Speeding? Manned equipment.

AdrianC

spacey2012 wrote: »

If we all just slowed down and drove on the limit, there would be no speed cameras.

There's just the small detail that speed in excess of the limit really isn't a great contributor to collisions and injuries. The DoT released Police figures a few years back - it was less than 10%. Excessive speed for the conditions but within the limit was a much, much higher percentage.

Oh, and apart from that, if they removed all the cameras, how would they replace the income?

Personally, my big objection to cameras is that they don't do anything about the serious problems on the roads - poor observation, primarily. If anything, they exacerbate the problem, compared to proper traffic policing with real live stripy Volvos. But, again, they're expensive. <shrug>

mattyprice4004

Froggitt wrote: »

Looks like theres no option.


But annoying to be caught by a camera van hidden in the bushes.

How is it annoying? You were speeding, you got caught, deal with it.

If anything, be annoyed at yourself for not being able to follow a simple '30' sign, instead of blame shifting to the very people trying to make sure the 'I've been driving for 200 years so it doesn't matter if I speed' brigade are adequately punished.

I've been there, hidden camera, however I didn't make a fuss, took it like a man and learnt from it.

It's only a mistake if you don't learn from it, as they say!

Iceweasel

mattyprice4004 wrote: »

How is it annoying? You were speeding, you got caught, deal with it.

If anything, be annoyed at yourself for not being able to follow a simple '30' sign, instead of blame shifting to the very people trying to make sure the 'I've been driving for 200 years so it doesn't matter if I speed' brigade are adequately punished.

I've been there, hidden camera, however I didn't make a fuss, took it like a man and learnt from it.

It's only a mistake if you don't learn from it, as they say!

Absolutely right - I learned to be more observant some 30 years ago. LOL

Froggitt

AdrianC wrote: »

Personally, my big objection to cameras is that they don't do anything about the serious problems on the roads - poor observation, primarily. If anything, they exacerbate the problem

Correct. While continuing my new life of crime as a speeder, I shall in future be looking out for hidden detector vans, rather than nuns with kittens, kids on bikes etc.

Law of Unintended consequences.

Aretnap

mikeyblunt wrote: »

Regards the 14 days to get a ticket ,surely at this time of year it could be longer ,and what would happen say if there was a postal strike ?

If the NIP isn't delivered within 14 days of the offence (calendar days, not working days) then you can't be convicted of speeding. There is no exception for postal strikes (Gidden v Chief Constable of Humberside confirmed that) - the police can look for an alternative way of delivering them if it's that important. The onus is on the defendant to prove that the delivery was late though, which is not always easy. The eponymous Peter Gidden intercepted his postman so had an independent witness to the late delivery. Not many people are that lucky.

spacey2012

If you ever wondered what those people you see rooting on tips are doing, the answer is looking for the envelope the NIP came in, when they realise it arrived after 14 days and they have just thrown the......ARGHHHHHHHH ENVELOPE...

AdrianC

Froggitt wrote: »

Correct. While continuing my new life of crime as a speeder, I shall in future be looking out for hidden detector vans, rather than nuns with kittens, kids on bikes etc.

Law of Unintended consequences.

Not quite what I was thinking. After all, if you don't see a parked van in the first place, then how do you _know_ it's not a nun on a bike with a basket of kittens?

I was thinking more along the lines of encouraging a mindset of "If I'm not on the phone and I'm not exceeding the speed limit, then my driving must be impeccable", and allowing all of the myriad of other, far more serious, offences to go undetected and unenforced.

AdrianC

mikeyblunt wrote: »

could I have argued and got away with it.

No, because it has to be sent to the _registered keeper_ within 14 days.

Froggitt

Scrootum wrote: »

If you incapable of mustering enough attention to know what speed you are doing as well as keeping an eye out for hazards. You are not fit to drive.

Yup you're right - I can't drive, drool out of the side of my mouth and have my statutory 27 sexual fantasies per hour all at the same time.....pass me the arsenic.....

Iceweasel

Froggitt wrote: »

Correct. While continuing my new life of crime as a speeder, I shall in future be looking out for hidden detector vans, rather than nuns with kittens, kids on bikes etc.

Law of Unintended consequences.

No, No, and thrice No.

The kittens, whether in nuns' baskets or unaccompanied, are much more important than the kids on bikes or the unmarked camouflaged camera vans.

You can safely ignore all nuns - including those on bicycles or even unicycles.

Just watch out for the kittens.

:rotfl: