Speed camera mega-thread ***Read first post before posting***

jaffa20

gerardk55 wrote: »

Has anyone received a fixed penalty notice from one of the new vans yet?

I drove past one last night, was slowing down but might have been pinged, unsure really, just wondering what the turn around is on the notice? When I can expect my correspondence!

Any of the vans I've seen have not had any high viz markings on them.

It was at night so you probably would have seen a flash if you were caught.

Max_Damage

gerardk55 wrote: »

Has anyone received a fixed penalty notice from one of the new vans yet?

I drove past one last night, was slowing down but might have been pinged, unsure really, just wondering what the turn around is on the notice? When I can expect my correspondence!

Any of the vans I've seen have not had any high viz markings on them.

I did, got caught on the Firhouse road. €80 fine and 2 points. Thieving bastards!

mickeyboymel

Any pattern developing as to where these vans are appearing maybe more than once or twice? I need to "cough....drive past....cough" one of them to test something!!

gerardk55

Hi Max,

Sorry for your trouble, how long did it take them to issue the notice?

I didn't see a flash, but I was on top of the damn thing before I saw it.

There seems to be a one outside roxboro school pretty regular

gerardk55

I.S.T.

Max_Damage wrote: »

I did, got caught on the Firhouse road. €80 fine and 2 points. Thieving bastards!

One of their favourite spots, they may as well just put a permanent static camera there.

norrie rugger

Anan1 wrote: »

A lot of criminals are charged afterwards rather than being caught in the act.

Except that you ARE caught in the act but are allowed on your merry

Simon201

ah look what I spotted

halfback5

Simon201 wrote: »

ah look what I spotted

thats brillant:D

Iwannahurl

Contrary to some totally incorrect claims made in this forum, speed/safety cameras in the UK are not being decommissioned because they don't work. The cut in funding for the road safety partnerships was a politically-motivated cost-saving measure implemented by a Tory government.

The funding cuts were made despite direct evidence that the UK's speed/safety cameras were effective.

This is what the UK Dept for Transport has to say on the subject:

In June 2004, the Department for Transport (DfT) published a research report that analysed the effectiveness of the system in 24 areas over the first three years. This report updates the analysis to the 38 areas that were operating within the programme over the four year period from April 2000 to March 2004. Only areas operating within the programme for at least a year were included in the analysis.

High level results were as follows:

Vehicle speeds were down - At fixed sites, there was a 70% reduction and at mobile sites there was a 18% reduction. Overall, the proportion of vehicles speeding excessively (i.e. 15mph more than the speed limit) fell by 91% at fixed camera sites, and 36% at mobile camera sites.
Both casualties and deaths were down - Overall 42% fewer people were killed or seriously injured.
There was a positive cost-benefit of around 2.7:1.
The public supported the use of safety cameras for targeted enforcement.

Those who inexplicably believe that speed/safety cameras in the UK are being switched off because they are ineffective might also wish to consider why they are being switched on again in Oxfordshire following a reported 400% increase in speeding.

The RAC Foundation, an independent motoring research charity, said the following only in the last couple of days:

Eight hundred more people could be killed or seriously injured each year on Britain’s roads if all the fixed and mobile speed cameras operational before the road safety grant was cut in summer 2010 were to be decommissioned.

Speed/safety cameras have proven benefits. More are needed. There is no valid evidence-based argument against them. Spreading spurious doubt about them is dangerous because such misinformation encourages a culture of non-compliance and law-breaking. Such illegal behaviour is, or ought to be, discouraged in this forum, according to its own rules.

Iwannahurl

Is this the kind of thing we can expect in future, as anti speed/safety camera propaganda is spread by sceptics (who ought to know better and behave more responsibly)?

Mobile speed van destroyed in Dundalk arson attack

Joey the lips

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Is this the kind of thing we can expect in future, as anti speed/safety camera propaganda is spread by sceptics (who ought to know better and behave more responsibly)?

Mobile speed van destroyed in Dundalk arson attack

Its going to happen. My bets are on kids who prob dont even drive yet.

It might help campagn for fixed points then garmin can list then and charge us as an add on .

