[AWSAWS]

Originally Posted by Digitalize

This is probably the most ridiculous thing I'll read today.

As much as I want to be able to drive as fast as I want, I have to agree.

How can speed limits (which are law) be enforced if a measurement isn't taken.

Does he worry that the license plate also tells them who the registered keep is

[The0pportunist]

Originally Posted by AWSAWS

How can speed limits (which are law) be enforced if a measurement isn't taken.

Nail on the head ^. If a house on your street is burgled does that allow the police to stop and search everyone's cars & homes in the area to find the culprit? Answer is no they need probable cause and a bloody good reason to enter your car/home.

Why do we then let police indiscriminately take measurements of us including innocent drivers who do not speed. As said before my issue is how the information is stored including drivers who do not break the law. This goes against our own governments privacy laws yet we can't hold them accountable.

[Digitalize]

Originally Posted by The0pportunist

Nail on the head ^. If a house on your street is burgled does that allow the police to stop and search everyone's cars & homes in the area to find the culprit? Answer is no they need probable cause and a bloody good reason to enter your car/home.

Why do we then let police indiscriminately take measurements of us including innocent drivers who do not speed. As said before my issue is how the information is stored including drivers who do not break the law. This goes against our own governments privacy laws yet we can't hold them accountable.

Just to let you know, he wasn't agreeing with you.

[The0pportunist]

Originally Posted by Digitalize

Just to let you know, he wasn't agreeing with you.

He was, he just don't know it yet.

[IanS100]

Originally Posted by The0pportunist

Why do we then let police indiscriminately take measurements of us including innocent drivers who do not speed.

A measurement has to be taken in order to ascertain the speed so how do you suggest measurements of only cars exceeding the speed limit are taken?

[The0pportunist]

Originally Posted by IanS100

A measurement has to be taken in order to ascertain the speed so how do you suggest measurements of only cars exceeding the speed limit are taken?

Thats an easy one, use the standard gantry speed cameras which ONLY take your picture if you break the limit.

[MrPogle]

Hang on. Your original point was that laser-jammers should be legal. How does jamming lasers stop your photo being taken and put in a database?

[Fundguy1]

A laser jammer in the states is just an infrared light that varies it's frequency messing up the laser reading device. No laws against having a light. Radar hammers are illegal because they are radio transmitters so you need a broadcasting license to use them. Laser cameras that take a pic based on your speed wouldn't be able to get your speed and therefore wouldn't take a pic. Issuing speeding fines via camera isn't done to my knowledge in the US. Red light cameras are and they are extremely controversial and easily overturned.

[Fundguy1]

A good example of the cameras use just happened here in the US. A crazy news reporter felt that he was being discriminated against. He had 5 jobs let him go for him being problematic after just a year or two. The last job he said he heard a black shooting suspect being referee to as "another thug", which he was, and so he flew off the handle suing the station and being escorted out in handcuffs. That was 2 yrs ago. A couple days ago he felt the appropriate response was to get a pistol, shoot and kill a 24 yr old reported and her cameraman dead on live tv, film himself doing it with his phone, and post the video on Facebook. When he fled the scene, the cops knew it was him and used the cameras to locate his car based on the license plate numbers. They were in pursuit within an hour and he eventuality shot himself instead of being taken.
Your house and to some extent your office and your car are your "castle" by US law. Inside your house, judge needs to write a search warrant to be monitored and needs proof of why he's doing it. Ex, known mafia boss . Outside is public space. Game on. You don't get nor should you expect privacy.
Same with guns. In your house, office, or car you don't need a carry permit to carry a gun. Outside those yes. This varies by state but is the norm and permits and purchasing firearms also varies by state.

Finally another good use of the traffic cameras is tracking down amber and silver alerts. An amber alert is a child in trouble. Maybe a parent without custody kidnapping the child for example. A silver alert is an old critter with alzheimers who's not all there lost driving around. Happens a lot in Florida. Lol

[zltm089]

Originally Posted by The0pportunist

I don't think these jammers should be illegal, its surely our right to protect ourselves from criminal prosecution, especially when they hide behind a bush or blind corner to take your speed reading. To me its more about privacy, god knows how they plot all this data about us..maybe even sell to criminals to keep crime rate high and thus justify bigger budget.

Plus one million.

The motorists gets raped in this country and no one says anything about it.

Sounds like so many are happy to get buttfucked by speed fines and caught by hidden cops.

[IanS100]

Originally Posted by zltm089

Plus one million.

The motorists gets raped in this country and no one says anything about it.

