Gasto Vans (not a happy Camper)

Victor

Originally posted by ColinM
Anyone who thinks that speed traps are not about making money first, and road safety a distinct second is extremely naive. In fact, it's a non-argument. At least in the UK, the local authorities admit that their primary purpose are as a source of revenue.

Really, the Comptroller and Auditor General in his report said the opposite, fines don't cover the cost of the Garda / Court time involved. In the UK the typical speeding ticket would need to rise to STG£100+ (€150) to cover all the costs. Specific cameras do make money - on the A3(?) in London at a sharp bend on an urban dual carriageway, the camera needed be set at 70mph instead of the speed limit of 40mph (sharp bend on an urban dual carriageway) to stop the video running out during the day.

Originally posted by Kali
tell that to the lad who smacked by a courier coming the wrong way down lower baggot st... and died, countless other serious incidents occur from similar accidents (pedestrian steps out on a one-way road looking towards traffic and gets knocked down by a cyclist coming the wrong way).

I think the statistics point in the other direction. That incident was very much the exception.

ColinM

Originally posted by Victor
Really, the Comptroller and Auditor General in his report said the opposite, fines don't cover the cost of the Garda / Court time involved. In the UK the typical speeding ticket would need to rise to STG£100+ (€150) to cover all the costs. Specific cameras do make money - on the A3(?) in London at a sharp bend on an urban dual carriageway, the camera needed be set at 70mph instead of the speed limit of 40mph (sharp bend on an urban dual carriageway) to stop the video running out during the day.

What garda/court time? You post in your fine or you walk in in person to queue up and and hand over the money. If you don't do it within 4 weeks they double the fine. That must get real expensive for them. They don't take credit card either so that saves on costs for them too, and makes it a lot more hassle for you.

I read an article in a recent Sunday Times where they were saying that UK local councils had so much money from speeding fines that they literally were swamped in money and couldn't keep up with the amount rolling in. I'll see if I can find the article.

[edit - incidentally, i see your trip counter has now rolled over to zero, Victor. Do I win the widescreen telly now? Cheers.]

NeRb666

Originally posted by Victor
Really, the Comptroller and Auditor General in his report said the opposite, fines don't cover the cost of the Garda / Court time involved. In the UK the typical speeding ticket would need to rise to STG£100+ (€150) to cover all the costs. Specific cameras do make money - on the A3(?) in London at a sharp bend on an urban dual carriageway, the camera needed be set at 70mph instead of the speed limit of 40mph (sharp bend on an urban dual carriageway) to stop the video running out during the day. I think the statistics point in the other direction. That incident was very much the exception.

I'm not calling you a liar, but I do find that very hard to believe (I guess I'm calling the C&AG a liar:) ).

1. If they were losing money on the whole camera operation, they would simply raise the fines. There's absolutely no reason why they couldn't do it - at the end of the day it's a punishment for a crime so nobody can argue against it.

2. If these cameras were doing what they are supposed to do, i.e. save lives, then the money saved on less dead people would easily cover the cost of running the things.

3. As ColinM said, there is no court time involved unless the motorists chooses to go to court, if that happens they will get hammered.

Victor

Originally posted by ColinM
I read an article in a recent Sunday Times where they were saying that UK local councils had so much money from speeding fines that they literally were swamped in money and couldn't keep up with the amount rolling in. I'll see if I can find the article.

I understoood it was central government got hte money from all fines in the UK, but that police forces wanted (in the future) to retain a portion.

Originally posted by ColinM
[edit - incidentally, i see your trip counter has now rolled over to zero, Victor. Do I win the widescreen telly now? Cheers.]

Not quite, someone paid ecksor to reset it. Money to Santa Strike Force.

ColinM

Originally posted by Victor
I understoood it was central government got hte money from all fines in the UK, but that police forces wanted (in the future) to retain a portion.

Maybe that's the way it is, but it was the amount of money more than where it was going that grabbed my attention! I'm trying to find the article.

Not quite, someone paid ecksor to reset it. Money to Santa Strike Force.

Ah I see. Well maybe that's spoiled it for all those punters who were betting about it. Now you join the very elite club of people who have zero post count and yet have posted at least once.

an_taoiseach

If anything the joggers and cyclists are more aware of what is going on around them than the motorist in their car with the heating on full singing away to their hearts content who is startled by the "idiot cyclist who came out of nowhere". If they are not looking at the road then of course they won't see them.

Last year I saw a (pedal) cyclists knocked off his bike in Tara Street ( evening rush hour ) by a
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Jogger

and whats more he didnt stop. Does the law require such people to stop & identify themselves ?

( BTW the Jogger knew very well what he had done - I saw him look back to the cyclist when he was on the ground )

:dunno:

an_taoiseach

I understoood it was central government got hte money from all fines in the UK, but that police forces wanted (in the future) to retain a portion.

LOL


http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=72258&f=10&h=0




An T

an_taoiseach

Have a read of this :

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=69864&f=10&h=0

BUT ... Would have been no use without the Mark 1 eyeball to interpret the situation


An T

Victor

Originally posted by an_taoiseach
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=72258&f=10&h=0

Not very meaningful if it gives no details of how many tickets were involved, how many accident reductions occurred etc.

It is also wholly disingenuous to say only 1% of the police costs went on cameras when (a) the cameras were probably bought previously (b) it is the council, not the police who buy the cameras.

Originally posted by tunney
40 mph in the heart of dublin city is never valid.

Originally posted by the evil belly
what about the parts of dublin that have 40mph speed limits?

Very few areas of the **city** have 40mph limits (other than the N4 and some areas around the M50).

Originally posted by Silent Bob
What if the city centre is devoid of other people and there is just you on your vehicle? Seems 40mph at times would be a perfectly safe speed... Never is a very strong word. Respect it, don't abuse it.

Originally posted by BigEejit
Tunney was obviously trolling ... 40mph in any city centre is not a problem at 5AM on a ordinary Tuesday night ...

In few and far between locations, remember it is now a 24 hour city.

Originally posted by BigEejit
I have seen it .... 50 meters away from the 40Mph sign on the Macroom side of Ballincollig ... catching all the people who hadnt slowed down before they entered the 40mph zone ... this is a wide road with no turns to speak of, purely a money making exercise

Of course this is actually one of the most dangerous stretches of roa din the country, with more than twice the level of accidents it should have (source: NRA).

the evil belly

Originally posted by BigEejit
50 meters away from the 40Mph sign on the Macroom side of Ballincollig ... catching all the people who hadnt slowed down before they entered the 40mph zone ... this is a wide road with no turns to speak of, purely a money making exercise

actually a friend of mine was killed around there and there's also the ****ing huge factory to consider and all the houses etc.