Iwannahurl

Joey the lips wrote: »

Its going to happen. My bets are on kids who prob dont even drive yet.

It might help campagn for fixed points then garmin can list then and charge us as an add on .

Not sure what you mean by "fixed points".

Do you mean a campaign for fixed camera locations?

If so, is there such a campaign? Who is campaigning, and why?

Dempo1

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Is this the kind of thing we can expect in future, as anti speed/safety camera propaganda is spread by sceptics (who ought to know better and behave more responsibly)?

Mobile speed van destroyed in Dundalk arson attack

Are u seriously suggesting this incident occurred because of so called anti speed/safety camera propaganda "as you call it"

I suspect this was more to do with mindless thugs who could let alone spell but have the intelligence to form an opinion?

I think the photos attached a few posts previous says exactly what these vans are here to do.

I am just surprised with all this wonderful technology the driver of the said van did not see whatever missile was thrown into the window coming. Bizarre to say the least, i suspect the driver was either absent or asleep.

hellboy99

Joey the lips wrote: »

Its going to happen.

+1

Agree with you, and we'll probably hear more of this happening over the coming months.

I.S.T.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Speed/safety cameras have proven benefits. More are needed. There is no valid evidence-based argument against them. Spreading spurious doubt about them is dangerous because such misinformation encourages a culture of non-compliance and law-breaking. Such illegal behaviour is, or ought to be, discouraged in this forum, according to its own rules.

Really?

TwoShedsJackson

Max_Damage wrote: »

I did, got caught on the Firhouse road. €80 fine and 2 points. Thieving bastards!

Where had they set up on that road, I travel it fairly often.

norrie rugger

Van attacks are starting


This is a disgrace. Regardless of how yoou feel about the vans, there is still a guys sitting in them that can be injured

Max_Damage

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

Where had they set up on that road, I travel it fairly often.

Not sure exactly where I was done (it happened on the 5th Nov), but from what I've heard, they're usually located near that new 'Victory Centre'.

Atomic Pineapple

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Is this the kind of thing we can expect in future, as anti speed/safety camera propaganda is spread by sceptics (who ought to know better and behave more responsibly)?

Mobile speed van destroyed in Dundalk arson attack

That act was perpetrated by mindless thugs who have no value for life, its highly unlikely they have any interest in the debate on speed cameras at all, in fact as stated it is unlikely they even know how to read.

Blaming someone who puts forward valid arguments against the introduction and use of mobile speed cameras for this type of behavior shows your lack of belief in your own counter arguments and highlights that you are in fact just attempting to troll this forum.

Dempo1

norrie rugger wrote: »

Van attacks are starting


This is a disgrace. Regardless of how yoou feel about the vans, there is still a guys sitting in them that can be injured

Yes i agree but a previous poster seems naively to think the attack was a result of anti speed camera propaganda, complete BS and more to do with mindless thugs.

I am curious however to know, how did such a thing happen, one would assume the van was manned and will all the technology on board how could such an attack happen without being noticed. I wondered was there anyone actually in the van or was it left abandoned.

I spoke to someone yesterday who told me one of these vans was left in the same position all day and night, indeed the driver was seen to be picked up early in the evening. This led me to think (perhaps cynically) that some of these vans are being left in position whilst not being opp orated fully. This particular van which i have seen for myself has no markings whatsoever, for all anyone would think, it was an abandoned pick up van.

Dempo1

draffodx wrote: »

That act was perpetrated by mindless thugs who have no value for life, its highly unlikely they have any interest in the debate on speed cameras at all, in fact as stated it is unlikely they even know how to read.

Blaming someone who puts forward valid arguments against the introduction and use of mobile speed cameras for this type of behavior shows your lack of belief in your own counter arguments and highlights that you are in fact just attempting to troll this forum.

You took the words right out of my mouth, ludicrous argument!:rolleyes:

Iwannahurl

draffodx wrote: »

That act was perpetrated by mindless thugs who have no value for life, its highly unlikely they have any interest in the debate on speed cameras at all, in fact as stated it is unlikely they even know how to read.

