# Speed camera madness



## paulatt (Oct 28, 2002)

Several RAC Rally competitors were caught on speed cameras between stages last year. They were all prosecuted and given various fines, points and even bans!

Absolutely ridiculous  
The mobile speed camera van just happened to be parked up on that road on that particular day. Do they think we are stupid.........

Have a look at the story......

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/3257523.stm


----------



## GRANNY (Jun 18, 2002)

Bit like fishing in a barrel.

The country is going speed camera mad.
In the last week we have seen 5 new cameras, in our local area.
Said it before will say it again Speed Cameras = Easy Revenue.


----------



## Major Audi Parts Guru (May 7, 2002)

Unfortunately this all stems from this loony Labour Government that we have in power......


----------



## A3DFU (May 7, 2002)

I suppose the drivers will use computer games soon :-/ 
Ridiculous situation!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## coupe-sport (May 7, 2002)

???

Fair game though - you speed and take the risk of getting caught. We all do it so what makes this so strange. It was on public roads


----------



## Guy (May 13, 2002)

PaulaTT

You seem to imply that Rally Drivers should be a group allowed to break speed limits on public roads.

Why is this?


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

It's not as if they were competing, so fair play in one way to the cops - after all, why shoukld Rally drivers get away with it.

HOWEVER, I've often thought that this would be a tactic employed by Police Forces as an easy way to genereate revenue. Park up by a major motoring event and catch everyone thta comes out as they're still hyped up.

It's annoying that they go to this much effort to catch speeders, and not this much effort to catch car thieves and their ilk.


----------



## teucer2000 (May 14, 2002)

Funniest thing I've seen for a long time was Gronholm stood next to his 206 minus his NSF wheel, arguing with a Copper that he could drive safely for 30 miles to the next service. He simply couldn't believe that anyone could question his ability to do it.


----------



## Guy (May 13, 2002)

> Posted by: Teucer2000 Posted on: Today at 3:48pm
> Funniest thing I've seen for a long time was Gronholm stood next to his 206 minus his NSF wheel, arguing with a Copper that he could drive safely for 30 miles to the next service. He simply couldn't believe that anyone could question his ability to do it.


There is no doubt he could do it, there is probably very little doubt that you could do it as well. The question is really, 'Can he do it safely?' Regrettably the answer is no.

It was funny though ....


----------



## Guy (May 13, 2002)

> Posted by: Kell Posted on: Today at 12:31pm
> 
> HOWEVER, I've often thought that this would be a tactic employed by Police Forces as an easy way to genereate revenue. Park up by a major motoring event and catch everyone thta comes out as they're still hyped up.
> 
> It's annoying that they go to this much effort to catch speeders, and not this much effort to catch car thieves and their ilk.


Isn't it annoying there are so many blatent speeders the Police have to waste their time catching those instead of catching car thieves and their ilk.


----------



## CapTT (Mar 2, 2003)

The problem is that rallying uses a system called target timing and you have an extact time to cover the road sections between special stages , you have to be at the stage start at your exact start time on the dot , early or late and you are penalised and will eventually go OTL and be excluded. The target timing average is set below the national speed limit for the exact mileage between the set points on the OS map.

The problem is that rallying in the UK , by and large , takes place in remote areas such as the welsh forests and the roads are either very poor or none existant.Then we have the problem of all the spectators who want to see the rally but can`t be arsed to walk into the forests and the general mass of bodies clogging the narrow roads up. So to be able to make the target time for stages the rally crews have no choice but to break the speed limits.Its a good old catch 22 situation.

Its all down to the RACMSA I`m afraid and thier piss poor organisation of the 12 car that is masquerading as a world championship rally. And FIA pandering to major manufacturers aswell.

Please don`t call this sham of a rally the RAC . The RAC rally was a proper rally that the powers that be killed a few years ago.

If they organised the rally properly and spread the route around the UK as they used to the speccies are spread also alleviating the problem to a degree. Now the RACMSA struggles to find marshals and officials to run the event as the majority of motorsport club members refuse to have anything to do with it .

The last RAC rally I did we only had congestion in kielder and there were no cash cameras then.Its a 21st century phenomena . Make money from motorists , don`t waste money on traffic cops and let bad drivers go unchecked but hammer the speeders who are mainly professsional people who can afford to pay. The whole speed camera "safety" thing is a government con..Big brother is watching you all.

The down side for wales is that they will lose the revenue from the tourists and sportspeople who will avoid the place like the plague.Who wants to be persecuted during your leisure time.?. But it will get worse before it gets better I fear.


----------



## paulatt (Oct 28, 2002)

> PaulaTT
> 
> You seem to imply that Rally Drivers should be a group allowed to break speed limits on public roads. Â Â
> 
> Why is this?


This public road would not normally attract the attention of a speed camera van!! It was deliberately placed there with the sole intention of catching rally drivers & followers.
Here, in South Wales, the mobile speed camera vans are a real pain. And are deliberately placed where they can gain the maximum revenue!!
Regards
mobile speed camera victim (twice)


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)




----------



## Stu-Oxfordshire (May 7, 2002)

I can see both sides of the story.

