Did you know you dont have to pay a speeding ticket from a camera. Its true. If there is no witnessing officer it cant be justified.. even on camera O.o
That's misleading - since 1996, there has been a great increase in the number of cars on the road and the speed/power of cars, and so logically there would be a corresponding increase in the number of collisions and deaths. But the fact that the number of deaths since 1996 have been consistent is a positive remark and shows that the efforts of the Highway Agency have actually worked since then.
In a later episodes of TG they summed it up better for me, they're not outside schools or in the middle of towns where you can actually speed and hit someone, but in the middle of highways where nothing ever happens.
@EUROEMOGUY1998 Don't blamethe -ism. Blame the New Labour party. Blame Thatcher and Major for fucking up bad enough for labor to swoop in. Blame the idiots in charge. for any -ism out there you can find a counter example of the system working, and many examples of it not working. The problem isn't politics, it's competency.
@EUROEMOGUY1998 perhaps consider emigration if it has "ravaged your home". Your comment smacks of paranoid Daily Mail-ism. 10/10 for humour, 0/10 for originality. Oh hang on, then you would be, in effect an immigrant! Oh the irony :)
near were i live there are 3 cameras within 300m, the 1st one is fine because it is a blackspot at a juntion, a further 100m on a bend hidden by trees is the 2nd, and 100m further cuming other way right at end of duel carageway is the 3rd (people slam brakes on for this one causing accidents). the 2nd one gets destroyd by fire etc most weeks? i wonder why?
If "Stupidity" was a fine-able crime, the colossal revenue generated, could simply abolish taxes all together. Honestly, everyone wants to do something stupid once in a while... well.... now there is a way, AND you can support your local government at the same time!
Im just sick and tired of being fined and money stolen off me by crooked governments that wont admit they are just to raise money. I got fined 90 dollars for 60km/hr in a 50km/hr by a speed camera - and the 50km/hr speed limit was TOTALLY unwarranted in the area....it should have been 70. Just so sick of having my hard earned money stolen off me by a crooked government. They all need to be locked up for life.
@PulletSurprise Wealthy people pay very little for taxes if at all in comparison to the working man if you want to go by percentages that's why they are wealthy.
At a certain status you can afford to deffer more money to charities and it all comes back as a write off.
I don't think they take the most dangerous roads, they take the roads where people exceed the (often too low) speed limit the most, to generate revenue and justify the cost of the speed cameras.
I find it extremely dangerous, When i come round a bend in the road, and there is a police van parked at the side of the road, my instant thought is "Panic" am i speeding, looking at my speedo, thinking , do i brake ,,what do i do,,, Its very unsettling and really puts my concentration on the actual task of driving safely totally out of synch with my real reactions. I actually believe they are a danger and should be investigated.
no what i hate is when the police are waiting on the other side of a hill (the downhill bit) and waiting with their little radar gun catching ppl who dont break downhill to idk.. cause they know the ground will lvl so they dont wanna break and then accelerate
There's safe speeds and then there's speed limits....where I live there's roads with long flat straights and then tight hairpin corners. THEY'RE ALL THE SAME SPEED LIMIT!!! I can legally screech around a hairpin at 80km/h then onto a long straight where it's illegal to do 81km/h. The point is...drivers already personally choose safe speeds for corners so what's the difference with straights?
@OmegaDude22 Pays for better equipment for police, like those beautiful new Jaguars that the police have bought for highway pursuit in the midlands.
I do prefer officers in unmarked cars to speed cameras though as the real bad drivers don't notice them, drive how they normally would and get nicked for driving like an idiot.
Also I like how the police can check car details to catch the guys without insurance.
its actually been proven that speed cameras increase deaths...psychologists have done research and found a change of focus by the majority of responsible motorists. Their focus has changed from getting safely to their destination to focusing on not getting caught by a speed camera. The speed cameras are a major distraction.
A guy was given a driving ban for having a sign on the side of the road informing people of a speed camera ahead. Now you've gotta ask yourself one question; If the police only want us to slow down, and the guy made cars do just that, why did they arrest him? Oh hang on I know! They weren't getting any bloody money from it! To hell with speed scameras!
@mackat4ck - I guess there is no 'freedom of speach' in the UK? Wow - here in the US you can get a ticket for flashing your lights to warn cars of Police ahead. They all think alike no matter where you are - CONTROL the people!
@thefiveneals Yep, very true! the government also only ever put speed cameras where they can make money, as said in the video, not on accident blackspots!
With all that money and new research they have reviled, you would think they would up police patrols and police monitoring of highways so that the higher percent of death causes would be addressed right?
The Finnish road traffic law just changed considering the limits of speeding. Now the fining-limit is 6km/4mls an hour over the limit. This means that citizens get fined for so called minimum or a misdemeanor fine for driving let's say 127km/hour on a dry bright summer's day sunday highway with a speed limit of a 120km/h. Once you get 3 of these in a 2-year period you loose your license.
The statistically greatest number of fatal accidents happen between 1 and 3am, on rural non-divided country roads, on saturdays and sundays, and more often than not in 4 door sedans and August is the most dangerous month of them all with California having more fatal crashes than any other state. Why isn't it illegal to drive a 4-door down a california country road on weekend mornings in August?
Speed camera's are just another tax IMO. Im tired of the Government taking our hard earned cash to spend on duck houses and second mortgages. Almost everything is taxed now. Even driving into the center of London. They must think we drive around at 8:30am just to be awkward. They want us to use public transport. But its shit! Its a vicious circle. We work hard to scrape money together only for the Government to take it away again. Anyway, im stepping down off my soapbox now...
