but have to say that I keep to limits now. I'm too busy looking out for the idiots who are driving when chatting - either in person or on the cell 'phone, reading, looking at everything but the road, fiddling with music  controls or worse, applying make up, scratching their arses or worse, or generally being  in a place other than behind the wheel of a lethal weapon.

I have of course the perfect antidote to this frenzy - the Toyota Prius- try one, your tension will melt away and you will be imbued with a wonderful sense of wellbeing ....honestly

[albitz]

I think it would require a serious amount of brainwashing to convince an inteeligent person the the scameras have a serious purpose with regard to road safety.It is an industry,simple as that.They are not placed only where deaths have occured,this is a myth.they are not placed where they can best prevent accidents,they are placed where they are most likely to generate most revenue.
The camera at the bottom of the M11 has generated more than any other camera in the country(well over a million quid) accidents at the site have risen since its installation and the relevant authourities are aware of this but refuse to discuss removing it.
There was a dreadful case a year or so ago when a motorcyclist slowed on the approach to a camera but the car driver behind didnt,he ploughed into the back of the motorcyclist and killed him.

[Andy B]

I think it would require a serious amount of brainwashing to convince an inteligent person the the scameras have a serious purpose with regard to road safety.......

It seems like at least one has been brain washed then!  :-/

[over50now]

Well stirred it all up.  Some of the comments got a bit personal, don't mind being insulted - got broad shoulders.

The system isn't perfect.

If you are really interested in road safety and saving lives, why don't you put a camera outside my son's school?
I'll tell you why, it's because you know full well you won't catch anybody because people slow down by default for that kind of scenario (and therefore, there is no money to be made).
[/quote]

slow down by default so that don't hit someone or something.

This subject could go on and on and probably will..........
It's emotive........... Two sides or more to every discussion.
Once again, Thanks to everyone who has contributed and to everyone who has been following this thread

Did say in first post 'head over parapet'

Pro cameras bridgade, not either way bridgade or totally against cameras bridgade, hopefully it got us thinking

[KillerWatt]

slow down by default so that don't hit someone or something.

They actually slow down by default because that is what the conditions permit, and anybody with at least one brain cell knows that.

The only people who won't slow down are the TWOC'rs, uninsured, unregistered, drunks, etc.......the very people who the camera won't catch anyway.

This subject could go on and on and probably will..........

Too right it will, I'm still waiting for you to respond to my earlier comments that started on page one...although I know full well you won't have an answer for them no matter how long you leave it.

hopefully it got us thinking

No need to think, I and plenty of others know that cameras are just a cash cow.

[GG]

I only wonder who over50now really is, and why stir so much trouble if the intent is truely honourable ?

[Vamps]

I only wonder who over50now really is, and why stir so much trouble if the intent is truely honourable ?

What are you suggesting.............

[Vamps]

Nope, joined in january, so not who I was thinking of

[Richie London]

what pi$$es me off is the frigging cretins who are going at 40mph in a 50 limit, get close to the camera then hit the brakes.  

[KillerWatt]

what pi$$es me off is the frigging cretins who are going at 40mph in a 50 limit, get close to the camera then hit the brakes.  

They were probably quite sensible drivers before scameras appeared, and if they've been caught unawares then that is more than likely the reason they appear to be driving like a c*nt.

[Chris_H]

oh yeah ps

SPEED doesn't kill people - BAD DRIVINGdoes - police's own statistics prove this but that don't earn revenue

If you want to be scientific (?) acceleration kills people not speed.

The 'speed kills' argument came out of a sound bite from decades ago, where a simple catchy slogan can have beneficial effects on people.  It was never true, but by its use at the time, undoubtedly lives were saved.

Unfortunately we don't tend to think too carefully about what we say these days, we just look to provide an effect.  So the falsehood is regurgitated over and over again.

If speed really killed we would not have any astronauts returning from space.

[KillerWatt]

If the message is going to be anything, it should be "The inappropiate use of speed MAY kill"

Alas that message wouldn't have the "demonising" effect that the current trash does.

[Pitchfork]

I always thought that the rexpression 'Speed Kills' came from the misuse of Amphetamines :-?

[KillerWatt]

I always thought that the rexpression 'Speed Kills' came from the misuse of Amphetamines :-?

Only if they've been cut with too much strychnine