Gatso Roadside Cameras

liam8282

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

Speed limits are just that... Limits. They are the maximum permisable speed on that particular stretch of road, NOT a target.

However, you can also be punished for driving too slow....

Funnily enough my mum was pulled over by the police for doing 30mph on a 40mph road. She was on a dual carriage way, in the left hand lane, so in theory not really doing anything wrong. Also, she was a bit lost at the time and in a different area, but she was still pulled over and given a warning for driving too slow!! :rotfl:

liam8282

Harry_Flashman wrote: »

Given the anecdotes given on here (and the fact that there is money to be made out of 'em), I'd doubt that.

If only they had those guidelines they could have argued their case.

Doubt they would have got anywhere with it though!

king100

sickofusernames wrote: »

Please tell, you can't leave it there - what was the crime number related to?

I went to visit my father for dinner, 2 hour drive to see him. Didnt answer door car parked outside. Couldent break down door so call police.

Suddenly thought one of his friends might have keys, drove round, didnt have keys drove back.

Alledegely flashed twice from gatso.

Police broke down door, dad had just had a stroke and was lying on the floor. Got crime number just incase I would need to appeal my alledeged speeding ticket.

Wee_Willy_Harris

Harry_Flashman wrote: »

Given the anecdotes given on here (and the fact that there is money to be made out of 'em), I'd doubt that.

If people are worried about straying over the speed limit by a couple of MPH, then perhaps they should aim for a maximum speed of a couple of MPH below the limit and give themselves the margin for error.

The bottom line is that the limit is set at whatever the speed restriction says (ie 30mph) and people aim to drive at 30 mph. If it were a recognised fact that the actual limit was 33mph, people would aim for 33 and whinge when they crept over THAT by just a couple of MPH.

king100

I would like to say that I stood next to a policeman who had setup and speedtrap many years ago. Worked in a resturant and gave them T and Coffee.

He let me have a go at the gun.

Speed limit was 40, I was clocking people doing 44, 45, 46,47.

He didnt blink, he was trying to catch the 60s and 70s.

Anyone who says that they have been done doing 32 or 33 in a 30 is lying, you could defend on the calibration of the equipment.

Paradigm

king100 wrote: »

Anyone who says that they have been done doing 32 or 33 in a 30 is lying, you could defend on the calibration of the equipment.

Utter Bollox!!

king100

Paradigm wrote: »

Utter Bollox!!

Google calibration of speed gun

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-365563/The-great-speed-gun-scandal.html

Read that for starters

Or this

http://www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/southwest/series7/speed-cameras.shtml

or this

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/3796472/Teenager-cleared-of-doing-126mph-in-fathers-car-on-speed-gun-technicality.html

Shall I go on

Paradigm

king100 wrote: »

Google calibration of speed gun

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-365563/The-great-speed-gun-scandal.html

Read that for starters

Or this

http://www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/southwest/series7/speed-cameras.shtml

or this

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/3796472/Teenager-cleared-of-doing-126mph-in-fathers-car-on-speed-gun-technicality.html Shall I go on

The first 2 examples have nothing to do with the device calibration but more improper use by the operator & general faults with the device. The Telegraph article is a calibration issue but only because the witness couldn't attend to give evidence. If he had, who knows?

None of this alters the fact that calling anyone saying they have been prosecuted for 32-33 in a 30 limit a liar is still "utter bollox"

Wee_Willy_Harris

Paradigm wrote: »

The first 2 examples have nothing to do with the device calibration but more improper use by the operator & general faults with the device. The Telegraph article is a calibration issue but only because the witness couldn't attend to give evidence. If he had, who knows?

None of this alters the fact that calling anyone saying they have been prosecuted for 32-33 in a 30 limit a liar is still "utter bollox"

As soon as someone produces evidence that a prosecution for a 1,2 or 3mph contravention has taken place for speed alone, then you will have proved your point. Shouldn't be too difficult. Until then, I say it's you talking utter bollox!

king100

king100 wrote: »

Anyone who says that they have been done doing 32 or 33 in a 30 is lying, you could defend on the calibration of the equipment.

Where did I say prosecuted, anyone who has been found guilty of doing 31, 32 33 in a 30 shouldent of taken it and should have defended the charge.

If I got caught doing that speed you can bet that I would question the callibration, the operator.

As you can see they have charged people doing less than the speed limit.

I still stick by my post they wont be found guilty if they are doing 31 - 33 in a 30. Maybe prosecuted but not found guilty. If they have then they deserve the points for not challenging it.