Ah but thats the thing, I know abot 8 places just in a five mile radius of my house where speed cameras are places directly inside a 30mph zone after coming down from a 50mph zone, or on a blind corner, or hidden by vegetation.
Its pretty obvious, they're not there for saftey, they're there for income for central government
Pt. 1: I see much confusion from the "Limiter" crowd that believes the speed limits work. Allow me to clarify for my fast driving brethren that may not be able (or willing) to enlighten. It's not that accidents are less violent at speed, it's that they would be less likely to happen at speed. Here's why- Someone zooms by you at 80 in a 65, you instantly pay attention and drive. You drop the cell phone, put down the burger, etc. You may not like it, but speed does makes you attentive.
Pt2: The "idiot" zooms by, gets your attention, gets your blood boiling, heart pumping, improving your reaction time, and putting your mind on the road in front of you, instead of what color shoes you were going to wear to the show, which is what some of you may have been thinking beforehand. As a result, you, temporarily become a better driver, even if only for a moment. If you were driving faster, like the "idiot" you'd feel less comfortable multi-tasking behind the wheel.
Pt3: Ever look quickly at the "idiot" zooming by before he/she's out of view? The "idiot" is almost always doing nothing other than driving. What other stuff are you as a "normal" person doing while driving? Patrolmen are no different. I've seen all types on several occasions that are just as guilty; cell phones, usually. You're welcome. Sidenote: I feel for the deziens of the U.K., but, Speed Cameras are unconstitutional in the U.S., even though most ignore that particular amendment.
@aftoolman1 Sorry bout the delay, had to think awhile which fits best. [Amendment 6. In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.] Not a single word about machinery in there. Not one.
@ThePatUltra what if u where zooming passed and someone suddenly crosses the road your speeding over the speed limit and going to fast to stop on time what would happen? i totally agree with u with what your saying butt this is the only reason i can think of why there still there..
@djthegrateone You're putting too much emphasis on the equipment. If someone suddenly crosses your path you're not going to have enough time to stop regardless of your speed. Defensive driving courses should teach how to "read" a drivers' line. As silly as it sounds, it is doable.
in in Va in the US, the speed cameras are not a problem here (there are none) its the FUCKING RED LIGHT CAMERAS!!!!! If they turn yellow and your 5 feet from crossing the white line (not possible in any car to stop) you get fined, If your stopped at the light and you roll up abit, an inch to far and you get fined, even if you dont actually go through the light. If your trying to turn on red and dont wait the full 4 seconds you get fined (in 4 seconds you loose your shot to pull out)
Evidence everywhere, not just the UK, shows that the only appreciable effect of traffic cameras is revenue generation for the government. The cameras are no longer up not to address a safety issue, they are there now to plug up holes in the budget.
Government's job should be to serve its constituents, not to make money off of them.
I'm from the states so I can't chime into this too much but it says it all when over a million fines are handed out yet fatalities remain steady. Just another example of government getting into every fabric of your life and wallet. All in the name of safety my left nut!
Damn this subject gets me wound up.. another big problem with speed cameras is that they can cause more danger than they try to prevent... specially the average-speed cameras. People usually drive down the highway at a comfortable speed that they judge to be appropriate to the road conditions, at the same time being alert and watching the road.
With speed cameras, people end up staring at their speedometer going past them, scared of getting fined, and not watching where they're going...
@MJM153 Thats so true, i get over paranoid when driving past speed cameras and although i would normaly have been driving at a safe appropriate speed i find myself obsessively staring at the speedo, nearly come off my bike a few times because of it!
The faster you go the more you're breaking the law therefore the punishment goes up idiot. Don't break the law then act outraged when you get caught. Speeding fines are like a fair tax, a tax on criminal morons
It isn't a fair tax. the 'criminal morons' are usually teen's who can't afford the fines. and they tend to memorize where speed cameras are and do their best not to get caught. The majority of people who get fined in my area are businessmen or women who are late for work and just happen to stray over the limit...
The only imbecile here is you. Jeremy presented a "double chart" which showed the amount of people fined & the amount of people that have died from speeding since 1996 until early 2000s. In the UK. The amount of people who have died has remained constant, whilethe amount of people fined has increased.
If you are too stupid to understand what this means, it means that the speed cameras are NOT lowering fatalities as they were intended to. Thus, there is no need for them.
@iCheckVtec Stretches of road that allow 70 mph won't have pedestrians next to them. If you hit another car at that speed, or run off the road, every mph make a huge difference in your and other motorists survival rate.
@sofawall No, I'm not as illogical as you appear to be. I'm talking about under 10 mph. Obviously it makes a difference going over double the speed. I guess your logic is laughable.
@iCheckVtec Your logical argument was that they would be dead either way, regardless of which speed they were hit at. From the logical argument you put forth, the speeds themselves don't matter, as long as both are sufficient to kill on impact. Maybe what you meant to say was that the police shouldn't bother about 5 MPH because it is such a small difference, but that is not what you said. The argument you posted was very different from what you seem to have intended.
