speed cameras

[halz]

Mike mentioned Autralia's use of speed cameras in another post...don't get me started. They are termed "revenue raisers" nowadays and most state governments plan their yearly budgets to include a healthy few million $$ from these devices.

Interestingly, the powers that be contnue to quote statistics ad-nauseum about how the cameras have reduced the accident rate. As we who have befallen the speed cameras can tell them, the cameras only give an accurate picture on straight, flat, wide, open roads in good lighting conditions when there is only a single car in view. In other words, positive identifications of a car exceeding the speed limit can only be made in ideal (read: SAFE) driving conditions. So you may be tootling along at 65km/h in a 60 zone one fine Sunday morning all by yourself when *flash*, you are photographed. Your day will be spoilt because you know that in weeks time a fine will arrive in your mailbox for $135.00. If you try to contest the fine, Sergeant Bargearse, officer on duty at the time, will state that the camera was installed, tested and operating correctly (even though he was scoffing another pie and reading the form guide at the time- he's got a tough job!).

Now tell me they are not revenue raising.

In Western Australia, cameras are slightly differnent to the East. Cars can only be photographed from the front which means motorcycles (rear numberplate only) never get caught by cameras in the west.

Incedentally, in W.A. the cameras are called Multa-Novas, which leads to the popular saying:

"If you see a Multa-Nova,

cross the kerb and run it over!"

[Zvoiture]

In CA we have cameras at crucial/large/frequently run/on the list of top accident area intersections to catch left-turn-lane runners. Your front bumper trips a beam that is activated as the light turns RED. As the beam is broken, several high-tech cameras with flashes take pix of your car from several angles, including one with a very good telephoto lense of your face through the glass. You get a little letter in the mail and it costs you $270 a pop. Most major cities in CA are doing it now.

steve77

[240znz]

You reckon that's bad.

London already has a huge car park called the M25. The south western portion has gantry's at about 1/2 mile distances. Each gantry has cameras that will (not yet though) take a picture of your number plate, a computer "reads" the plate and automatically updates the Police system that not only sends you a automated ticket but also lets you know that you have points on your license. The cameras are currently used to vary the speed of traffic during peak times. A speed display is shown to you have time to slow down...if you don't...yep... you've won a ticket. The government announced some time ago that it will tackle the increase in traffic on the roads by not building new roads but finding ways to get more traffic on the existing ones.....DOH....have you figured that out????

You can buy a map that shows you all the routes around the M25. These routes are now as slow as the M25...classic.

In London they are trying introduce a "fee" for using London roads. The major is going to use existing static digital speed cameras to take a picture of your plate. You are then "forced" to pay a fee (the amount is still to be advised) either by calling a phone number and quoting your credit card or over the net. Oh yes they are thinking of giving you 24 hours to make the payment before no doubt sending you a ticket.

Driving in London at peak times is a MAJOR PITA. They have to something about it and one of the pet hates of all motorised worldwide is watching tossers driving up the bus lanes at peak times only being forced to que back into the lane at the end....thus more delays. So what they put in cameras. The old type ran on film and they lasted all but 3 days. So now they have put in the new DSL linked cameras that will ALWAYS get you. Good I say. I hate waiting and queing.

The Westminister Council (runs the area around Big Ben and surrounding CBD) currently issues about £3million in parking tickets A YEAR..... A metered packing space costs £1 per 20 minutes in places. A public privately run carpark will charg you £25 to park for 8 hours....OHFG.

And what is the answer to all this.............anyone know??? You'd make a million if you knew how. Make 2 million if you could convince the bonehead Major that you were right.

Sorry, that's my little moan for the morning.

[24OZ]

IMO bus lanes are a complete waste of time and have contributed to more congestion and a bottle neck of traffic then ever before in London.

What about the M4 bus lanes as you reach London, no traffic and then bam bus lane! Stuck in traffic for hrs just to see a couple of taxis shoot past you every 5 mins... Wheres the sense in that??

We have the worst transport system ever, not only is it one of the most expensive in Europe but its useless too. It was discovered recently that temperatures on the London Underground exceeded what was safely legislated under an EU commision for the transport of animals!!

