Call for more urban speed cameras

[Ian]

Mr. Smith has convinced me that speed cameras are a good thing, I think there should be a lot more
of them in urban situations, some of the revenue raised could be used to improve direct traffic
free cycle routes, all in favour say "aye".

Ian

 

[Andrew B]

"aye"

The money could also go to families that have been destroyed by cagers !

Andrew B

"Ian" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:BB14D90E.5F46%[email protected]...
Mr. Smith has convinced me that speed cameras are a good thing, I think there should be a lot more
of them in urban situations, some of the revenue raised could be used to improve direct traffic
free cycle routes, all in favour say "aye".

Ian

 

[Just Zis Guy]

> Mr. Smith has convinced me that speed cameras are a good thing

A first! Mohammed Saeed Al-Smith persuading somebody of something!

> there should be a lot more of them in urban situations, some of the
revenue
> raised could be used to improve direct traffic free cycle routes, all in favour say "aye".

Aye!

--
Guy
===
I wonder if you wouldn't mind piecing out our imperfections with your thoughts; and while you're
about it perhaps you could think when we talk of bicycles, that you see them printing their proud
wheels i' the receiving earth; thanks awfully.

 

[Geraint Jones]

"Andrew B" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "aye"
>
> The money could also go to families that have been destroyed by cagers !
>
> Andrew B
>
> "Ian" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:BB14D90E.5F46%[email protected]...
> Mr. Smith has convinced me that speed cameras are a good thing, I think there should be a lot
> more of them in urban situations, some of the revenue raised could be used to improve direct
> traffic free cycle routes, all in favour say "aye".
>
> Ian

Some of it could be put to good use re-educating top-posters who don't mark quotation.

 

[Nathaniel Porte]

"Ian" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:BB14D90E.5F46%[email protected]...
> Mr. Smith has convinced me that speed cameras are a good thing, I think there should be a lot more
> of them in urban situations,

Most certainly

>some of the revenue raised could be used to improve direct traffic free cycle routes, all in favour
>say "aye".
>

Which is certainly better than giving the police the money (which is one of my gripes about the
implementation of speed cameras)

 

[Peter Clinch]

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

> A first! Mohammed Saeed Al-Smith persuading somebody of something!

Not at all. He persuaded me threads that feature a lot of his posts weren't worth my while reading
some time ago now.

Pete.

p.s., aye!

--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email protected]
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Tony W]

"Ian" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:BB14D90E.5F46%[email protected]...
> Mr. Smith has convinced me that speed cameras are a good thing, I think there should be a lot more
> of them in urban situations, some of the
revenue
> raised could be used to improve direct traffic free cycle routes, all in favour say "aye".

Interesting. Reverse Trolling designed to cause annoyance to the Trolls. Like it.

T

 

[Jim Price]

Ian wrote:
> Mr. Smith has convinced me that speed cameras are a good thing, I think there should be a lot more
> of them in urban situations, some of the revenue raised could be used to improve direct
> traffic free cycle routes, all in favour say "aye".

Aye added to sig file for posterity.

--
Jim Price

http://www.jimprice.dsl.pipex.com

Conscientious objection is hard work in an economic war.

Aye!.

 

[Disgruntled Goa]

On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 14:41:18 +0100, Ian <[email protected]> wrote:

>Mr. Smith has convinced me that speed cameras are a good thing, I think there should be a lot more
> of them in urban situations, some of the revenue raised could be used to improve direct traffic
> free cycle routes, all in favour say "aye".

Aye. Especially if the amount of fines are increased.

--
DG

Bah!

 

[Not Me]

Ian deftly scribbled:

> Mr. Smith has convinced me that speed cameras are a good thing, I think there should be a lot more
> of them in urban situations,

Nay.

> some of the revenue raised could be used to improve direct traffic free cycle routes, all in
> favour say "aye".

A laudable aim ..

--
Digweed

 

[John B]

Ian wrote:

> Mr. Smith has convinced me that speed cameras are a good thing,

So P**l Sm**h has a use.

> I think there should be a lot more of them in urban situations, some of the revenue raised could
> be used to improve direct traffic free cycle routes, all in favour say "aye".

Aye ... and preferably hidden.

John B

 

[Nathaniel Porte]

"John B" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Ian wrote:
>
> > Mr. Smith has convinced me that speed cameras are a good thing,
>
> So P**l Sm**h has a use.
>
> > I think there should be a lot more of them in urban situations, some of the
revenue
> > raised could be used to improve direct traffic free cycle routes, all in favour say "aye".
>
> Aye ... and preferably hidden.
>

Surely the aim is to stop people speeding more than it is to catch those who do?

 

[John B]

Nathaniel Porter wrote:

> "John B" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > Ian wrote:
> >
> > > Mr. Smith has convinced me that speed cameras are a good thing,
> >
> > So P**l Sm**h has a use.
> >
> > > I think there should be a lot more of them in urban situations, some of the
> revenue
> > > raised could be used to improve direct traffic free cycle routes, all in favour say "aye".
> >
> > Aye ... and preferably hidden.
> >
>
> Surely the aim is to stop people speeding more than it is to catch those who do?

I agree completely.