@iCheckVtec, ur right on the money mate coz here in melbourne australia if a fixed speed camera or a mobile camera gets u and if ur over by 1 km/h they will send u a $250 fine.
lose the queens head shes a twat, and the whole "royal" family is unneccesary, thow them out the big palace and make them pay taxes in their counsel flat XDXD the very thought of that makes me happy :)
@italianchriswilko100 I agree. The only argument that I've heard in favour of keeping the royal family is that they're tourist attractions, but I disagree. People visit the pyramids don't they? When was the last pharaoh? Buckingham palace would be a whole lot more tourist friendly if we could actually go inside. etc etc.
ah the good old seasons where they actually talked sense....this last season is the dumbest by far....they either have old people's dementia or are deliberately catering to the ADHD generation
Also, iv'e seen countless people bring out graphs showing drops in road deaths, and attempting to say that speed cameras are the culprit. A large amount of that is down to new designs in vehicle safety which reduce the rate of deaths. These graphs make no mention of the number of accidents that didn't lead to death. It just proves that the majority of laws are made based on improper interpretation of statistics. You can't get away from the fact that we are being goverened by unqualified idiots.
There is absolutely no way to stop idiots from mucking around. The government can impose as many laws as they want, people will still find ways to break them and not get caught. That means the rest of us have to put up with these restrictive, stupidly ill-informed laws while hoons still go about killing themselves.
Nothing else but to raise money? Then explain away the points system that you simply make no mention of??
In the UK, we have a cumulative points system where habitual offenders ultimately have their driving privileges withrawn. This means that those who habitually ignore posted thresholds are history for a given period. THAT is the principle & key element of speed detection.
You'd prefer the infrastructure that supports that paid for by the tax payer?
@lollygaggle Many countries have a points system, it is not unique to the U.K.
Also, if the cameras were there to catch speeders and reduce danger, they would be in more logical spots, as the gentlemen explained. Regardless of where the money may or may not go, from the evidence brought forth it logically follows that the cameras are not used to reduce accidents or excessive speeding, but instead to raise money.
@sofawall You will need to elaborate on the relevance of the international points system? What is a more 'logical' spot? What is more logical than locations where recognised speeding issues exist using the 85th percentile system gathered via data tubes? Can you supply any links to support your claim regarding the raising of revenue? I have sent you links.
@sofawall I addition to my previous comments, you are obviously not aware that there are countless mobile enforcement sites that generate very few detections, in other words, there is a recognised collision history but 0 - 2 speed detections per hour. These must be visited in the monthly cycle just the same as all other sites, so if revenue was the ONLY consideration, then why aren't only high yield sites visited?
it would be interesting to see the number of cars on the road on that graph as well. if there are loads more cars on the road now, and the accident rate is the same as it was back in the 90's then thats a different issue
CA and WA as far as I know are starting to have cameras for the stop signs. Personally I don't always come to a total stop, but I go down to a slow roll, and I look.
Its a miracle i dont have any "expensive photos"...Even though i drive like a bat out of hell....red..red..red..green...wroooooaaahh 0-60 in 1 second XD
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The key flaw with Mr Clarkson's figures concerning so-called static road accident figures, is that they don't take into account the rise in the numbers of vehicles on the roads. So whilst motorists slow down at camera locations, they then hurtle away to have an accident elsewhere.
Do Mr Clarkson's figures demonstrate accidents at camera locations?
whether you are going fast or slow, if you do shit or someone else is doing shit and u have to avoid them, you can have an accident.
I once had an accident going at the speed limit...a guy came out on me, I swerved to avoid him and ran into another car. THe jackass got away scot free.
I never argued that...speed makes accidents worse...but it doesn't CAUSE accidents...stupidity does.... if the guy didn't pull out in the first place, there would have been no accident...no death, no injury, no dmged vehicles with expensive repair bills....
I disagree, exceeding the posted threshold does account for a percentage of road traffic collisions, not all, but unquestionably some.
It is a combination of poor judgement combined with not being able to stop safely within the distance you can see that is the biggest cause - the latter part being speed related.
Reducing speeds nationally would reduce the trauma inflicted by collisions.
moreso than speed.. the quality of the vehicle/vehicle safety measures is/are the principle factor that determines the level of injury haha. Also type of accident, location of accident, and yes speed is a factor as well
If you are good behind the wheel, then speed doesn't matter... if u're not good with a vehicle, then OBVIOUSLY u have to drive slower... ur speed to mirror your driving skill. It still isn't "speed"...
@Chaupro Who makes the decision about a driver's capabilities? It will always be the individual themselves - how often do you see a teenager out in the fast lane behind the wheel of a Corsa doing 90mph+?
More often than not, those who consider themselves 'good' behind the wheel are just kidding themselves.
@lollygaggle And for the record, I agree with you about most ppl who think they they can drive usually can't. But that's why I mentioned abt ppl being honest with themselves... and people tkaing their time to learn... and people observing other drivers and how things are done...
also, the way people are taught to drive needs to change INTERNATIONALLY....
@lollygaggle but again... understand that speed or no speed, if ppl drove less wrecklessly, there would be few or no accidents. If you serviced your vehicle regularly so there's a less likely chance of a malfunction. If you were honest with your abilities rather than tryign to drive fast to impress someone. If people would use indicators/hand signals and would check theri mirrors before turning or changing lanes. If people would know to slow down on a wet or unsure surface....
@Chaupro The key word is 'if' - but nothing will change. People continue to smoke knowing it causes respiratory disease, & drink even though it destroys your liver. Human beings do not alter their behaviours to better the system, just themselves.
Speed is still unquestionably the number one determining factor of the level of physical trauma WHEN a collision takes place & they will continue to do so. Observing the 30 limit would unquestionably reduce pedestrian road deaths.
Speed kills! Think of the logic: If all cars went zero mph, car accidents would, amazingly be a thing of the past... Sounds ridiculous yes but that argument eventually being used wouldn't surprise me.
