'Scrap Cash-Cow Speed Cameras'

blastman

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Just this morning, I was stopped at traffic lights for some time, another driver came after a while and casually drove past me all the way over the stop line, stopping with the back wheels in the middle of the pedestrian crossing and the front blocking the cycle track that crossed the junction in front of us.

I have to ask, how would one of your beloved speed cameras have caught this infringement?

I've been driving around the south and east of the country over the last week and have driven down roads with room for one car and grass growing in the middle of the tarmac that have the same speed limit or higher as wide-open stretches of dual carriageway. Plainly those who decide speed limits are far from competent and would have difficulty persuading me that the prime motivation behind the use of speed cameras is safety. My passenger at the time (a Dubai resident and therefore no stranger to insane traffic) remarked on several occasions that they couldn't believe some of the speed limits.

faceman

I would be more interested in seeing radar thingies introduced and get rid of static cameras. (i.e. radar that tracks your average speed from point a to point b) Granted they arent perfect but they are more effective than cameras.

I wouldnt be too keen on increasing speed limits on many roads in Ireland given the poor standard of discipline on the roads. Speed and speed prevent is only one aspect in the wider issues.

cyclopath2001

blastman wrote:

I have to ask, how would one of your beloved speed cameras have caught this infringement?

My point was about discipline and the lack thereof. No doubt the same driver will, deliberately ignore speed limits as casually and grossly as she ignored the red lights and stop line.

faceman wrote: »

I would be more interested in seeing radar thingies introduced and get rid of static cameras. (i.e. radar that tracks your average speed from point a to point b) Granted they arent perfect but they are more effective than cameras.

Like the system mentioned in this story? Jeremy Clarkson has spouted some emissions on the topic.

faceman

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Like the system mentioned in this story? Jeremy Clarkson has spouted some emissions on the topic.

Spouted ****e more like it!

faceman

Something Ive always wondered - if speed cams are such a "cash cow", how come we dont have more of them?

astraboy

Because they are on the way.:rolleyes:

BTW, I was not suggesting the removal of speed limits in residental areas, or on national routes. I mearly suggest that speed limits be appropiate for the road, ie, the national secondary limit being raised to say 120kph would allow people to overtake at a decent speed and cruise along at a reasonable pace whe conditions allow. Motorways should certainly have their limits raised, I think if it happened we would not see the annihilation of innocent people on our motorways, but people would instead cruise at a speed that suits the conditions, their car and driving style. Speed limits are an appropriate tool in road safety, its a pity they are focused on solely as THE ONLY safety measure, not driver training, not police presence on the roads, not better infrastructure.....

As E92 said, motorways are designed with speeds of up to and over 100mph, so a limit of 90 mph would not be excessive on motorways.

I break speed limits at times and have the guts to admit it and stand up for my views. Just because I break the speed limit when safe to do so does not mean I break red lights, or plow across pedestrian crossings or mow down cyclists. I would consider myself a well trained, experienced and considerate driver. And I often ease over to the hard shoulder to let faster traffic pass, a consideration not shown by the high horse bandit cyclo.

(que usual drivel about how speeders are the spawn of Satan etc etc :rolleyes:)

Bee

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

There's an awful lot of law-breaking going on. Honest citizens should be protected and law-breakers should be put off the roads. Cameras are useful tools which allow scarce Garda resources to be deployed more effectively.

Statements that cameras are 'revenue generators' are just propaganda from the law-breaking lobby of 'Ordinary Decent Speeders'. It's like criminals complaining about window locks making their job more difficult.

What is badly needed are cameras for cycle lanes

The majority of cyclists are to be witnessed daily running red lights and ignoring all traffic laws in Dublin city centre therby putting law abiding motorists and pedestrians at risk.

What is needed as well are cycle speed ramps coming up to traffic lights, pedestrian crossings and all other areas these pond dwellers believe they have a right to ignore.

Of course speed cameras are simply cash generators that allow a lazy government coupled with poor policing to generate a stealth tax that has zippo effect on road safety

What is needed are

Money to be spent on roads to engineer-out accident blackspots
Direct investment in driver training & education
An insurance and license system for cyclists with strict cycling traffic law enforcement
A trained Garda traffic corps to correctly enforce traffic laws, not the leather clad moustache wearing chaps hiding behind bushes whilst holding their tools on safe motorways gathering revenue for government.

astraboy

OOO he won't like that Bee! Don't you know cyclist's are the saviors of our planet and are both above the law, and can do no wrong....:rolleyes:

Your last remarks hit the nail on the head. Glad to see some others have some common sense on the issue.