With highly visible cameras drivers will/can speed withour fear of being caught between the cameras
and then slow down at the camera site. If they don't know where the cameras are situated they need
to drive below the limits _all_ the time to avoid penalty.

IMO this is a better solution.

Another answer could be to have every inch of every road under surveillance, then it would not
matter if they were hidden or not.

Of course if drivers obeyed the HC then they would have nothing to fear anyway.

John B

 

[Garry Broad]

On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 20:05:10 +0100, "Nathaniel Porter" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"John B" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> Ian wrote:
>>
>> > Mr. Smith has convinced me that speed cameras are a good thing,
>>
>> So P**l Sm**h has a use.
>>
>> > I think there should be a lot more of them in urban situations, some of the
>revenue
>> > raised could be used to improve direct traffic free cycle routes, all in favour say "aye".
>>
>> Aye ... and preferably hidden.
>>
>
>Surely the aim is to stop people speeding more than it is to catch those who do?

Guess that's the education argument again. Mind you, how many of us volunteer to *learn* unless
we're really interested?

Personally, I actually think the situation will never improve until it implodes, (yes, I'm a
pessimistic old toad) as 'The Government' <any damn government> realizes <as they did years ago>
that it's a lucrative business this motoring lark. More and more opportunites to raise revenue by
taxing this and penalizing that. People still pay. It's not really in their interests to 'eradicate'
the problem. Occupation of the rich will motoring be. And the people who can't afford it, they won't
care, they'll just drive like they do now anyway!! Is there really any indication whatsoever that
'traffic' will actually decrease henceforth?

Boy, know what?.... these issues are too stressful for me....I'm sticking to strictly technical
stuff in the future ....like how much better the shifting/rear derailleur is with my new 9sp 12-25
casstte on this Cannondale here. Works like a dream. That's more like it! Nothing like decent
shifting. Thanks.

Garraye

 

[Nathaniel Porte]

"John B" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Nathaniel Porter wrote:
>
> > "John B" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > Ian wrote:
> > >
> > > > Mr. Smith has convinced me that speed cameras are a good thing,
> > >
> > > So P**l Sm**h has a use.
> > >
> > > > I think there should be a lot more of them in urban situations, some of the
> > revenue
> > > > raised could be used to improve direct traffic free cycle routes,
all in
> > > > favour say "aye".
> > >
> > > Aye ... and preferably hidden.
> > >
> >
> > Surely the aim is to stop people speeding more than it is to catch those
who
> > do?
>
> I agree completely.
>
> With highly visible cameras drivers will/can speed withour fear of being
caught
> between the cameras and then slow down at the camera site. If they don't know where the cameras
> are situated they need to drive below
the
> limits _all_ the time to avoid penalty.
>
> IMO this is a better solution.
>

But this doesn't work, despite many areas using hidden cameras.

> Another answer could be to have every inch of every road under
surveillance,
> then it would not matter if they were hidden or not.

How exactly?

> Of course if drivers obeyed the HC then they would have nothing to fear
anyway.
>

Absolutley.

 

[Graeme]

Ian <[email protected]> wrote in news:BB14D90E.5F46%[email protected]:

> Mr. Smith has convinced me that speed cameras are a good thing, I think there should be a lot more
> of them in urban situations, some of the revenue raised could be used to improve direct
> traffic free cycle routes, all in favour say "aye".

Aye!

One of my colleagues sent out a link earlier on this week which had a list of all the new speed
cameras that have gone up in Edinburgh recently (about 17 news ones were turned on this week). I was
very tempted to respond saying that anyone stupid enough to be caught by one of them, even without
the map, deserves all they get. However, sanity prevailed, they think I'm weird enough as it is for
not speeding in the nearby 50 zone.

Have fun!

Graeme

 

[Ian]

John B must be edykated coz e writed:

> Another answer could be to have every inch of every road under surveillance, then it would not
> matter if they were hidden or not.
>
That is actually a very good idea. It would guard against all sorts, not just speeding and would
make disputes in accident cases a lot less frequent.

Ian

 

[Nathaniel Porte]

"Nathaniel Porter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> > Another answer could be to have every inch of every road under
> surveillance,
> > then it would not matter if they were hidden or not.
>
> How exactly?
>

That's how could you have every inch of every road under surveillance.

Sorry for lack of clarity!

 

[John B]

Nathaniel Porter wrote:

> "Nathaniel Porter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > > Another answer could be to have every inch of every road under
> > surveillance,
> > > then it would not matter if they were hidden or not.
> >
> > How exactly?
> >
>
> That's how could you have every inch of every road under surveillance.
>
> Sorry for lack of clarity!

Squillions of cameras. Of course they would have to be working ones.

John B

 

[Nathaniel Porte]

"John B" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Nathaniel Porter wrote:
>
> > "Nathaniel Porter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> > > > Another answer could be to have every inch of every road under
> > > surveillance,
> > > > then it would not matter if they were hidden or not.
> > >
> > > How exactly?
> > >
> >
> > That's how could you have every inch of every road under surveillance.
> >
> > Sorry for lack of clarity!
>
> Squillions of cameras. Of course they would have to be working ones.
>

And who's going to pay for this?