I am curious about Jeremy's comment about police interrogation: How can the british police force you to incriminate yourself by verifying the speed camera picture?
i think your question relates to the fact of the British transportation acts. Im sure the British parliament amended the law in the transportation act to allow police officers to force you to say who the driver was or else face "obstruction of justice" charges.
Speed Camaras are there just to raise money for the transportation department, it really doesnt help people.
What if someone get fined once? Its unlikely they will not speed again.
Although an old clip, Mr Clarkson also fails to grasp the concept of 'speeding kills'.
The velocity at the moment of impact is primarily the determining factor as to the level of physical trauma, the higher the speed, the greater the level of injury.
Speeding kills does not infer that all accidents are caused by excessive velocity, more, that if you go faster than the posted threshold & hit something, personal injury levels will be resultingly much higher.
true that if u get into an accident going faster, there is a higher likelihood of dying or getting seriously injured, but if more ppl would drive intelligently and considerately, we wouldn't have as many accidents...anywhere...
As for your puzzling over the 'police interrogation' comment;
Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 dictates that the registered keeper must supply tthe name of the driver at the time of the alleged offence.
Are you suggesting that having had lessons, passed the test to the prescribed standard, bought a vehicle, got insurance, a VEL, MOT if applicable, we then opt to pick & choose which road trafffic legislation to follow or ignore?
I thought Britain was a "monarchy" but that comment about the RTA "dictates," does slightly reek of totalitarian. Was that 1988 or "1984?" In Canada we are not yet forced to testify against ourselves... sorry for the misunderstanding.
Again I am not familiar with totalitarian governments. I do have a question in response to your last: Stop signs, do you stop the duration "dictated" by RTA 1988? If 70MPH is the limit on the motorway, than by your reasoning, 71mph would be...?
Fair enough; "testify" would imply a courtroom setting but being forced to incriminate yourself is the same thing.
You had mentioned the picking and choosing what parts of the statutes one chooses to disregard: 70MPH Maximum posted, 71mph is then disregarding that portion of the RTA?
Intent is key in every aspect of legislation infringement - hence murder becomes manslaughter if unintentional. The Uk does not operate a zero tolerance policy with regard to speed enforcement - the leeway is usually 10%+2 give or take.
@newcamper Whilst on paper we are indeed a monarchy, both the Queen & her cohorts have taken a very obvious backseat in the level of coverage & profile they once enjoyed.
This can be attributed to several factors, but the death of Diana played a significant role in the decline of 'their' popularity.
Much of the way the 'system' is viewed is based upon urban legend & pure nonsense about Big Brother. Odd when you consider that all the recent moves have reduced the numbers of regular police.
Ooooor... everyone could band together to drive better and more responsably? Thus making the convictions and fine money whither away in one of the most satisfying victorys I can think of.
Everyone could band together to drive better? You can't be serious.
There is no 'unity' out on the roads, the 'I must get in front of you at any cost' mentality is rife & the concept of everyone suddenly 'uniting' & dropping overall speeds is quite ludicrous.
We currently have a system where everyone is taught how to drive & what is expected of them. They are then tested, but once passed, you can't expect anyone to be interested in joining a great big buddy club to all drive the same?
Yeah... I wasn't serious really, but the concept I was shooting for was not without reward. If that were to happen, it would not be for the betterment of having a drive thats not some form of stock car race.
It would be to stop the govermant from reaping the rewards of human nature via ticketing us to oblivion.
But honestly it was just an amusing concept to just throw out there..
In Phoenix Arizona one of the speed cameras ran out of digital storage space for all of the many thousands of speeding ticket pictures it had to take in just ONE DAY. The reason? An individual I know replaced the 55mph sign with a 65mph sign.
if you look at the germans,, they almost never speed in the city, They make up time on the autobahn and stay within the speed limits in the city, MAKE ALL HIGHWAYS LIKE THE AUTOBAHN!!
@vamphunte I see an obvious flaw in that. The Autobahns are not bumper car arenas, they cannot take the impact of someone slamming into the barriers at 100+mph. So, with no limit, who's to say the percentage of death's by speed won't go up as people try to push their cars to the limit and fail?
This really pisses me off.. the whole money thing. Last year the cops where I live (Western Australia) made $33 million off speeding - out of a population of 2 million, yet as Jeremy points out, just like Britian, the death toll remains at an almost constant. If the money was put to a better use, such as 1 or 2 days of driver training a year for every registered driver I wouldnt care but its just an obvious money maker for the government anywhere in the world and they'll never remove or admit it
'Common' people almost always do not have the voice, or conviction, or the $ to commit to change the laws or the way they are enforced; Law makers know this; and will continue to make ridiculous, secretive, biased-researched, knee-jerk and self-serving laws.
I think that's the way it is.
