Apology if this has been posted - can't find it in forum search though it was in the news last week.
My BMW-riding colleague has often chortled that the forward facing cameras don't catch bikes - must show him this story when he gets back from holiday.
A Dunstable biker had been making a habit of riding past three of these every day at 100mph while making victory gestures - this presumably annoyed the police so much that they actually traced him ...
www.visordown.com/motorcyclenews/view/biker_busted...l
Can't condone of course but he made me smile.
|
I wonder how many police man hours were wasted on this?
|
It's probably also true to say that he's now the ex-holder of a PSV licence and consequently in need of a career change.
|
My BMW-riding colleague has often chortled that the forward facing cameras don't catch bikes....
You might want to show him this. tinyurl.com/2c9hqw
"Two new speed cameras are both bad news for speeding riders. A new camera van can film the same bike from the front and rear. The speed camera van, called the Commander, can capture both our registration numbers and a 180° view of bike and rider. One camera films the rider as he approaches while his speed is measured with a laser device. More cameras on the side of the van film the motorcycle as it passes and proceeds along the road."
That aside, there was a biker recently caught by a Gatso in Nuneham Courtenay (Oxfordshire) performing a wheelie at more than twice the speed limit. Although he wasn't displaying a numberplate, a police officer recognised him from a previous offence of not having a numberplate.
archive.oxfordmail.net/2007/5/15/152334.html
|
""Two new speed cameras are both bad news for speeding riders. A new camera van can film the same bike from the front and rear. The speed camera van, called the Commander, can capture both our registration numbers and a 180° view of bike and rider. One camera films the rider as he approaches while his speed is measured with a laser device. More cameras on the side of the van film the motorcycle as it passes and proceeds along the road."
I wouldn't care or dare to guess how much this ultra specialised bit of equipment cost or whether it can be used for anything other than detecting speeding bikes. I will say that it seems to indicate a very skewed sense of priorities when one looks at the things that the police service will not do in connection with detecting crime and apprehending suspects/offenders.
|
|
AS - bikers in an accident tend to be killed. Think about how much it costs to close a busy road for a day; for an ambulance to take a seriously injured rider to hospital; the police costs to investigate; the trauma to whoever they might have crashed into while performing a dangerous overtaking manoeuvre, and it is hopefully clear that it is worth the cost of a camera van to get the bulk of the riders who behave like imbecilic morons off the road.
|
Sorry DH - we are poles apart on this! I don't think a road should be closed for a day to investigate an accident. The only cost of an ambulance taking some one to hospital is the fuel - the ambulance is there, paid for, with a crew whether it is used or not. The police should be investigating and preventing serious crime not RTAs, unless there a criminal aspect to the RTA. I agree that people are probably very upset by being involved as an innocent party in a RTA, what do you think we should do about mitigating this trauma? One camera van isn't going to help much and it won't get moronic riders off the road unless they are close to being banned under totting up procedures; in the normal run of events they will get a fine and some points. Impossible to quantify the life and cost savings made by the presence of one van somewhere in UK IMO. Spend the money on keeping motorcyclists, and all road users safe, by mending potholes, improving road surfaces and general road maintenence, something we are charged a shed load of money for and only 20% of which is actually is spent on the roads. We need more road safety and more safer roads. These are imprtant questions but one van specialised in the detection of speeding motorcyclists isn't it.
|
SORRY! Oh for an edit button!
Last sentence of my 07.54 post should be "These are important questions but one van specialised in the detection of speeding motorcyclists isn't even one answer"
|
|
|
|
True, it may catch the occassional nutter, and im all for that;...... but, the chances are its going to catch a far greater number of thoroughly decent types who, because they were probably spending their time looking where they were going, rather than staring down constantly at speedometers, just happened to accidentally stray up to 36mph on a downhill stretch of road.
These people are not 'imbecilic morons'; they are perfectly decent people who because they were concentrating on the road, driving probably very safely, suddenly find themselves with points on their licence.
The whole thing stinks if you ask me.
|
|
|
|
I wouldn't care or dare to guess how much this ultra specialised bit of equipment cost or whether it can be used for anything other than detecting speeding bikes. I will say that it seems to indicate a very skewed sense of priorities when one looks at the things that the police service will not do in connection with detecting crime and apprehending suspects/offenders.
Couldn't agree more AS!
|
There is an undercurrent here that many seem to think that breaking the speed limit is not a criminal offence - I think it still is, we are not able to choose which offences we believe ae correct or not , we elect parliament to do that for us!
Also the hatched area in the photo indicates that it is either single carriageway (no central reservation) or a junction which makes his speeding/one handed driving/looking at the camera instead of the road ahead even more stupid.
One less idiot on the road and it will deter a few more.
|
Oh, for crying out loud!
Look at the stats. More drivers are killed by inattention, carelessness and aggression that by speed alone.
Yes, it's against the law to speed.
V
|
|
|
There is an undercurrent here that many seem to think that breaking the speed limit is not a criminal offence - I think it still is we are not able to choose which offences we believe ae correct or not we elect parliament to do that for us!
Cameras can be a deterrant in the viscinity of schools etc however most cameras are a case of very poorly targeted resources, no more than a 500th sec snapshot in time normally catching the sober driver in a modern insured, taxed etc vehicle because he marginally exceeded a somewhat arbitary limit where as the drugged up drunk in a stolen, un-taxed, un-insured, bald tyred etc banger that was doing 90 in a 40 half a mile earlier gets away with it because he slowed to answer his mobile 100yds before the camera !!!!!
The fact is that traffic density is as much of a causal factor in accident rates as speed, so as average speeds are lowered by lower limits and speed enforcement, which when added to the growth in vehicle numbers means congestion is on the increase at a greater rate than speed is falling.
So the roads are getting slower and LESS safe !
|
>So the roads are getting slower and LESS safe !
both factually wrong.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
>So the roads are getting slower and LESS safe ! both factually wrong.
Nice to get a bit of reasoned argumentation ;-)
However what I meant was if you extrapolate the less speed / more congestion point with consideration to the FACT that congestion is a causal factor in accidents then the roads will get slower and less safe.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Ian Johnson's comment.
"we are not able to choose which offences we believe are correct or not , we elect parliament to do that for us!"
In theory, you are quite correct and I agree.
However, it would be nice if Parliament (current ruling party gained only 34% of votes cast, by the way) was actually consulted and listened to, instead of hundreds of new offences and compulsions being steamrollered through according to the whims of the clique in power.
Examples: ID cards, HIP's, Road Pricing, 24 hour licensing, failure to adequately fund the Armed Services, exempting MP's from FOI act, just read the Telegraph any day to extend the list.
|
come off it, we all know mortorists are an easy target for getting 'crime' figures down and cash up.
In fact far easier than sorting out nuisnance estates and endless violence in towns.
The police have fun catching M/cs, it is a sport to them, cash no problem.
You ring them with a break-in, it'll be a crime number and s*d off!
Bikers need more camaflage and dark visors
|
|
|
As a nation, we get the government we deserve because we vote for it. Or don't vote at all. Compare and contrast with the French elections. Compare and contrast with British election turnouts of decades past. People prefer to vote for celebrity types on awful television programmes
>wanders off into garage to sniff some Castrol R before retiring for the evening<
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
