One of the Local Cities, Akron installed some of the speed cameras.
2,371 speeders cited near Akron schools; City Council divided. The private firm ticketing speeders in and around Akron's school zones nailed
2,371 drivers in 19 days, issuing fines of $150 or $250.
2371 Times $150 or $250 = $356,000 to $593,000 in 19 days!
These machines are evil!
Link
Is this the 1st time you guys have got GATSOs?
In one noteable 'scoop' a while ago, they'd set up some cameras on the Orwell Bridge, near Ipswich, because of road works. Managed to
get more than 2000 cars in the few days! Made the local BBC news...
DJ
[Edited on 6/12/05 by David Jenkins]
they set fire to them over here.....i wonder what the american answer to them would be?
No points issued though, sounds like they get off lightly with a $150-250 fine and no endorsements.
At the moment at least....
i frame the speeding photos i've had, so far i have 7 on the wall in the garage. . . . not bad 11 points too maybe a bec 7 isnt a good idea.
In the UK never ceases to amaze me the different policies on cameras in different Police force areas in the UK, In west central Scotland Strathclyde
Police have put most cameras in fairly sensible places where they do contibute to safety but in other areas of Scotland it seems to be all about
revenue.
The million pound average speed camera chain near me on the A77 has been on line since June --- this a is major pilot scheme covering about 30
miles of road --- how may tickets did they issue in the first 3 months operation a whole 21 !!! --- I will watch with interest if more are
installed anywhere in the UK , I suspect they won't be although this would totally demolish the argument that speed cameras are about safety not
revenue. I drive through this 28 mile long trap fairly regularly and find the average speed cameras unlike GATSOs have actually have improved the
situation greatly reducing tailgaiting.
Anyone know about the smaller versions of the Gatso ? It's the same height but half the width with two slots at the front, The ones I'm
after knowing about are in the roadworks on the M5 south of Bristol
Jason
And one of my m8's makes up two of the 21! He got done by the same camera's twice in 10 days.....he is a bit of a f$%k wit though! I
actually think (controvertialy) that if you get done on the motorway it almost serves you right - everyone knows the speed limit is 70 and if you go
over it your risking it! However, I do get very anooyed with some of Aberdeen cities placings for "safety"! They put them amongst lots of
other signs so rather than doing 2mph over the 30 limit everyone goes slower but there eyes aren't on the road anymore there in the hedges
looking for cameras....its a matter of time before some gets killed by a motorist - I was looking for speed camera's officer, I honestly
didn't see the mum and pram step out onto the zebra crossing!......how much can motorists be expected to take in! Oli.
Rant over....luckily.....
Speed cameras? Not a problem. They don't bother me in the slightest.... They can be put wherever they like on the public highways, and I
wouldn't complain. The simple fact is there is a speed limit in force on public roads, so the trick is to not speed. Then there's no need
to worry about the speed cameras! Simple eh?
Okay, so you are unsure of the speed limit? Try slowing down a bit, just to be on the safe side! How about unsure as to where the cameras are?
Simple: drive below/at the speed limit, and you don't need to keep a look out for speed cameras!
People who argue the toss over hidden cameras, and say that the drivers attention is distracted from the roads by the fact they have to look out for
speed cameras, are talking $h!te. The simple fact is if you keep within the limits, you don't need to worry about cameras. Full stop.....
I don't know if any of you guys use the A17 Sleaford to Kings Lynn as a number of Gatsos along that stretch look as though they have been hit with a torpedo! Large blackened hole front and rear!
In lot of areas cameras are sited purely for revenue and to increase stats, the difference in policy between police areas is very noticeable. As I said I have no problems with any of the camera sites in the west of scotland, indeed have no problem with increasing camera number of cameras provided they are in genuine black spots.
quote:
Originally posted by Howlor
I don't know if any of you guys use the A17 Sleaford to Kings Lynn as a number of Gatsos along that stretch look as though they have been hit with a torpedo! Large blackened hole front and rear!
m6 toll road is great no speed cameras lol hit 140 down there the other day
i think the cameras should monitor your driving not your speed people who tailgata should get fned people who sit int he outside lane goign slower
then people inside them should get fined and people who sit int he middle or utside lane of an empty road
a nice way to do it would be for people to have to pass graded licences to use the faster lanes and at higher speeds so only the good drivers (better
reaction times better judgement etc) could drive at higher speeds and people that can barely scrape through a test should be restricted to the slow
lane with the lorries
i suppose i think that because someone i know regularly drive in excess of 110 mph and not once have i ever felt unsafe because said person is an
exceptionally good driver doesnt do it in heavy traffic only on relatively empty roads and not usually in poor weather conditions and has not had an
accident EVER other then a few people driving into the back of him at traffic lights ...
also i think people who dont move out of the way for emergency vehicles should be fined and get points
Best way to slow people down are the signs with radar detectors that light up with the speed limit and yellow flashing lights . They have a few of
these around and when they go off people slow down dead quick and look embarrassed. They use them extensively in Scandanavia I saw some there over 20
years ago. They are cheap compared to Gatsos but raise no revenue so guess why they don't install them so much here!