YOU must do something -at the great expense of being ridiculed - if you want things to change.
the government has got the wrong end of the stick, speed doesn't kill.... lack of driving skill and stupidity kills... yet even though speed cameras have had a negative effect on the number of road related deaths, the governmets still keep them because they are a significant source of revenue.
i can say now if they try and put a limiter in my car or bike ide take it right out coz there crap and pointles u make a car to get places fast not kina fast lol
its all revenue!!!! FUCKING MONEY MAKING BULLSHIT!!!!!!!!!!! ITS ALL A SCAM TO MAKE MONEY! TRY HAVING EVERY CAR LINKED UP TO A GPS STYLE SPEED LIMITER. THEREFORE THE CARS ARE LIMITED TO CERTEN SPEEDS ON THE ROAD. EVEN BETTER TEACH PEOPLE HOW TO DRIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
i dont think speed cameras are there for your own safety. what people tend to do is speed anyway, when a camera approaches they slow down, when the camera is passed speed up. if they really were there for our safety, we'd have one every 500 meters. its just another way for the government to make money, and its a successful method apparently
They could pass a law to instal a speed monitor hooked up with a GPS in every car so they would always know when your'e speeding and I'm sure that would decrease the number of people speeding, however that would cost A LOT so screw peoples lives, let them pay for breaking the law, right?
if the government really wanted us to not speed they could pass a law outlawing BMW's and give everyone a ford focus. but they're obviously not going to do that, so pointing out something as irrelevant as this is pretty much a waste of everyones life
If every country had an autobuhn we would have less speeders because we could get the high speed driving out of our system. Germany is wonderful !!!!!!
Did you know you dont have to pay a speeding ticket from a camera. Its true. If there is no witnessing officer it cant be justified.. even on camera O.o
RustyStallioNZ 2 weeks ago
if you join the EU you will also lose your money :)
TOKIOHOTEL1000000 3 weeks ago
the government wants money so.......
dyingangelo 1 month ago
Speed doesn't kill.
Rapid deceleration during a crash does.
MrFalconfly 7 months ago 5
@MrFalconfly Your a handicap, learn some physics
CurliiJay 6 months ago
@CurliiJay
I think it is you who need to learn physics.
During a crash the car is decelerated (or accelerated, depends on the perspective) and it is this deceleration that will prove fatal.
Oh and by the way. It's speller "you're".
MrFalconfly 6 months ago 3
Does anyone know how many speed cameras are in Northern Ireland? Cause i've never seen one here.
Mthtmty 7 months ago
2:04.. "JC : ............who are proper scientists and not just Mad Vegetarians on Bicycles..." lol..
prabhasghai 8 months ago 3
I stood up and applauded at this.
mrkokopuffs 9 months ago 3
That's misleading - since 1996, there has been a great increase in the number of cars on the road and the speed/power of cars, and so logically there would be a corresponding increase in the number of collisions and deaths. But the fact that the number of deaths since 1996 have been consistent is a positive remark and shows that the efforts of the Highway Agency have actually worked since then.
ThDV1 9 months ago
In a later episodes of TG they summed it up better for me, they're not outside schools or in the middle of towns where you can actually speed and hit someone, but in the middle of highways where nothing ever happens.
CipherPixel 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Real benaughty brides are there **benaughtyman.info**
madaraddeumiployolbc 1 year ago
Socialism is a dangerous thing. It has ravaged my home, england.
EUROEMOGUY1998 1 year ago
@EUROEMOGUY1998 Don't blamethe -ism. Blame the New Labour party. Blame Thatcher and Major for fucking up bad enough for labor to swoop in. Blame the idiots in charge. for any -ism out there you can find a counter example of the system working, and many examples of it not working. The problem isn't politics, it's competency.
taitaisanchez 1 year ago 2
@EUROEMOGUY1998 perhaps consider emigration if it has "ravaged your home". Your comment smacks of paranoid Daily Mail-ism. 10/10 for humour, 0/10 for originality. Oh hang on, then you would be, in effect an immigrant! Oh the irony :)
Lucasimo 9 months ago
near were i live there are 3 cameras within 300m, the 1st one is fine because it is a blackspot at a juntion, a further 100m on a bend hidden by trees is the 2nd, and 100m further cuming other way right at end of duel carageway is the 3rd (people slam brakes on for this one causing accidents). the 2nd one gets destroyd by fire etc most weeks? i wonder why?
ts3830 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
As soon as night falling naughty women here benaughtyman.info
bakarnebakana 1 year ago
If "Stupidity" was a fine-able crime, the colossal revenue generated, could simply abolish taxes all together. Honestly, everyone wants to do something stupid once in a while... well.... now there is a way, AND you can support your local government at the same time!
GyroRX8 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Do or die man naughty women here benaughtyman.info
fghfjytihytituiuyt 1 year ago
At least it is very easy to disable those stupid speed cameras.
In fact, it's so easy everyone should do it!
You don't even have to damage them to disable them.
Just stick some tape over the lenses or throw a cardboard box over it.
Very simple and effective!
GunOwnerDan 1 year ago 3
Im just sick and tired of being fined and money stolen off me by crooked governments that wont admit they are just to raise money. I got fined 90 dollars for 60km/hr in a 50km/hr by a speed camera - and the 50km/hr speed limit was TOTALLY unwarranted in the area....it should have been 70. Just so sick of having my hard earned money stolen off me by a crooked government. They all need to be locked up for life.
stimps90 1 year ago 4
these speed cameras are absolutley pontles coz they monitor just a small bit of road and then it will save live maybe of 0,1% of people
patko1610 1 year ago
people that drive excessively slow when they see a cop are annoying.
One: if you were speeding you're already caught
Two: There really is nothing to be nervous/afraid of if you're doing nothing wrong
i HATE driving on the road, held back by a bunch of slow traffic because they're too afraid to go the speed limit or 5-10kph because of a cop.
pathetic!
rascal3001 1 year ago
@rascal3001 Revenue plain and simple.
JAG03064 1 year ago
@JAG03064
The government makes more off of income taxes off of a couple of wealthy people than they do from speed cameras every year.
PulletSurprise 1 year ago
@PulletSurprise Wealthy people pay very little for taxes if at all in comparison to the working man if you want to go by percentages that's why they are wealthy.