Sounds like so many are happy to get buttfucked by speed fines and caught by hidden cops.

Are of the opinion that we shouldn't have any speed limits or just that they shouldn't be enforced, which amounts to pretty much the same thing?

[zltm089]

Originally Posted by IanS100

Are of the opinion that we shouldn't have any speed limits or just that they shouldn't be enforced, which amounts to pretty much the same thing?

What I want is no speed limits on motorways, just like Germany!

What I don't want is those cunts hiding behind bushes on motorways and catch you doing 85mph on an empty motorway. Hence why, if they going to get twisted, why can't we use jammers too?

I want harsher punishment for drunk cunts that kill people by speeding in residential areas. Harsher punishment for criminals such as thieves, ,murderers, paedos and rapists.

I want more "privileges" for the average motorists..... every road user have something "special" for them.....we got cycle lanes, bus lanes, crossings, etc....

But for the average motorists....fuck all.

But we have road tax or vehicle excise whatever, mot, insurance, speed cameras, cops in bushes, congestion charge, ....

[zltm089]

It's like this whole system is so fucked up....you have to be at the two "extremes" of the class to "gain" from the system. Either a benefit chav scum and get loads of benefits or a rich banker or starbucks owner where you can evade paying taxes or afford all sorts of lawyers to get you out of trouble.

But for the average working class guy....he gets fucked up big time from everywhere...

Sorry for the off topic OP!

[Fundguy1]

Originally Posted by zltm089

What I want is no speed limits on motorways, just like Germany!

What I don't want is those cunts hiding behind bushes on motorways and catch you doing 85mph on an empty motorway. Hence why, if they going to get twisted, why can't we use jammers too?

I want harsher punishment for drunk cunts that kill people by speeding in residential areas. Harsher punishment for criminals such as thieves, ,murderers, paedos and rapists.

I want more "privileges" for the average motorists..... every road user have something "special" for them.....we got cycle lanes, bus lanes, crossings, etc....

But for the average motorists....fuck all.

But we have road tax or vehicle excise whatever, mot, insurance, speed cameras, cops in bushes, congestion charge, ....

Exactly. Most road tickets are just there to generate tax revenue. Cops get quotas for how many they need to write.

The US would be perfect for an autobahn style road. Make one go from DC to central California and two more up and down the coasts. Have people who want to use them be required to get a special certification for their licence requiring classes and their cars pass a high level inspection to be allowed on the highway. Use the revenues from the inspections, licenses, etc to pay for it. Be nice but it's not PC.

[ahmedb]

I think there is a common thought of school which suggests that speed fines are there to generate income to government quotas etc.

Lateral thinking tells you that there are more dimensions to them such as saving lives (it doesn't take much to accept that the lower the average speed, the less risk there is of death or serious injury in the case of an accident), reducing fuel costs and bad emissions which damage the earth as well as managing the flow of traffic etc.

Of course, nobody likes to be caught speeding and we all want to drive faster but if we all did that, there would be more accidents, more traffic and more automotive costs for running our vehicles.

It's no secret that there are speed cameras in the U.K and having mobile cameras is just a way of reminding people to watch their speed. Without them, people would just speed wherever there wasn't a yellow box. You can openly view where mobile cameras will be placed by checking local authoritie's websites.

[IanS100]

Originally Posted by zltm089

I want more "privileges" for the average motorists..... every road user have something "special" for them.....we got cycle lanes, bus lanes, crossings, etc....

But for the average motorists....fuck all.

We've got roads

[Fundguy1]

Saving lives? Not really. Speed is cited as being a contributing factor for basically every accident. Why? Because everybody speeds. Everybody. Always. 1 mph over is speeding. Average motorist is going 5-10 mph over. If you look at accidents that were caused by excessive speed, the percentages drop dramaticalky. This is often unreported or superseded because it doesn't fit into the tax agenda. Biggest cause for accidents is distraction such as cell phones, texting, etc. Same goes for red light cams. They say it's to stop all the red light accidents. Those are less than 2% and with or without the cams doesn't change the percentages. As for saving the earth carbon emissions is a sham. Long disproved that the data was skewed by liberal scientists with an agenda. Global warming is happening but no data shoes man is increasing it. And the largest canon emmitors are cow fats. Far greater than all the cars out there. Want to stop carbon emmissions? Stop eating your burger. That'll work well on the US lol.

[IanS100]

Originally Posted by Fundguy1

1 mph over is speeding. Average motorist is going 5-10 mph over. If you look at accidents that were caused by excessive speed, the percentages drop dramaticalky.