Total speculation framed as categorical and informed statement. I posed a question (re possible motivation), I did not attempt to state as fact.

draffodx wrote: »

Blaming someone who puts forward valid arguments against the introduction and use of mobile speed cameras for this type of behavior shows your lack of belief in your own counter arguments.

Non sequitur.

draffodx wrote: »

you are in fact just attempting to troll this forum.

Mere subjective opinion. Please identify the specific rule in this forum or on Boards generally which clearly and unambiguously identifies my posts as trolling.

-Chris-

draffodx wrote: »

That act was perpetrated by mindless thugs who have no value for life, its highly unlikely they have any interest in the debate on speed cameras at all, in fact as stated it is unlikely they even know how to read.

This is an important point IMHO, this act was performed by criminals rather than any other category of person.


And a quick mod reminder for everyone: promotion of, encouragement of, incitement to (etc.) illegal acts is against the Charter and will result in infractions/bans as appropriate.

Dempo1 wrote: »

I am curious however to know, how did such a thing happen, one would assume the van was manned and will all the technology on board how could such an attack happen without being noticed. I wondered was there anyone actually in the van or was it left abandoned.

The photos I've seen have the operator sitting in the back with the camera/equipment. I presume there's a bulkhead between the load area and driver compartment.
It'd be entirely reasonable to think that someone threw something through the driver/passenger window of the van, and the operator just presumed someone had thrown something at the van as they passed by.

Dempo1 wrote: »

This particular van which i have seen for myself has no markings whatsoever, for all anyone would think, it was an abandoned pick up van.

As I understand it, the unmarked ones are for surveying traffic, and the marked ones are for catching speeders. That's why there's a mix.

kwalshe

Am I right that this happened at 5am?
If so I'd say more the likely the van will have taken a picture of the suspect / disgruntled speeder shorthly before. That is if the van was not destroyed..

Atomic Pineapple

Dempo1 wrote: »

I am curious however to know, how did such a thing happen, one would assume the van was manned and will all the technology on board how could such an attack happen without being noticed. I wondered was there anyone actually in the van or was it left abandoned.

The driver sits in the back, which is separated from the cockpit fully I believe, the drivers window was smashed and the van was set alight that way.

In the report it says that the driver noticed smoke and got out of the van and call for assistance.

The ones with nothing signed on them are surveying vans, they check if speeding on a section of road is over a certain percentage and if it is they bring the money maker in.

Iwannahurl

hellboy99 wrote: »

+1

Agree with you, and we'll probably hear more of this happening over the coming months.

That's a bit worrying. Why do you think there will be more of it?

hellboy99

Dempo1 wrote: »

This particular van which i have seen for myself has no markings whatsoever, for all anyone would think, it was an abandoned pick up van.

We were all told by the crowd operating the vans, the NRA and the Garda comissioner that they were to be clearly marked as speed camera vans. If what you say is correct then I don't feel sorry for them as it comes across as a big money making scam and they should be coming out now with an explanation as to why it was unmarked.

-Chris-

hellboy99 wrote: »

We were all told by the crowd operating the vans, the NRA and the Garda comissioner that they were to be clearly marked as speed camera vans. If what you say is correct then I don't feel sorry for them as it comes across as a big money making scam and they should be coming out now with an explanation as to why it was unmarked.

A) the unmarked ones are survey vans

NOBODY deserves to be burned alive for doing their job.

hellboy99

Iwannahurl wrote: »

That's a bit worrying. Why do you think there will be more of it?

Because a lot think it's nothing but a money making scam. We were told that these vans were to be placed on sections of road where they have been accidents, not the case and secondly if what a previous poster here has said is correct a out the van being unmarked that does not help the company that operate them in convincing the public that it is not a money racket either.

Iwannahurl

kwalshe wrote: »

Am I right that this happened at 5am?
If so I'd say more the likely the van will have taken a picture of the suspect / disgruntled speeder shorthly before. That is if the van was not destroyed..

It is being described as a survey van and apparently was being used for a traffic survey, not detection of speeding.

I have no idea what such a survey van looks like, and so I can't speculate whether it might be mistaken for a speed/safety camera van.

Hypothesis: an arson attack at 04:45 on such a vehicle on such a road is unlikely to have been carried out by mindless thugs with reading difficulties.