At a certain status you can afford to deffer more money to charities and it all comes back as a write off.
JAG03064 1 year ago 2
@rascal3001 indeed, a cop getting worried about somebody driver 5 or 10 km/h faster is a %@#$ (twat)
bassplayer137 1 year ago
I don't think they take the most dangerous roads, they take the roads where people exceed the (often too low) speed limit the most, to generate revenue and justify the cost of the speed cameras.
ryfin2000 1 year ago 13
I find it extremely dangerous, When i come round a bend in the road, and there is a police van parked at the side of the road, my instant thought is "Panic" am i speeding, looking at my speedo, thinking , do i brake ,,what do i do,,, Its very unsettling and really puts my concentration on the actual task of driving safely totally out of synch with my real reactions. I actually believe they are a danger and should be investigated.
wiley789 1 year ago 18
@wiley789 Could not agree with you more but no-one in authority seems to want to consider your point
XTee500 1 month ago
no what i hate is when the police are waiting on the other side of a hill (the downhill bit) and waiting with their little radar gun catching ppl who dont break downhill to idk.. cause they know the ground will lvl so they dont wanna break and then accelerate
gorrilla1234 1 year ago
There's safe speeds and then there's speed limits....where I live there's roads with long flat straights and then tight hairpin corners. THEY'RE ALL THE SAME SPEED LIMIT!!! I can legally screech around a hairpin at 80km/h then onto a long straight where it's illegal to do 81km/h. The point is...drivers already personally choose safe speeds for corners so what's the difference with straights?
itsdamo1993 1 year ago
It's because speed cameras are there for the money, not for safety.
OmegaDude22 1 year ago
@OmegaDude22 Pays for better equipment for police, like those beautiful new Jaguars that the police have bought for highway pursuit in the midlands.
I do prefer officers in unmarked cars to speed cameras though as the real bad drivers don't notice them, drive how they normally would and get nicked for driving like an idiot.
Also I like how the police can check car details to catch the guys without insurance.
G1NZOU 1 year ago
Magic Mushrooms :D
desimunda116 1 year ago
Either way you look at it, we lose our money, the government simply wants all the money in our wallets.
akmandem69 1 year ago
"... Not just, mad vegetarians on bicycles." I adore Jeremy <3
aymthebest 1 year ago
its actually been proven that speed cameras increase deaths...psychologists have done research and found a change of focus by the majority of responsible motorists. Their focus has changed from getting safely to their destination to focusing on not getting caught by a speed camera. The speed cameras are a major distraction.
somerandomaussie 1 year ago 4
2:40...Jeremy, it's to late, you gave your sovereignty to Belgium and the EU, so, your screwed from here on out.
Nazgul001 1 year ago
instead of silly speed cameras they should be spending money and working with the awful roads
MrBazpoker 1 year ago
A guy was given a driving ban for having a sign on the side of the road informing people of a speed camera ahead. Now you've gotta ask yourself one question; If the police only want us to slow down, and the guy made cars do just that, why did they arrest him? Oh hang on I know! They weren't getting any bloody money from it! To hell with speed scameras!
mackat4ck 1 year ago
@mackat4ck - I guess there is no 'freedom of speach' in the UK? Wow - here in the US you can get a ticket for flashing your lights to warn cars of Police ahead. They all think alike no matter where you are - CONTROL the people!
thefiveneals 1 year ago
@thefiveneals Yep, very true! the government also only ever put speed cameras where they can make money, as said in the video, not on accident blackspots!
mackat4ck 1 year ago
the fines are conditioning for the nwo and for paying the dept to the world banks
adelesoccer 1 year ago
With all that money and new research they have reviled, you would think they would up police patrols and police monitoring of highways so that the higher percent of death causes would be addressed right?
SantaFebuff 1 year ago
The Finnish road traffic law just changed considering the limits of speeding. Now the fining-limit is 6km/4mls an hour over the limit. This means that citizens get fined for so called minimum or a misdemeanor fine for driving let's say 127km/hour on a dry bright summer's day sunday highway with a speed limit of a 120km/h. Once you get 3 of these in a 2-year period you loose your license.
StPaul76 1 year ago
The statistically greatest number of fatal accidents happen between 1 and 3am, on rural non-divided country roads, on saturdays and sundays, and more often than not in 4 door sedans and August is the most dangerous month of them all with California having more fatal crashes than any other state. Why isn't it illegal to drive a 4-door down a california country road on weekend mornings in August?
81broncoman 1 year ago
MONEY MONEY MONEY! How do you think they can afford a murcielago police car???
adelie1 1 year ago
What's the BBC doing advertising?
This is surely a breach of their charter?
Thoughts anyone.
smudge6699 1 year ago
Speed camera's are just another tax IMO. Im tired of the Government taking our hard earned cash to spend on duck houses and second mortgages. Almost everything is taxed now. Even driving into the center of London. They must think we drive around at 8:30am just to be awkward. They want us to use public transport. But its shit! Its a vicious circle. We work hard to scrape money together only for the Government to take it away again. Anyway, im stepping down off my soapbox now...
JayRicci7891 1 year ago 5
the consept speed cameras only work for about 0.1%
namas000 1 year ago
I dont see the argument here. If no one broke the law by speeding, no one would get fined. Simple conclusion = dont speed
316124 1 year ago
@316124
Ah but thats the thing, I know abot 8 places just in a five mile radius of my house where speed cameras are places directly inside a 30mph zone after coming down from a 50mph zone, or on a blind corner, or hidden by vegetation.