Caber
"People who argue the toss over hidden cameras, and say that the drivers attention is distracted from the roads by the fact they have to look out
for speed cameras, are talking $h!te. The simple fact is if you keep within the limits, you don't need to worry about cameras. Full
stop....."
Agreed if the speed limits were reasonable but they are based on a 1960's Ford Anglia !!
quote:
Originally posted by Taz Surfleet
"People who argue the toss over hidden cameras, and say that the drivers attention is distracted from the roads by the fact they have to look out for speed cameras, are talking $h!te. The simple fact is if you keep within the limits, you don't need to worry about cameras. Full stop....."
Agreed if the speed limits were reasonable but they are based on a 1960's Ford Anglia !!
quote:
Originally posted by Taz Surfleet
Agreed if the speed limits were reasonable but they are based on a 1960's Ford Anglia !!
Speed limits were introduced on Motorways in the 60's when many cars could not do 70mph, and the brakes they had were pretty inadequate for those
sort of speeds (get in a drum braked saloon car and try for yourself!!).
70mph can be far too fast, but 140 can be perfectly safe (in fact, a judge agreed that over 150mph is safe), it depends on the car, the road
condition, the weather and the driver. Trouble is a camera can't differentiate these things and will not prosecute the dangerous driver who is
below the limit passing the camera. I like driving fast, as I guess most on this forum do, and some of the limits are pretty arbitary, and often
unrealistic. Why do straight roads, with no houses which used to be de-restricted now have 40mph limits? There are plenty round here like that.
There should be only one driving offence - dangerous driving. That offence would cover anything which endangers others in whatever way.
M6 Toll may not have any camera's but it has police sitting and waiting for you very offen. I know three people how have been done at +90 on
empty road as well.
Dave.
quote:
Originally posted by oliwb
I actually think (controvertialy) that if you get done on the motorway it almost serves you right - everyone knows the speed limit is 70 and if you go over it your risking it!
"Why should the fact they are based on a 1960's Ford Anglia make any difference to the speed limits in force at present? "
so there hasnt been any improvements in brake and tyre technology in the interim period ??
I agree about tailgaters but thats a different offence isnt it ?
quote:
Originally posted by Taz Surfleet
"Why should the fact they are based on a 1960's Ford Anglia make any difference to the speed limits in force at present? "
so there hasnt been any improvements in brake and tyre technology in the interim period ??
I agree about tailgaters but thats a different offence isnt it ?
![]()
quote:
Originally posted by bigandy
Speed cameras? Not a problem. They don't bother me in the slightest.... They can be put wherever they like on the public highways, and I wouldn't complain. The simple fact is there is a speed limit in force on public roads, so the trick is to not speed. Then there's no need to worry about the speed cameras! Simple eh?
Okay, so you are unsure of the speed limit? Try slowing down a bit, just to be on the safe side! How about unsure as to where the cameras are? Simple: drive below/at the speed limit, and you don't need to keep a look out for speed cameras!
People who argue the toss over hidden cameras, and say that the drivers attention is distracted from the roads by the fact they have to look out for speed cameras, are talking $h!te. The simple fact is if you keep within the limits, you don't need to worry about cameras. Full stop.....
quote:
Originally posted by andyps
Speed limits were introduced on Motorways in the 60's when many cars could not do 70mph, and the brakes they had were pretty inadequate for those sort of speeds (get in a drum braked saloon car and try for yourself!!).
70mph can be far too fast, but 140 can be perfectly safe (in fact, a judge agreed that over 150mph is safe), it depends on the car, the road condition, the weather and the driver. Trouble is a camera can't differentiate these things and will not prosecute the dangerous driver who is below the limit passing the camera. I like driving fast, as I guess most on this forum do, and some of the limits are pretty arbitary, and often unrealistic. Why do straight roads, with no houses which used to be de-restricted now have 40mph limits? There are plenty round here like that.
There should be only one driving offence - dangerous driving. That offence would cover anything which endangers others in whatever way.