If you scrap or stop enforcing speed limits then the average speed will rise and accidents accordingly

[ahmedb]

Originally Posted by Fundguy1

Saving lives? Not really. Speed is cited as being a contributing factor for basically every accident. Why? Because everybody speeds. Everybody. Always. 1 mph over is speeding. Average motorist is going 5-10 mph over. If you look at accidents that were caused by excessive speed, the percentages drop dramaticalky. This is often unreported or superseded because it doesn't fit into the tax agenda. Biggest cause for accidents is distraction such as cell phones, texting, etc. Same goes for red light cams. They say it's to stop all the red light accidents. Those are less than 2% and with or without the cams doesn't change the percentages. As for saving the earth carbon emissions is a sham. Long disproved that the data was skewed by liberal scientists with an agenda. Global warming is happening but no data shoes man is increasing it. And the largest canon emmitors are cow fats. Far greater than all the cars out there. Want to stop carbon emmissions? Stop eating your burger. That'll work well on the US lol.

I take your points on board but there is no denying logic. The slower you are driving when you hit someone, the higher there chances are of survival. You also mention distractions such as phones etc. I'm pretty sure anyone who is passing a camera (mobile or fixed) will drop their phones or whatever they are doing that they shouldn't be and concentrate on driving.

I haven't checked stats but if what you say is true and speeding isn't much of a contributing factor to accidents, does that mean it serves no purpose? Also it doesn't negate the other positives which I mentioned.

You might not like your medicine but if it's going to do you good, you still take it.

[Fundguy1]

Originally Posted by IanS100

If you scrap or stop enforcing speed limits then the average speed will rise and accidents accordingly

True. But right now speed limits are what they were in the 60s and 70s. Cars have advanced dramatically in safety. A reassessment of limits is due. And tickets are tax generators. Take the fines away from the local civic coffers and see what happens. Quotas are outrageous. Don't force police to give out tickets if they're unwarranted.

[Fundguy1]

I'm talking US. Right now it isn't against the law to use your phone. Texting penalties are also a joke. Raise the limit to what is the general consensus. In a 70 everybody goes 80. Cops don't issue tickets unless you're going 86 because the get double money. Have cops continue to issue tickets at 86. With a 70 limit you have 90% of people going 80+ some go 70. The difference in relative speed is more dangerous than the extra speed. As for cameras, get rid of the liberal asses who put them there and elect officials who will remove them. They're not legal here and won't be. Public won't stand for them. Many places who put in red light csmeras, only ones legal in us, are having them removed.

[Aragorn30d]

The problem as i see it, is that people think "Speed is dangerous" due to years of govt propoganda stating exactly that.

They think, that driving slowly, as you've eluded to above, is safer.

The problem however, is that speed in itself isnt what causes the crashes. Bad driving, INNAPPROPRIATE speed, lack of concentration, showing off, frustration etc, are what causes the crashes.

Doing 100mph on a quiet motorway is not dangerous. The germans do it, and their death rate on their motorways isnt particularly high. But the drivers on german motorways are also VERY aware of whats going on around them. You dont find folk hogging lanes, and folk are acutely aware that someone might be doing 100mph, and thus are actually on the ball, and get out the way. The Germans also have reduced speed limits when there ARE reasons for it, usually dropping to 130kph near intersections and suchlike, and the drivers respect that, becuase they recognise the reason for it.

Unfortunaltey due to decades of brainwashing however, people here dont consider these things. The simply consider speed alone. Driving slowly = driving safely. And if your driving safely(slowly) you can then afford to pay less attention, because its not dangerous any more... Thus you get folk driving along texting etc.

I've been sat in a car with someone else driving, and they were going so slowly that she ended up being overtaken by a HGV on a country road. Her response? She commented on how dangerous the lorry driver was being for overtaking her. The overtake was a textbook job, long straight, plenty visibility etc etc. In effect, her driving slowly was creating danger but she couldnt see it. Instead she chose to attack the lorry driver for executing a perfectly safe overtake.

The issue is you cant easily quantify "bad driving". At the extremes its obvious, but general bad driving isnt something you can measure, thus theres nothing the govt/police can do about it and they ignore it, choosing instead to focus on a speed limit.

Recently the police in this area have said they're going to remove the 10%+2 guidance on the speed cameras etc. So in effect they're saying that its safer to drive along at 70.0mph staring at the speedo to ensure you dont go to 70.5mph, than it is to drive at 75mph paying FULL attention to the road. Brainless.