Bavarian-Board.co.uk - BMW Owners Discussion Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > General Forums > General Off Topic Forum
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Scamera poll
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedScamera poll

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 1617181920 29>
Poll Question: Are scameras good for road safety ?
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
2 [4.00%]
4 [8.00%]
44 [88.00%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted

Author
Message
Nigel View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 09-November-2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6941
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-November-2005 at 19:03
Originally posted by Coasting Coasting wrote:

You can't train those that won't listen either.

Thats true enough, but most of them will train rather than lose the ability to drive.

It is true that most of the driving public don't really seem to care about speed limiters etc, but we are supposed to be motoring enthusiasts.

Best Wishes

Nigel

Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
livvy View Drop Down
Really Senior Member II
Really Senior Member II


Joined: 12-November-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 745
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-November-2005 at 19:04
Originally posted by spokey spokey wrote:


So, they're going to be hugely effective then, lobbying for the removal of something that a large number of their members actually want.

Where do I sign up?


You're unlikley to get removal, it's making sure other options are taken rather than more going up that should be your realistic aim.
Back to Top
steven.seed View Drop Down
Really Senior Member II
Really Senior Member II
Avatar

Joined: 24-June-2005
Location: Sale, Cheshire
Status: Offline
Points: 1507
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-November-2005 at 19:07
Originally posted by Nigel Nigel wrote:

Cost, steven !

[/QUOTE]

But haven't we been constantly reminded of how much just one accident costs the taxpayer. If an accident involves the emergency services its hundreds of thousands of pounds. So preventing one accident could run a couple of  RT cars and crews for a year.

1998 E36 318iS Saloon   
1989 E30 318i. Coupe
2000 E39 520i Touring

Back to Top
livvy View Drop Down
Really Senior Member II
Really Senior Member II


Joined: 12-November-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 745
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-November-2005 at 19:07
Originally posted by Coasting Coasting wrote:

A Speed Camera doesn't (generally) take your details when you pass it under the speed limit.  Movement monitoring does.  That makes it fall into a completely different area of the law.


I haven't seen any successful legal objection to ANPR.
The link I gave (don't know why but a gap invalidating the URL keeps appearing when I enter it) shows the new ACPO road chiefs plans for ANPR use etc.
Back to Top
spokey View Drop Down
Bavarian-Board Contributor
Bavarian-Board Contributor
Avatar
Offensive and obnoxious tub of lard

Joined: 02-March-2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1948
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-November-2005 at 19:08
Ah! So someone else gets to choose my aim!

Well, that sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Not.

But even if they are arguing for that, there is still a large number of members who want limiters and more scameras. So my basic point still stands: the IAM will be as much use as a hat full of dandruff, because half the members will want something and the other half will want the opposite.
Ciao,
Spokey

Back to Top
Coasting View Drop Down
Really Senior Member II
Really Senior Member II
Avatar
www.TOTALTORQUE.net

Joined: 05-February-2005
Location: Not with the two-faced bloke.
Status: Offline
Points: 2125
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-November-2005 at 19:10
Originally posted by Nigel Nigel wrote:

Originally posted by Coasting Coasting wrote:

You can't train those that won't listen either.

Thats true enough, but most of them will train rather than lose the ability to drive.

It is true that most of the driving public don't really seem to care about speed limiters etc, but we are supposed to be motoring enthusiasts.

I disagree.  Those that drive without insurance or tax are already proving that the law means little to them in the first place, so the next step is to drive without a licence.

Those that modify a car in any way, and don't tell their insurers - they're just the same - in fact in many ways they're worse because they tend to have an attitude of "Well it's just an air filter, why should I tell them about that" etc.  It's the typical "I'm different, I'm allowed" flaw.

The biggest point has actually being left out so far though.  What do you think electronically (throught movement monitoring or limiters) limiting the speed of a vehicle would do to the motor industry?

Wreck it.  It's amazing how much power the industry yields - and it's close association with the vendors of petroleum needs careful consideration too.......and then you're really starting to talk about the people that have influence, power and control over what does and doesn't happen.  As I said, it won't happen in our lifetime - I maintain that stance because we're in a time where money talks in government and the only corruption we see is the tip of the iceberg. 



Now with FREE HPI CHECK and FREE GLASSES GUIDE VALUATIONS for all members!

Back to Top
Nigel View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 09-November-2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6941
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-November-2005 at 19:11

Originally posted by spokey spokey wrote:

Ah! So someone else gets to choose my aim!

Well, that sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Not.

But even if they are arguing for that, there is still a large number of members who want limiters and more scameras. So my basic point still stands: the IAM will be as much use as a hat full of dandruff, because half the members will want something and the other half will want the opposite.

There are a large number of self righteous people who believe they do not need to worry about such devices, as they never exceed a speed limit etc......no I don't believe them either, but they are about !

