One for Simon

[Tony Raven]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6238604.stm

Research found across Scotland the number of £60 fixed penalty notices
issued to drivers caught by speed cameras had fallen by 21%.

The exception was Dumfries and Galloway, which saw the highest amount
issued in the UK.

........

Dumfries and Galloway, the only exception, saw an equivalent of £6.55
raised for every man, woman and child in the area. This compared with an
average of £1.42 per capita in other parts of Scotland.

The fines brought in nearly £1m in the region.


--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

 

[The other view point, there is one you know...]

On 26 Jun, 09:04, Tony Raven <[email protected]> wrote:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6238604.stm
>
> Research found across Scotland the number of £60 fixed penalty notices
> issued to drivers caught by speed cameras had fallen by 21%.
>
> The exception was Dumfries and Galloway, which saw the highest amount
> issued in the UK.
>
> .......
>
> Dumfries and Galloway, the only exception, saw an equivalent of £6.55
> raised for every man, woman and child in the area. This compared with an
> average of £1.42 per capita in other parts of Scotland.
>
> The fines brought in nearly £1m in the region.
>
> --
> Tony
>
> "The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
> is no good evidence either way."
> - Bertrand Russell

Here in North Wales, the arrive alive vans used to publish were they
were on which days etc, not the times.

The rules have been changed and they can now go where they like, when
they like.

I will believe they are a safety thing when i see them in town
centres, near schools at home time, near crossings and fast road
traffic lights.

 

[David Martin]

On Jun 26, 9:42 am, "The other view point, there is one you know..."
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On 26 Jun, 09:04, Tony Raven <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> >http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6238604.stm
>
> > Research found across Scotland the number of £60 fixed penalty notices
> > issued to drivers caught by speed cameras had fallen by 21%.
>
> > The exception was Dumfries and Galloway, which saw the highest amount
> > issued in the UK.
>
> > .......
>
> > Dumfries and Galloway, the only exception, saw an equivalent of £6.55
> > raised for every man, woman and child in the area. This compared with an
> > average of £1.42 per capita in other parts of Scotland.
>
> > The fines brought in nearly £1m in the region.
>
> > --
> > Tony
>
> > "The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
> > is no good evidence either way."
> > - Bertrand Russell
>
> Here in North Wales, the arrive alive vans used to publish were they
> were on which days etc, not the times.
>
> The rules have been changed and they can now go where they like, when
> they like.
>
> I will believe they are a safety thing when i see them in town
> centres, near schools at home time, near crossings and fast road
> traffic lights.

You may find that there are specific physical criteria for their
location (ie layby, clear line of sight etc.) that preclude their
positioning in more appropriate places. Shame they seem unable to do
what the Norwegians do - camera attached to tree/lamp post etc and
police waiting in a layby or car park half a mile up the road.

...d

 

[The other view point, there is one you know...]

On 26 Jun, 10:20, David Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jun 26, 9:42 am, "The other view point, there is one you know..."
>
>
>
>
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 26 Jun, 09:04, Tony Raven <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6238604.stm
>
> > > Research found across Scotland the number of £60 fixed penalty notices
> > > issued to drivers caught by speed cameras had fallen by 21%.
>
> > > The exception was Dumfries and Galloway, which saw the highest amount
> > > issued in the UK.
>
> > > .......
>
> > > Dumfries and Galloway, the only exception, saw an equivalent of £6.55
> > > raised for every man, woman and child in the area. This compared withan
> > > average of £1.42 per capita in other parts of Scotland.
>
> > > The fines brought in nearly £1m in the region.
>
> > > --
> > > Tony
>
> > > "The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
> > > is no good evidence either way."
> > > - Bertrand Russell
>
> > Here in North Wales, the arrive alive vans used to publish were they
> > were on which days etc, not the times.
>
> > The rules have been changed and they can now go where they like, when
> > they like.
>
> > I will believe they are a safety thing when i see them in town
> > centres, near schools at home time, near crossings and fast road
> > traffic lights.
>
> You may find that there are specific physical criteria for their
> location (ie layby, clear line of sight etc.) that preclude their
> positioning in more appropriate places. Shame they seem unable to do
> what the Norwegians do - camera attached to tree/lamp post etc and
> police waiting in a layby or car park half a mile up the road.
>
> ..d- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Indeed, though there have been many photos of the vans parked in
places where a car couldn't due to the location.

It might get worse if they can go where they like. But I will accept
that at each potential location, the van driver/operator has to comply
with the rules...

Hmmm on the cameras on the tree/lamp post, would mean there would have
to be a police car there all the time...Some speeding might get
caught, most won't.

 

[Simon Brooke]

in message <[email protected]>, Tony Raven
('[email protected]') wrote:

> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6238604.stm
>
> Research found across Scotland the number of £60 fixed penalty notices
> issued to drivers caught by speed cameras had fallen by 21%.
>
> The exception was Dumfries and Galloway, which saw the highest amount
> issued in the UK.
>
> .......
>
> Dumfries and Galloway, the only exception, saw an equivalent of £6.55
> raised for every man, woman and child in the area. This compared with an
> average of £1.42 per capita in other parts of Scotland.
>
> The fines brought in nearly £1m in the region.