Steve

faceman wrote: »

Something Ive always wondered - if speed cams are such a "cash cow", how come we dont have more of them?

What planet are you on? read the news much?

astraboy wrote: »

Just because I break the speed limit when safe to do so does not mean I break red lights, or plow across pedestrian crossings or mow down cyclists. I would consider myself a well trained, experienced and considerate driver. And I often ease over to the hard shoulder to let faster traffic pass, a consideration not shown by the high horse bandit cyclo.

I agree - mostly. You know where I stand on this so no point in repeating myself, I also welcome cyclopaths veiwpoint though, it brings balance in an odd type of way.
I've a feeling I'm going to be sorry I said that though.

Bee wrote: »

A trained Garda traffic corps to correctly enforce traffic laws, not the leather clad moustache wearing chaps hiding behind bushes whilst holding their tools on safe motorways gathering revenue for government.

That's unwarranted, I have great respect for the thankless job the Guards do. They don't make the stupid policy, they have to implement it and are therefore blamed for it. There are many well respected and sound minded posters in motors who are traffic corps and if I ever get stopped, I hope to god it's by one of them.

cyclopath2001

Bee wrote: »

What is badly needed are...

I agree in general. It's important that all road users obey the law. First, though, let's properly enforce the laws we have, and let's stop making excuses and inventing consipiracy theories about 'tax cameras', or clinging to the comforting postings of people pretending to be Gardai.

astraboy wrote:

Don't you know cyclist's are the saviors of our planet and are both above the law, and can do no wrong....

You're mistaken. I think cyclists must obey the laws too and I have certainly seen many wrong moves by cyclists. But, I agree with you that cycling has great potential for safe, healthy, environmentally friendly transport.

knuth

SteveC wrote: »

That's unwarranted, I have great respect for the thankless job the Guards do. They don't make the stupid policy, they have to implement it and are therefore blamed for it. There are many well respected and sound minded posters in motors who are traffic corps and if I ever get stopped, I hope to god it's by one of them.

Whats your name son? STEVE C, STEVE SEE, COUGH STEVE *Boards.ie* SEE!!

faceman

SteveC wrote: »

What planet are you on? read the news much?

Clearly not the same planet. If the response has something to do with privatised speed cams then that doesnt make sense.

Steve

lordlame wrote: »

Whats your name son? STEVE C, STEVE SEE, COUGH STEVE *Boards.ie* SEE!!

sekrit boards handshake usually works...:D

faceman wrote: »

If the response has something to do with privatised speed cams then that doesnt make sense.

Don't follow you.

Johnny Utah

The truth about speed cameras:

Part 1
http://youtube.com/watch?v=noTllmqWjOU&feature=related




Part 2
http://youtube.com/watch?v=wTBXROqE9l8&feature=related








I, for one, will be investing in a can of photoblocker :D:D:D

http://www.photoblockeruk.com/special/

peasant

Johnny Utah wrote: »

I, for one, will be investing in a can of photoblocker :D:D:D

Can't be bothered to dig up the relevant legislation, but as far as I know to have your number plate in any other state but legible and conforming to the specifications is illegal in Ireland.

Rowley Birkin QC

lordlame wrote: »

I witness this very rarely on the Dublin roads. Ironically, it is quite frequent in the majority of counties outside Dublin - the same counties that DO NOT encounter the same policing as Dublin.

Sorry lordlame, but that is just plain wrong. I'm studying in Dublin Sept-June, living at home in Cork and commuting to Limerick for the summer. I can tell you, in my experience, the same level of policing exists countrywide. Just this moning I was travelling to work on the R513 and there was a cop out doing a speedcheck. I encounter checkpoints all the time on my travels around the country and do not see any difference between jurisdictions.

What this thread doesn't need is Dublin vs. the rest of the country.

astrofool

I always wonder why they don't post more speed limit signs on our roads, for example, there's no reason why the speed limit couldn't also be posted on a traffic light, the driver has to sit at it, and acknowledge it, as it is, half our signs are way too small, hidden by trees, or completely non existant.

It's very frustrating to be on a road and not be able to get quick acknowledgement of the current limit while people speed past you at 100+.

I'd also support dropping the fine element, and keeping the points only, completely removes the incentive to raise money (and have cops setting up mobile points on the last few days of the month). They should be paid for out of motor tax.

