According to the goverment and the police, we have speed camera's and warning signs of speed cameras to slow people down, its all about slowing people down and NOT about collecting money, right?

So can someone explain this?

http://money.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;sessionid=WO1MB5W4AHE23QFIQMFSM5WAVCBQ0JVC?xml=/news/2004/06/03/ncam03.xml&sSheet=/portal/2004/06/03/ixportal.html

Funny innit. The Police and the Government are trying to tell us all the time that it's not about making money. They even try to placate us by bringing in the graded offence system. But here is the question that we should REALLY be asking:-

"If it's not about raising money why not scrap the fines and just penalise using points on the licence BUT you can only have 2 offences before you are banned?"

Instantly people will be a lot more focussed on their speed and the authorities cannot be accused of money making - everybodys happy!

Ask your local MP just for fun and watch him squirm!

Shabash!

Now partying with Yul Brynner
http://ozrics.co.uk/

We have speed cameras as some people are incapable of obeying a speed limit put there for the safety of both the drivers and pedestrians.

Speed cameras on motorways, dual carriageways etc.. are pointless, unless its raining or roadworks.

I think there needs to be a minimum speed on motorways to get rid of old biddies doing 45 in the middle lane!

Speed cameras in towns and housing estates and residential areas where people and cars come close to eachother have a use.

But surely if he was found guilty of slowing drivers down, then the local councils who put signs up warning of speed cameras should also be found guilty of the same offence?

Secondly, how the hell can you ban a guy who commits an offence ON FOOT from driving?

One gets the feeling that story is bull.

what could they do if he had a sing saying moblie cash machine ahead.

I have to agree with you Tom, I wouldn't care if there were speed monitoring systems in every town/village making sure no-one went over 30/40 or whatever but on the open road I think they should penelise people for driving stupidly NOT fast. For example too slowly or more importantly too damn close to the car in front, i don't understand the mentality of the twats who drive on peoples bumpers it makes it harder for them to overtake the car they can't see as well, the car in front will usually slow down and I bet driving too close causes more accidents on motorways/duel carrigeways than speeding.

and breathe...

Unfortunately its much easier to detect a car driving fast than it is to detect it being driven by a ****.

The new TWATSO with special bellend detector

basically take a pic of every nova, XR3i, BMW and 4x4.

Don't forget Hondas Tom. Guaranteed that at least one of those has got a **** in it!

Shabash!

Now partying with Yul Brynner
http://ozrics.co.uk/

Don't forget the performance Golfs, they are twats who can't afford BMW's

Very true Tom, speed cameras where there are pedestrians are necessary (town centres, schools etc), the number of people that do 40 in 30 zones pisses me off, especially when there sitting on my rear bumper (but they seam to back off when I brake test them. tee hee hee….). I'm surprised the old geezer in that article didn't keel-over when he heard the verdict. His blood must be boiling.

the biggest problem with speed cameras are the people who don't register, insure or tax their car. Once again they get away doing what they want, and they'd still think they were hard done to if they got caught!

Well, seeing none of you like tailgaters, maybe this new camera will cheer you up.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3742765.stm

But before you start cheering just imagine this scene, you are driving along, leaving a nice safe space in front of you, along comes Mr. Asshole and decides to jump into your space, as soon as he does that, you pass one of these cameras and there you are, tailgating him!!

That would be unfortunate, perhaps that is why you need actual people, we could call them traffic police of something like that, who are capable of making rational and reasonable judgement on the driving standards of people using the roads. Mad idea i know but you never know, it could work!

What?! Actually have HUMAN PEOPLE doing that job? You must be mad!

1) cut police paperwork
2) employ more plod
3) spend less on speed cameras

How much does a gatso/truvello/specs cost to install and run? Probably quite a bit.

They cost nothing compared to the revenue they bring in, but if the people who go round destroying them do so more often maybe that'll change and they'll force a rethink, but i suspect not.

Well, if they are supposed to be SAFETY cameras, and NOT just a way of collecting cash, why not get rid of the fines and just ban speeding drivers from driving?

I'm not sure about that but if the fine is there as a punishment/deterrant why not have it proportional to your income with a minimum limit then it punishes everyone equally.

i don't agree with it being propotyional to income, why should people that work hard to do well be treated worse whilst the scroats on benefits doing all the cash in hand jobs get away doing as they please, as per usual!!!

If they are safety camera's the money collected should go into a fund and something useful done with it. Not sure what though?!?!?!

Did anyone read clarksons view on this in the sun today, spot on as ever!