I'll have to remember to congratulate my friends in the traffic police next
time I see them.

What makes this the more shocking is that the local constabulary don't have
a single fixed camera (at least, hadn't last time I checked, which is only
six months ago). They have two - count them, one, two - mobile camera
vans. So those camera vans are contributing to the region's police budget
to the tune of half a million a year each - that has got to be something
for the council tax payers to be pleased about.

I'll suggest they buy a couple more!

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Morning had broken, and I found when I looked that we had run out
of copper roove nails.

 

[Matt B]

David Martin wrote:
> On Jun 26, 9:42 am, "The other view point, there is one you know..."
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 26 Jun, 09:04, Tony Raven <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6238604.stm
>>> Research found across Scotland the number of £60 fixed penalty notices
>>> issued to drivers caught by speed cameras had fallen by 21%.
>>> The exception was Dumfries and Galloway, which saw the highest amount
>>> issued in the UK.
>>> .......
>>> Dumfries and Galloway, the only exception, saw an equivalent of £6.55
>>> raised for every man, woman and child in the area. This compared with an
>>> average of £1.42 per capita in other parts of Scotland.
>>> The fines brought in nearly £1m in the region.
>>> --
>>> Tony
>>> "The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
>>> is no good evidence either way."
>>> - Bertrand Russell
>> Here in North Wales, the arrive alive vans used to publish were they
>> were on which days etc, not the times.
>>
>> The rules have been changed and they can now go where they like, when
>> they like.
>>
>> I will believe they are a safety thing when i see them in town
>> centres, near schools at home time, near crossings and fast road
>> traffic lights.
>
> You may find that there are specific physical criteria for their
> location (ie layby, clear line of sight etc.) that preclude their
> positioning in more appropriate places. Shame they seem unable to do
> what the Norwegians do - camera attached to tree/lamp post etc and
> police waiting in a layby or car park half a mile up the road.

Why - are you a "catcher" rather than a "deterer"? The police here can
still use hand-held devices anywhere they like - with another officer at
the next safe stopping location flagging offenders in.

The fixed ones used to be hidden, even disguised here. When "safety
camera partnerships" were accused of being more interested in money than
safety the DfT changed the rules so that only the proceeds from
high-visibility cameras could be kept. What happened? Did the
partnerships insist that the hidden cameras were more effective at
improving safety - so keep them (they had the option)? No there was an
undignified rush to apply the high-visibility treatment to them all,
arguing that the deterrent effect was desirable. What are we to
conclude - high-visibility is actually safer, or the partnerships only
wanted the cash?

--
Matt B

 

[Tony Raven]

Simon Brooke wrote on 26/06/2007 10:30 +0100:
>
> I'll suggest they buy a couple more!
>

Remember they are only there for Revenue Generation[1] so you need to
think of revenue optimisation. At one end with no cameras there will be
no revenue because no-one will be caught and at the other end with
masses of cameras there will be no revenue because no-one dares speed.
What you need to determine is the number in the middle that optimises
revenue. Four may be better or worse than two. ;-)

[1]â„¢ Paul Smith

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

 

[The other view point, there is one you know...]

On 26 Jun, 09:04, Tony Raven <[email protected]> wrote:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6238604.stm
>
> Research found across Scotland the number of £60 fixed penalty notices
> issued to drivers caught by speed cameras had fallen by 21%.
>
> The exception was Dumfries and Galloway, which saw the highest amount
> issued in the UK.
>
> .......
>
> Dumfries and Galloway, the only exception, saw an equivalent of £6.55
> raised for every man, woman and child in the area. This compared with an
> average of £1.42 per capita in other parts of Scotland.
>
> The fines brought in nearly £1m in the region.
>
> --
> Tony


http://icnorthwales.icnetwork.co.uk...objectid=19356908&siteid=50142-name_page.html

North Wales speed camera details

 

[naked_draughtsman]

On Jun 26, 2:44 pm, "The other view point, there is one you know..."
> http://icnorthwales.icnetwork.co.uk/dailypost/news/wales/tm_headline=...
>
> North Wales speed camera details

Funny how the amount per capita generally seems lower in more densely
populated areas. Also if the figure is £6.55 in Dumfries and Galloway
then the North Wales figure is not the highest in Britain as that
article is claiming, although it is high.

For the speed camera locations, http://www.arrivealive.org.uk has a
list of the 'routes' they are targeting due to the number of
accidents. The schedule page is well out of date now - maybe
something to do with their announcement about being skint a few months
ago! I've not been actively looking for the locations in the
newspaper (going most places by bike) but in Loughborough the
locations were still being published in the local paper when I last
bought one about 3 weeks ago.

peter