Steve

Johnny Utah wrote: »

The truth about speed cameras:

:eek: Are the same cameras used here?

It does look like misoperation of the cameras is to blame for the false readings. Who's to say how many fines are generated this way though - even the camera operator may not be aware he's making an error.

Mr. Presentable

Perhaps we need to invest in more cameras, and to allay the claims of revenue generation, we'll have no fine, just double the points.

Johnny Utah

SteveC wrote: »

:eek: Are the same cameras used here?

It does look like misoperation of the cameras is to blame for the false readings. Who's to say how many fines are generated this way though - even the camera operator may not be aware he's making an error.

The above clip is somewhat mis-named because it actually focuses on radar and speed detection, rather than speed cameras. However, it does show that a person should be properly trained before they are allowed to perform a speed check. Furthermore, when the private companies take over the speed detection duties, I'd say that they'll go about their business with the same gutso as the clampers around Dublin city centre, ie. expect them to be hidden behind a tree, wearing a ghillie suit:D, beside some of the country's safest roads where the speed limit is unusually low.


I've watched a few programmes on the subject of speed detection, and I remember one show on ITV which said a number of cases in England were thrown out of court because the apparatus used had not been calibrated properly. The programme showed that the effects of not calibrating the radar/laser properly could lead to highly inaccurate readings, taking a reading from a different car, etc. In other words, if the laser's line of sight is not accurate and it was pointing at a car on a two-lane motorway, the laser could pick up a speed reading from a car travelling on the outside lane of the motorway.

This was a few years ago, and since then the legislature in this country brought in legislation which states it is not necessary to calibrate the speed detection apparatus before conducting speed checks. :eek:

Steve

Johnny Utah wrote: »

Furthermore, when the private companies take over the speed detection duties, I'd say that they'll go about their business with the same gutso as the clampers around Dublin city centre.

That remains to be seen - I sincerely hope not. Interesting to note that a recent article on the contract, they are only estimating €30M revenue where they were previously estimating €75m.

Speed Camera: contract
A summary of what the successful bidder must do under the terms of the contract.

Number of hours of monitoring: 6,000 a month.
Where: 90 per cent of monitoring is to be on rural, secondary roads.
When: the majority of monitoring is to be at weekends and at night, starting by the end of this year.
Potential: Department of Justice estimate is for half a million speed camera penalties a year.
Revenue: At €60 for each penalty, the cameras could generate €30 million a year.
Cost: In the region of €25 million a year for 72,000 hours of monitoring.
© 2008 The Irish Times

Johnny Utah wrote: »

I've watched a few programmes on the subject of speed detection, and I remember one show on ITV which said a number of cases in England were thrown out of court because the apparatus used had not been calibrated properly. The programme showed that the effects of not calibrating the radar/laser properly could lead to highly inaccurate readings, taking a reading from a different car, etc. In other words, if the laser's line of sight is not accurate and it was pointing at a car on a two-lane motorway, the laser could pick up a speed reading from a car travelling on the outside lane of the motorway.

The fact still remains that whether it's calibrated correctly or not, it can return false readings it not operated correctly. The 2nd video has a good example where the reading started on the windscreen and finished on the front of the car, thus adding (10-15mph?) on to the reading.
The other thing I noticed from that video is that if the operators need to keep camera movement to a minimum then the only places they'll get good readings is on clear straight roads.

Johnny Utah wrote: »

This was a few years ago, and since then the legislature in this country brought in legislation which states it is not necessary to calibrate the speed detection apparatus before conducting speed checks. :eek:

Welcome to Ireland..only here could it be possible to condone the use of faulty / broken speed detectors BY LAW.:rolleyes:

astraboy

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

You're mistaken. I think cyclists must obey the laws too and I have certainly seen many wrong moves by cyclists.

Yourself included? You have previously posted that you would not warn drivers on a busy dual carriageway about a sudden slowdown in traffic by using your hazzards, and refuse to acknowledge the rules of the road by easing over to the hard shoulder to allow drivers with a bit more pace to overtake, so I'll make no apology I I believe you frequently break the rules yourself and indeed would be more of a hazzard then an aware speeder

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

But, I agree with you that cycling has great potential for safe, healthy, environmentally friendly transport.

Is'nt it already?!

On the main topic, I reckon with the Gov coffers in poor shape these new cash cows along with the stealth taxes involved will be rolled out sooner rather then later. Que much media coverage of how important this is to saving lives, and improving road safety. I'm no consipircy theorist but we can all see the REAL motivation for speed cameras.