Its pretty obvious, they're not there for saftey, they're there for income for central government
leapoffaith20 1 year ago
lol
"high on magic mushrooms in a stolen Nissan".
I like the sound of that!
SCHIZOPHRENlC 1 year ago
Pt. 1: I see much confusion from the "Limiter" crowd that believes the speed limits work. Allow me to clarify for my fast driving brethren that may not be able (or willing) to enlighten. It's not that accidents are less violent at speed, it's that they would be less likely to happen at speed. Here's why- Someone zooms by you at 80 in a 65, you instantly pay attention and drive. You drop the cell phone, put down the burger, etc. You may not like it, but speed does makes you attentive.
ThePatUltra 1 year ago
Pt2: The "idiot" zooms by, gets your attention, gets your blood boiling, heart pumping, improving your reaction time, and putting your mind on the road in front of you, instead of what color shoes you were going to wear to the show, which is what some of you may have been thinking beforehand. As a result, you, temporarily become a better driver, even if only for a moment. If you were driving faster, like the "idiot" you'd feel less comfortable multi-tasking behind the wheel.
ThePatUltra 1 year ago
Pt3: Ever look quickly at the "idiot" zooming by before he/she's out of view? The "idiot" is almost always doing nothing other than driving. What other stuff are you as a "normal" person doing while driving? Patrolmen are no different. I've seen all types on several occasions that are just as guilty; cell phones, usually. You're welcome. Sidenote: I feel for the deziens of the U.K., but, Speed Cameras are unconstitutional in the U.S., even though most ignore that particular amendment.
ThePatUltra 1 year ago
@ThePatUltra What amendment was that makes speed camera's illegal????
aftoolman1 1 year ago
@aftoolman1 Sorry bout the delay, had to think awhile which fits best. [Amendment 6. In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.] Not a single word about machinery in there. Not one.
DownYonderFilmCo 1 year ago
@ThePatUltra what if u where zooming passed and someone suddenly crosses the road your speeding over the speed limit and going to fast to stop on time what would happen? i totally agree with u with what your saying butt this is the only reason i can think of why there still there..
djthegrateone 1 year ago
@djthegrateone You're putting too much emphasis on the equipment. If someone suddenly crosses your path you're not going to have enough time to stop regardless of your speed. Defensive driving courses should teach how to "read" a drivers' line. As silly as it sounds, it is doable.
ThePatUltra 1 year ago
Don't join the EU its not worth it.
GunsOfThePhoenix 1 year ago
Don't join the EU. Biggest misstake Sweden ever did. ^^
Neroin88 1 year ago 4
in in Va in the US, the speed cameras are not a problem here (there are none) its the FUCKING RED LIGHT CAMERAS!!!!! If they turn yellow and your 5 feet from crossing the white line (not possible in any car to stop) you get fined, If your stopped at the light and you roll up abit, an inch to far and you get fined, even if you dont actually go through the light. If your trying to turn on red and dont wait the full 4 seconds you get fined (in 4 seconds you loose your shot to pull out)
Rlnthndr 1 year ago
Evidence everywhere, not just the UK, shows that the only appreciable effect of traffic cameras is revenue generation for the government. The cameras are no longer up not to address a safety issue, they are there now to plug up holes in the budget.
Government's job should be to serve its constituents, not to make money off of them.
SDSakuragi 1 year ago 6
I'm from the states so I can't chime into this too much but it says it all when over a million fines are handed out yet fatalities remain steady. Just another example of government getting into every fabric of your life and wallet. All in the name of safety my left nut!
fullbohr 2 years ago 181
Damn this subject gets me wound up.. another big problem with speed cameras is that they can cause more danger than they try to prevent... specially the average-speed cameras. People usually drive down the highway at a comfortable speed that they judge to be appropriate to the road conditions, at the same time being alert and watching the road.
With speed cameras, people end up staring at their speedometer going past them, scared of getting fined, and not watching where they're going...
MJM153 2 years ago 11
@MJM153 Thats so true, i get over paranoid when driving past speed cameras and although i would normaly have been driving at a safe appropriate speed i find myself obsessively staring at the speedo, nearly come off my bike a few times because of it!
02pattersonp 2 years ago
The faster your speed the more you get charged, they just want to get as much money out of your pockets as possible!
akmandem69 2 years ago
The faster you go the more you're breaking the law therefore the punishment goes up idiot. Don't break the law then act outraged when you get caught. Speeding fines are like a fair tax, a tax on criminal morons
l3inaryl3urnout 2 years ago
When did I say I drive?I don`t even own a car asshole. And I know the dam law so stfu.
akmandem69 2 years ago
It isn't a fair tax. the 'criminal morons' are usually teen's who can't afford the fines. and they tend to memorize where speed cameras are and do their best not to get caught. The majority of people who get fined in my area are businessmen or women who are late for work and just happen to stray over the limit...
MJM153 1 year ago
The only imbecile here is you. Jeremy presented a "double chart" which showed the amount of people fined & the amount of people that have died from speeding since 1996 until early 2000s. In the UK. The amount of people who have died has remained constant, whilethe amount of people fined has increased.
If you are too stupid to understand what this means, it means that the speed cameras are NOT lowering fatalities as they were intended to. Thus, there is no need for them.
Once again: You = idiot
Rarez2 1 year ago 3
i hate it when cops rape you over frickin 5mph...seriously, if you go 70 or 75 it won't make a difference of you hit the person...they'll be dead.
iCheckVtec 2 years ago 134
@iCheckVtec Stretches of road that allow 70 mph won't have pedestrians next to them. If you hit another car at that speed, or run off the road, every mph make a huge difference in your and other motorists survival rate.
