Cardiff catastrophe!

[chadded]

Quote[/b] (Bob Cratchitt @ April 28 2005,18:54)]A law that has been used to generate revenue!!

Traffic speed cameras are only meant to be used in traffic accident blackspots. So can you tell me chadded if this section of the road is considered a blackspot?

Er, no, I can't. My point is that whilst you may disagree with the law, it doesn't mean it should be ok to break it.


IMO the law should be changed, so that driving at 63 in a 60 is not going to get you fined etc. But at the end of the day, whether you are 3 mph over or 30, you are still over the limit. IE, where do you draw the line?

My views on speed cameras come from sitting in a camera van watching one vehicle do 93mph in a 40mph zone, and then 10 minutes later, and another doing 102.

Try looking at it in an positive way. If your loved one is run down and killed by a speeding motorist, you are going to be the first person to be ranting and raving at the police about the outrageous offence of speeding motorists, and the fact that the police are doing nothing to stop them.

Oh, ####, look at that, they already are.

 

[chadded]

Quote[/b] (The General @ April 28 2005,20:06)]Im sure Mr Cyril was being slightly sarcastic. He knows he was wrong and will pay (literally!) the consequences ...

I don't doubt that he was. But he raises an interesting point.

 

[The General]

I dont speed so im not getting involved ...

 

[* ORM *]

Quote[/b] (The General @ April 29 2005,13:22)]I dont speed so im not getting involved ...

Kev, it's not that you don't speed it's more that you can't, even downhill with a tailwind.

The whole issue of cameras has been totally mismanaged. Personally I'd support any measures for camera usage in urban areas/blackspots in exchange for a recognition that 70mph outside peak periods on motorways with today's vehicles is wholly unreasonable.

 

[Bucks_blue]

One of the guys at work brought in to work an article from the Sunday Express (April 17th) saying that the speed cameras situated on bridges above motorways(In particular the M4)are usually parked illegaly and as such the evidence gained(spped camera film) whilst parked illegally is not admissable in court. As the police are not allowed to break the law whilst upholding the law.

The article speaks to an ex copper who says that unless there is a drop kerb on the bridge(unlikely) the police vans are parking on the footpath which is illegal. Unless...... They have obtained the relevant permit. But the ex copper said that they never bother.

 

[The General]

Ignore this.

 

[Bob Cratchitt]

Quote[/b] (chadded @ April 29 2005,12:23)]My views on speed cameras come from sitting in a camera van watching one vehicle do 93mph in a 40mph zone, and then 10 minutes later, and another doing 102.

Try looking at it in an positive way. If your loved one is run down and killed by a speeding motorist, you are going to be the first person to be ranting and raving at the police about the outrageous offence of speeding motorists, and the fact that the police are doing nothing to stop them.

Chadded - you seem to like to use extreme examples to back your point.

Well Mad Cyril is talking about a motorway and if my loved one is killed by a speeding motorist, would i hate the motorist no because as you know pedestrians are not permitted to walk on a motorway, so in effect my loved one would be breaking the law.

Of course people who do 92 or 102mph on 40mph urban roads need to have the book thrown at them because these roads are not built for such speeds and pedestrians are permitted to use them.

 

[Firestorm]

The current limit of 70 was devised in the 70's when Brakes were worse (all Drum no Discs) tyres were poorer as well as narrower, no ABS, road surfaces were poorer. So in reality the safety aspect has increased dramatically.

The limits in 30 and 40 zones are there for a very good, non motorist reason and I am all in favour of tight monitoring of them. However looking at the way pedestrians are these days as well as the apparent belief amongst some cyclists that the Highway code doesn't apply, I am sure a bit of training to other road users would help matters.

Where is Tufty when you need him.....

 

[chadded]

Quote[/b] (Bob Cratchitt @ April 29 2005,15:41)]Chadded - you seem to like to use extreme examples to back your point.

Well Mad Cyril is talking about a motorway and if my loved one is killed by a speeding motorist, would i hate the motorist no because as you know pedestrians are not permitted to walk on a motorway, so in effect my loved one would be breaking the law.

Of course people who do 92 or 102mph on 40mph urban roads need to have the book thrown at them because these roads are not built for such speeds and pedestrians are permitted to use them.

Fair one, but I was talking generally, obviously pedestrians aren't allowed on motorways, but the law is still there, and it was broken. I agree, the limit on motorways should be higher, but as it's not, we still have to abide by it.

P.S, Before anyone thinks I am, I'm not a civvy copper.

 

[BrettieAngell]

My driving instructor got caught doing 61 in a 50 zone, he was lucky though cos he was doing 80 but saw the camera in time to be able to slow down enough!