A final point, anyone see the new measure for road safety in Kildare(maybe kilkenny?) Cardboard cut outs of cop cars on straight roads, pretending to be doing speed checks. How about actually placing some REAL cops on the road and have them cruise along pulling dangerous drivers? Maybe I'll call a cardboard ambulance if I'm in an accident....:rolleyes:

eringobragh

I've used the LTI 20-20 (What the guards use) & I can tell you for fact that with the flick of the wrist (Size of a hair) you can turn 30mph into 50mph :mad:

Its known as 'the slip effect'. Ive successfuly managed to get a 7mph from a wall

The LTI has error trapping to prevent such occurances put seeing as teh handheld apparatus isn't used to the regulations i.e shoulder stock /or tripod not used it will result in a miscarraige of jusice in alot of case's. The Israeli police are notorious for this. A number of cases have been struck out in the UK because of video evidence.

I for one will fight a ticket if I know i'm under and i get tagged.

And the mobile camera Use this system connected to the above handheld.

eringobragh

Johnny Utah wrote: »

I, for one, will be investing in a can of photoblocker :D:D:D

http://www.photoblockeruk.com/special/

Doesn't workon newer systems because of the double flash! Plenty of video on youtube about it.

cyclopath2001

astraboy wrote: »

You have previously posted that you would not warn drivers on a busy dual carriageway about a sudden slowdown in traffic by using your hazzards,

That's inaccurate and you know it.

astraboy wrote: »

refuse to acknowledge the rules of the road by easing over to the hard shoulder to allow drivers with a bit more pace to overtake

That's not true either. I did acknowledge the guideline. What you refer to is not a rule and there has been much discussion of how the guideline should be interpreted.

astraboy wrote: »

so I'll make no apology I believe you frequently break the rules yourself

So, on the basis of deliberately misquoting me on a difference of opinion about the application of two road practice guidelines, you arrive at the conclusion that I 'frequently break the rules'. Nonsense. I can still remember my horror at how you abused an accident victim and it's clear from reading your posts that you break the law as and when it's convenient and if you think you can get away with it.

I sympathise with those affected by inaccurate speed cameras or where a limit is not clearly posted or where it's just plain wrong. But let's divorce these reasonable arguments from obsessive attempts to undermine any kind of a speed-limit compliance initiative.

L1011

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

That's inaccurate and you know it.

Its inaccurate because you actually said you'd warn people by tapping your brakes - aka "Brake testing" and considering a prosecutable dangerous driving offence in this country.

Astraboy accidentally accused you of being discourteous when in fact you said you'd be downright dangerous, and in violation of the law. Should have just accepted what he said...

L1011

TheNog wrote: »

You cannot be seriously suggesting this? Have you ever seen a driver overtake in the face of oncoming traffic or do something else equally incompetent? And would you expect these drivers should be allowed to choose their speed.

I suspect Darwinian selection would cull these out quite quickly if we had Autobahns... Anyway, when was the last time you saw oncoming traffic on a motorway?

eringobragh

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

That's inaccurate and you know it.

And to quote you....pulls in for a packet of fags on dual carriageway :pac:

cyclopath2001 wrote:

My own preference is to rely on my brake lights & keep the hazards for exceptional situations. Generally, I'll tap the brake lights on a bit while slowing down, giving longer and longer taps gradually depending on circumstances

Do want me to reiterate the extracts from RoadCraft again :P

astraboy

eringobragh wrote: »

And to quote you....pulls in for a packet of fags on dual carriageway :pac:



Do want me to reiterate the extracts from RoadCraft again :P

I know, classic!:rolleyes::D I was'nt aware all the sudden slowdowns on Corks south link during the evening were due to a guy pulling into the non existent centra on the road and buying 20 B+H.

Thanks to MYOB for proving cyclo himself is not above breaking the law now and again. I'm sure he'll post links to some other countries driving laws to disprove me however.:rolleyes:

cyclopath2001 wrote:

That's inaccurate and you know it.

My good man I have'nt been inaccurate since around the 6th of July 1998, if I'm not mistaken, which I am not because I never am. That is why my driving is so impeccable.

BTW the RULES of the road are rule assuch, the clew is in the title.:rolleyes: Do try not to hold the rest of us up when you are pootling along at 35kph again, ranting about how society has fallen due to the speeders.......

peasant

enough now ...