Best Wishes

Nigel

Back to Top
spokey View Drop Down
Bavarian-Board Contributor
Bavarian-Board Contributor
Avatar
Offensive and obnoxious tub of lard

Joined: 02-March-2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1948
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-November-2005 at 19:13
And?

I'm still waiting to hear why I should give my time to the IAM rather than Safe Speed or ABD as a lobbying organisation?
Ciao,
Spokey

Back to Top
Nigel View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 09-November-2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6941
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-November-2005 at 19:18

Originally posted by spokey spokey wrote:

And?

I'm still waiting to hear why I should give my time to the IAM rather than Safe Speed or ABD as a lobbying organisation?

Firstly, you will learn a system of car control you don't know, and will get a qualification you don't have.

Secondly, the IAM have more of a standing than the ABD or safespeed , what alternatives do the abd or safespeed offer to the government ?

Best Wishes

Nigel

Back to Top
livvy View Drop Down
Really Senior Member II
Really Senior Member II


Joined: 12-November-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 745
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-November-2005 at 19:19
Originally posted by spokey spokey wrote:

And?

I'm still waiting to hear why I should give my time to the IAM rather than Safe Speed or ABD as a lobbying organisation?


Because one has more chance of being listened to by government than the other & if you are active in that organisation your can help shape it's voice.
Back to Top
Nigel View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 09-November-2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6941
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-November-2005 at 19:20
Originally posted by steven.seed steven.seed wrote:

Originally posted by Nigel Nigel wrote:

Cost, steven !

But haven't we been constantly reminded of how much just one accident costs the taxpayer. If an accident involves the emergency services its hundreds of thousands of pounds. So preventing one accident could run a couple of  RT cars and crews for a year.

[/QUOTE]

Yes steven, but cameras are cheaper , dont need pensions, leave , or staff canteens

Best Wishes

Nigel

Back to Top
livvy View Drop Down
Really Senior Member II
Really Senior Member II


Joined: 12-November-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 745
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-November-2005 at 19:23
Originally posted by Coasting Coasting wrote:

I disagree.  Those that drive without insurance or tax are already proving that the law means little to them in the first place, so the next step is to drive without a licence.

Those that modify a car in any way, and don't tell their insurers - they're just the same - in fact in many ways they're worse because they tend to have an attitude of "Well it's just an air filter, why should I tell them about that" etc.  It's the typical "I'm different, I'm allowed" flaw.

The biggest point has actually being left out so far though.  What do you think electronically (throught movement monitoring or limiters) limiting the speed of a vehicle would do to the motor industry?

Wreck it.  It's amazing how much power the industry yields - and it's close association with the vendors of petroleum needs careful consideration too.......and then you're really starting to talk about the people that have influence, power and control over what does and doesn't happen.  As I said, it won't happen in our lifetime - I maintain that stance because we're in a time where money talks in government and the only corruption we see is the tip of the iceberg. 



Section 165A & B of The Road Traffic Act 1988 are a move in the right direction Re no insurance/licence etc.

The motor industry will just change it's markets slightly. Performance would become a less important criteria & other criteria would take over. They'll still be selling cars & they'll still be using fossil fuels.

Limiters are just another reason to get involved if the threat of more cameras weren't enough reason for you.




Edited by livvy
Back to Top
Nigel View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 09-November-2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6941
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-November-2005 at 19:26

Spokey

I seem to remember from when you were organising a run out, that you have a class 1 mate, doesn't he like civilian advanced driving ?

Best Wishes

Nigel

Back to Top
steven.seed View Drop Down
Really Senior Member II
Really Senior Member II
Avatar

Joined: 24-June-2005
Location: Sale, Cheshire
Status: Offline
Points: 1507
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-November-2005 at 19:44
Originally posted by Nigel Nigel wrote:

Originally posted by steven.seed steven.seed wrote:

Originally posted by Nigel Nigel wrote:

Cost, steven !

But haven't we been constantly reminded of how much just one accident costs the taxpayer. If an accident involves the emergency services its hundreds of thousands of pounds. So preventing one accident could run a couple of  RT cars and crews for a year.

Yes steven, but cameras are cheaper , dont need pensions, leave , or staff canteens

[/QUOTE]

Then that says to me the authorities are not  doing all they can about improving safety on the roads but are  looking at the financial side of things too much which gives credibility to the people who believe the cameras are there for revenue raising purposes.

1998 E36 318iS Saloon   
1989 E30 318i. Coupe
2000 E39 520i Touring

Back to Top
scarface View Drop Down
Really Senior Member I
Really Senior Member I
Avatar

Joined: 16-June-2004
Location: Surrey, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 414
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-November-2005 at 20:01
Originally posted by Nigel Nigel wrote:

I find the best drivers I assess are HGV 1's, their forward planning is rather good.



