Speed cameras "off"

msmyth18

I say someone takes one for the team and tests them all?

interstellaflyer

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Au contrerre Rodney. You pair seem intent on doing a charachter assinasion on Brianb without even realising he actully is the OP and clearly knows why he asked the question. He asked if it was possible to update the software, not ignore the speed limits.

Maybe you should base your replies on what was actually written, not on what you read into it?
:(

No not charachter assination, it's just not very good manners to call someone a 'Dork' (actually 2 people) just because they may have either miss read the post or gone off topic a little, like wise I found the 'Do try and keep up' comment aimed at me a little insulting. In my post i made no judgement on speeding, I just asked why he was so worried about whether the database was going to be modified as you can turn the alerts off, why would you need a software update?

bryanb

Hello folks, I have no desire to turn off speed alerts, I simply asked if it is possible to delete alerts for cameras that no longer exist. If anyone does not yet follow that I'll try to explain further.
Also anyone who is interested, should read the first line of post 20 before condemning my response.

interstellaflyer

bryanb wrote: »

Also anyone who is interested, should read the first line of post 20 before condemning my response.

However two wrongs don't make a right, if you were unhappy about the comment you could have just hit the 'Abuse' button and reported it.

rev_henry

Coveredinbees!!!! wrote: »

So which ones were left 'on' or at least recording statistics?

One was the one outside the main gates to Blenheim Palace, just outside Woodstock, the other I *think* was in Cowley. Can't remember where I read this but I am sure about the Woodstock one.

Quentin

rev_henry wrote: »

One was the one outside the main gates to Blenheim Palace, just outside Woodstock, the other I *think* was in Cowley. Can't remember where I read this but I am sure about the Woodstock one.

Yes, the other camera "left on" (but not taking photos for prosecutions) at Blackbird Leys, (Watlington Road).

Lum

ElkyElky wrote: »

I have to agree. As the Government keeps saying.. it's 30 for a reason. If it was safer driving at higher speed limits, then they would be increased.

Because speed limits are never set for any of the following reasons:

• Personal political gain
• In response to complaints of "speeding" that are actually "we don't like people using our village as a shortcut"
• In response to a freak accident (such as a drunk driver who was going far too fast for the conditions) in order to appease the "something must be done" crowd when doing something about the actual cause is difficult or expensive. Common examples being a case where the drunk was exceeding the existing 60mph limit so they "do something" by lowering the limit to 50.
• As an alternative to actually re-engineering a dangerous junction, then left in place once the engineering is complete because raising a speed limit is political suicide these days thanks to 10 years of "speed kills" propaganda.
• Because the people making this decision don't know what they are doing. In some cases the councillors in charge of this sort of thing don't even have driving licenses.

Since none of the above ever happen we can safely trust the opinion of whoever decided to slap a certain number at the side of a certain road, confident that sticking to that number at all times and in all conditions, including ice and fog, will mean we will never have a fault accident.


You have probably gathered that this post is sarcastic, but there is a growing number of people around who genuinely believe this, even that last paragraph which is plainly ridiculous, and drive accordingly.

tomstickland

ElkyElky wrote: »

As the Government keeps saying.. it's 30 for a reason.

The experiment in Oxford found 60 vehicles "exceeding the speed limit" over a few days. Hardly a large proportion and they didn't mention by how much they exceeded the posted limit. This compared with 30 when the cameras were active. Considering that most traffic slows down for cameras anyway, it's not really a shocking result.

If it was safer driving at higher speed limits, then they would be increased.

No speed is safe. If only all the limits out there were reasonable too.