The moral of the story is that motorists hear get shafted any way possible; high fuel costs, crap roads, speed cameras, high road taxes, high parking fees etc... . Notice how the real issues arent being tackled.... like providing a cheap, reliable, clean public transport system...

The speed cameras here are a licence to print money and whats worse is that they dont put them in high risk places like near schools etc.... They install them on open roads, sometimes in non built up areas or on corners on a motorway where you'll have no chance of seeing them.

I'll get off my soap box now...

THANKS..

[Alfadog]

In Western Australia, cameras are slightly differnent to the East. Cars can only be photographed from the front which means motorcycles (rear numberplate only) never get caught by cameras in the west.

Are you sure? That seems odd as here they can only take a picture from the rear. It's to do with a privacy issue or some other gibberish. Also that means over there they'd have to set up the camera further down the road than the speed gun surely??

Bus lanes are there to promote public transport. Use public transport - get to work on time. That's providing the bus wasn't delayed by something else...

[Ivan]

Camera Nazi's in NZ as well, heaps of mobile ones (you have to be really stupid to be done by the fixed ones). On the open roads they are allowed to hide in bushes.

I don't like the idea of not being able to try and sweet talk the officer out of a ticket.

[halz]

Alfaog I'm sure of it. the radar and camera unit are mounted together...usually hidden at the bottom of a long hill behind some shrubbery. Just to blacken your mood, about 50m past the radar they place a temporary sign which reads: "You have just passed a speed camera, thankyou for driving within the limit" Its enough to get the veins on the temple throbbing!

[kmack]

If they are hidden in bushes, then casually pull to the side of the road, walk up to the bush and then relieve your self.

Or just run the things over. I can't image that they'd be manned.

Just a few dilinquent thoughts roaming through my childish mind. I'll grow up now...

[halz]

Oh but they are 'attended' (see my original post). Usually by a fat copper reading newspaper and scoffing down a pie... So he might not notice the quick 'hotwash' you are suggesting!

[Zvoiture]

Have you seen the 'clear' license plate covers? They look clear, but have this prism or hologram type thing built into them. From straight on, they look normal, but at the angle of the cameras, they are totally blank. Pretty trick, but I wouldn't want to have one on my car if I got pulled over by an actual cop...

steve77

[Ivan]

I heard a story at uni once of someone unbolting and taking off with the speed camera while the Traffic Officer Slept in his car.

Don't know if it was true or not but it made for a good laugh.

[hawaiiankine]

Alohas,

I've experienced traffic cameras in two States: Oregon and Hawai'i. In Oregon, they are only allowed to put them in residential areas where people are really concerned about cars exceeding the speed limit. You know, around schools, retired folks and such. Nobody in Oregon really tried to fight the cameras, so they stayed. However, I do know that it is the governments burden to provide the evidence that it is actually YOU driving the car. If they say you have to admit to speeding because they have a blurry picture of your car/you, then it is self-incriminating, which is un-constitutional. They have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it is you in the car.

Here in Hawai'i, they were putting the cameras on the H-1, H-2 & H-3 freeways, and a couple other major roads. Very few of the cameras were near a residential area or schools, which made people livid, as they felt it was a complete revenue maker without any intention of making the roads safer. That being so, people down here protested at the state capital, wrote to their state legislators and told them "get rid of the cameras or we'll make sure you're out of a job." Well, needless to say, the department of transportation tried to usurp the authority of the legislature here and got their asses handed to them by the politicians who were afraid of losing their pathetic jobs. So, the cameras are banned in Hawai'i.

I honestly did not know that other countries had implemented the traffic cameras. It really makes me paranoid if governments around the globe are photographing their citizens in the name of "traffic safety." How can we be assured they are not taking our pictures ALL the time? I know you see a flash, but your basic 35mm camera can take pictures in broad daylight w/o a flash, so what's to keep a multi-million dollar piece of equipment from doing the same? Personally, I think its a breach of privacy and personal rights. The government has NO right to collect information on citizens without just cause. Even if they are collecting information behind our backs, I find it upsetting that when they do it before our eyes, nobody really does anything about it.

Just my $0.02

~Joel