Shame their ability to stay out of the outside lane isn't so good!

My main gripe is not just the amount of cameras and mobile speed traps but the current trend to reduce speed limits, at least in my part of the world.  It appears that more and more nsl dual and single carriageways are being reduced to 40 for not apparent reason. 

Some roads have even been reduced to 30 seemingly because of the influencial people living on them. 


Back to Top
spokey View Drop Down
Bavarian-Board Contributor
Bavarian-Board Contributor
Avatar
Offensive and obnoxious tub of lard

Joined: 02-March-2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1948
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-November-2005 at 20:14
Originally posted by livvy livvy wrote:

Because one has more chance of being listened to by government than the other


Why?
Ciao,
Spokey

Back to Top
spokey View Drop Down
Bavarian-Board Contributor
Bavarian-Board Contributor
Avatar
Offensive and obnoxious tub of lard

Joined: 02-March-2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1948
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-November-2005 at 20:24
I'll say it again:

Originally posted by spokey spokey wrote:

Originally posted by Nigel Nigel wrote:

They are trying to reduce the carnage, it will be either through training or limiting.



It will not be through training. That would take the responsibility for thinking away from the government, and they really do know what's best.

I am convinced that the government has a large vested interest in maintaining the scamera status quo, they get revenue, employment, the appearance of doing something constructive while actually doing nothing useful, and they increase the subjugation of the population by reducing their responsibility and by criminalising everyone (therefore enabling them to marginalise their voice).

Which government is going to walk away from so many wins?


There is NOTHING that RoSPA or IAM (or ABD or SafeSpeed) will be able to achieve against the government when it achieves so many KSI's with scameras.

And if I was going to waste my time with one of them as a lobbying organisation, it would probably be one with a very clear message and opinion that was as strong and out of touch as mine. At least I would feel that what I wanted to say was being said, not some sanitised, politically correct piffle.


Edited by spokey
Ciao,
Spokey

Back to Top
livvy View Drop Down
Really Senior Member II
Really Senior Member II


Joined: 12-November-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 745
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-November-2005 at 01:59
Originally posted by spokey spokey wrote:

Originally posted by livvy livvy wrote:

Because one has more chance of being listened to by government than the other


Why?


Because one lot attempts to address our (& the governments problems) on our roads, by methods other than camera use. The sort of methods that people here are shouting that the government should be doing instead of extensive camera use. They need more members though to lend weight to their cause of forcing higher standards. They may use different methods to the government currently, but they offer a better long term solution and they have the same objectives as the government. They have common ground & ideals.

The other organisation doesn't offer anything to reduce the number of collisions on our roads, so while joining these may make you feel better, they are less likely to help you make change on the issues you want. They are less likely to be listened to by those who have the power to make change of policy & have a vested interest in seeing reductions, because their policies don't support that. They don't have the same objectives as the government & have little common ground with the government.


As I said before you will only get change with support from within the government & you will have to be bringing something that interests them & may help them achieve what they want, if you want them to align themselves with your way of thinking.

Getting rid of all cameras is not viable.
Halting further ones deployment is.
Small groups have a history of forcing change in governemnt legislation & policy, where they can show it will benefit communities & at the same time promote fairness.



Edited by livvy
Back to Top
livvy View Drop Down
Really Senior Member II
Really Senior Member II


Joined: 12-November-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 745
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-November-2005 at 02:14
Originally posted by spokey spokey wrote:

I'll say it again:

There is NOTHING that RoSPA or IAM (or ABD or SafeSpeed) will be able to achieve against the government when it achieves so many KSI's with scameras.

And if I was going to waste my time with one of them as a lobbying organisation, it would probably be one with a very clear message and opinion that was as strong and out of touch as mine. At least I would feel that what I wanted to say was being said, not some sanitised, politically correct piffle.


If you want something from someone, insulting them is not the way to get it.

You need to emphasise the common ground with what you are trying to work towards, not emphasise the ones that force you apart.

So while that approach may sooth you a little it's not very positive in achieving your objectives, just as doing nothing isn't.
Back to Top
livvy View Drop Down
Really Senior Member II
Really Senior Member II


Joined: 12-November-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 745
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-November-2005 at 02:23
Originally posted by steven.seed steven.seed wrote:

Then that says to me the authorities are not  doing all they can about improving safety on the roads but are  looking at the financial side of things too much which gives credibility to the people who believe the cameras are there for revenue raising purposes.



They are always going to be attracted to cost effective options. But rather than trying to stop the current cameras, you should be trying to divert the money that is earned from them away from further enforcement & into further education & engineering.

Currently after netting off what is left after netting off goes to the government. You need to show them that if they are serious about road safety that the money after netting off should be invested in eucation & engineering & ring fenced for it.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 1617181920 29>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.234 seconds.