The question I'd like to ask is how many accidents have taken place on that road and/or the whole rally event over the years to warrant such a focus of Traffic Police and "Safety Cameras"


----------



## SteveS (Oct 20, 2003)

Accidents are caused by bad driving, not by speed per se. Speed(ing) in some situations IS bad driving, but not of itself does it cause accidents (IMO) .

1. IMO there are more accidents caused by inattentive/inconsiderate drivers than by speeding drivers.

2. Some speed limits are set (by whom btw?) at a level that should you obey them you are doomed to be an "inattentive driver".

3. Speed is easy to prove and thus easy to prosecute.

4. Driving inattentively in lane 3 at or below the limit will not cause you to get a ticket, it may cause an accident, but it won't get you a ticket.

5. IMPORTANTLY  what defines "speeding"? I contend it is those who SET the speed limits. On what basis are they doing this? Not a real world one for sure. 30 past a bunch of schoolkids and two lines of parked cars is probably a barmy speed, but not illegal. However 70 on a clear "A" road (even 80 or 90 if it's dual) isn't in any way out of order IMO, so why do they set it at 40 in some places and put a camera up to enforce it?

6. What is the difference between "speed" and "speeding"? (what some guy who thinks he knows better than you says it is for a given road IMO)

7. Life is like that.

8. ahh well, time to get off the hobby horse I guess.

9. discuss Â


----------



## NicholasButt1 (Feb 1, 2003)

One could argue that failure to adhere to an indicated speed limit is inattentiveness.

An inattentive driver is an accident waiting to happen.

Or are you are advocating selective adherence to road signs? That should make driving fun for everyone.


----------



## SteveS (Oct 20, 2003)

One could. I suspect that most over the limit are well aware of it though. And, crucially, also more aware of what's around them at the same time (if only to try and avoid a ticket).

Agreed and, at least partly, the point of my (long winded ) post.

Road signs? Nope, Didn't say that.


----------



## Antwerpman (Nov 4, 2002)

There are 2 issues here which are being rolled together:-


Should you obey the law[/*]
are the speeding laws sensible[/*]

of course we all (should) agree with the first point, but the second is up for debate. And if a law is not sensible, what mechanisms do you have for getting it changed?? Look at the pro-hunting lobby - they are advocating breaking en-mass what they consider to be an 'improper' law banning hunting of any form. What mechanisms are available to a motorist who feels the same?? You could argue that breaking the speeding laws is a fairly passive way of protesting against them in a similar way - we all do it, we all know that they are a bit ridiculous in places (both too high and too low depending upon situations such as those described above), but government seems unwilling to change anything.

Now if nobody protested and there were no speeding tickets issued, probably some suit in whitehall would decide that this was an indication that the speed limits were too high and should be dropped. As it is, I think they see it as a reasonable balance between 'most' people getting away with it, but some getting caught so you know you cant take the p!$$ too much


----------



## silvertt (Nov 5, 2003)

There is no doubt that speed cameras have been introduced in order to generate revenue.It should come as no surprise that most police forces have dramatically reduced their traffic departments since the advent of speed cameras.So the fact is less and less dangerous or careless drivers are called to account,only it would seem those who fail to spot the ubiquitous speed cameras suffer under our traffic laws these days!
THE ROAD SAFETY ARGUEMENT IS TOTALLY MANAFACTURED AND BOGUS!!!!!!


----------



## Dont I Recognise You (Oct 10, 2003)

> This public road would not normally attract the attention of a speed camera van!! It was deliberately placed there with the sole intention of catching rally drivers & followers.
> Here, in South Wales, the mobile speed camera vans are a real pain. And are deliberately placed where they can gain the maximum revenue!!
> Regards
> mobile speed camera victim (twice)


yep!

Though to be fair (why?) the camera van I saw was above the M4 - and the big new signs for 2 miles either side were plastered with 'speed cameras in use' warnings.....

Which doesn't mean I think it was not a cash generation exercise......
(I can't actually remember the last crash on that section)


----------



## David_A (May 7, 2002)

The Gronholm bit was funny - I remember the copper being interviewed afterwards - a jokey comment of "we could hardly keep up with him"

However this shows the great discretion that more trafpol have over scameras. The camera wouldn't have caught him, and yet has anyone educated the guys that the scameras caught have they hell.

Its much like smacking a kid whos shoplifted and not explaing the impact on the shopkeepers economy and the rise in the price of 1penny chews.

Or summat like that

Enough of my random babble for now.

Dave


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

> There are 2 issues here which are being rolled together:-
> 
> 
> Should you obey the law[/*]
> ...


What a good point Antwerpman. Â How come a relatively small bunch of hunting, shooting, fishing types can generate positive publicity for their cause, advocate breaking the law and not be hounded by the Police (pun intended )?

Yet the motorist, who must vastly outnumber hunters (?) can't get the weight of his feeling towards speed cameras felt without being drowned out by non-driving politicians droning "speed kills, speed kills" when there are still many other factors that contribute to road death but go unmentioned?

Oh, the Country Side Alliance are mainly Tory landowners who still have good political connections in Parliament. That would be it then :


----------