Athaeus 2 years ago
@iCheckVtec check out the aussie 'wipe off 5' program and adds
MegaMonkeyExtreme 2 years ago
its all about stopping distance. from 50km/hr to 60km/hr stopping distance doubles. but i do agree its bullshit when they nail you for 5 over >.>
SecretName25 2 years ago
Unless they wear bubblewrap :D
Dragon22873 1 year ago
@iCheckVtec You logic is laughable. By what you say, it doesn't make a difference if I drive at 150 mph or 60 mph, as they'll be dead either way.
sofawall 1 year ago
@sofawall No, I'm not as illogical as you appear to be. I'm talking about under 10 mph. Obviously it makes a difference going over double the speed. I guess your logic is laughable.
iCheckVtec 1 year ago
@iCheckVtec Your logical argument was that they would be dead either way, regardless of which speed they were hit at. From the logical argument you put forth, the speeds themselves don't matter, as long as both are sufficient to kill on impact. Maybe what you meant to say was that the police shouldn't bother about 5 MPH because it is such a small difference, but that is not what you said. The argument you posted was very different from what you seem to have intended.
sofawall 1 year ago
@iCheckVtec i agree
drapperneverstops3 1 year ago
@iCheckVtec yeah but for every mph you drive you are getting one step closer to death if ur crashing
heltfuckd 1 year ago
@iCheckVtec, ur right on the money mate coz here in melbourne australia if a fixed speed camera or a mobile camera gets u and if ur over by 1 km/h they will send u a $250 fine.
WRS493 7 months ago
@iCheckVtec lol. The only time you can even do 70mph is on a dual carridgeway or a motorway, and people aren't allowed to walk their anyway ;)
I'm 16, and it seems like I know more about this stuff than the government transport department or whatever...
ThePrototype27602 5 months ago
lose the queens head shes a twat, and the whole "royal" family is unneccesary, thow them out the big palace and make them pay taxes in their counsel flat XDXD the very thought of that makes me happy :)
italianchriswilko100 2 years ago
@italianchriswilko100 I agree. The only argument that I've heard in favour of keeping the royal family is that they're tourist attractions, but I disagree. People visit the pyramids don't they? When was the last pharaoh? Buckingham palace would be a whole lot more tourist friendly if we could actually go inside. etc etc.
supasonicman 2 years ago 7
@supasonicman hahahah thats a great way of looking at it
riz44 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Put swastika on these sticks.
VegEdGoku 2 years ago
So dont say anything??? that suits me (:
nath0987 2 years ago
ah the good old seasons where they actually talked sense....this last season is the dumbest by far....they either have old people's dementia or are deliberately catering to the ADHD generation
MilitantOldLady 2 years ago
Oh no, the politicians in our country are more than qualified. In fact that is the reason why they will use biased results. To get their own way.
Clever really
4wildej 2 years ago
Also, iv'e seen countless people bring out graphs showing drops in road deaths, and attempting to say that speed cameras are the culprit. A large amount of that is down to new designs in vehicle safety which reduce the rate of deaths. These graphs make no mention of the number of accidents that didn't lead to death. It just proves that the majority of laws are made based on improper interpretation of statistics. You can't get away from the fact that we are being goverened by unqualified idiots.
MJM153 2 years ago 2
There is absolutely no way to stop idiots from mucking around. The government can impose as many laws as they want, people will still find ways to break them and not get caught. That means the rest of us have to put up with these restrictive, stupidly ill-informed laws while hoons still go about killing themselves.
MJM153 2 years ago 4
These guys are true patriots, those cameras are used for nothing else but to raise money.
rifleman4life 2 years ago 10
Nothing else but to raise money? Then explain away the points system that you simply make no mention of??
In the UK, we have a cumulative points system where habitual offenders ultimately have their driving privileges withrawn. This means that those who habitually ignore posted thresholds are history for a given period. THAT is the principle & key element of speed detection.
You'd prefer the infrastructure that supports that paid for by the tax payer?
lollygaggle 2 years ago
@lollygaggle Many countries have a points system, it is not unique to the U.K.
Also, if the cameras were there to catch speeders and reduce danger, they would be in more logical spots, as the gentlemen explained. Regardless of where the money may or may not go, from the evidence brought forth it logically follows that the cameras are not used to reduce accidents or excessive speeding, but instead to raise money.
sofawall 1 year ago
@sofawall You will need to elaborate on the relevance of the international points system? What is a more 'logical' spot? What is more logical than locations where recognised speeding issues exist using the 85th percentile system gathered via data tubes? Can you supply any links to support your claim regarding the raising of revenue? I have sent you links.
lollygaggle 1 year ago
@sofawall I addition to my previous comments, you are obviously not aware that there are countless mobile enforcement sites that generate very few detections, in other words, there is a recognised collision history but 0 - 2 speed detections per hour. These must be visited in the monthly cycle just the same as all other sites, so if revenue was the ONLY consideration, then why aren't only high yield sites visited?
lollygaggle 1 year ago
it would be interesting to see the number of cars on the road on that graph as well. if there are loads more cars on the road now, and the accident rate is the same as it was back in the 90's then thats a different issue
memento18poker 2 years ago
look its not 'speed' that kills u... suddenly becoming stationary is what gets u. - quote from jeremy clarkson
pecker22350 2 years ago
my state wont allow speed cameras, hells yea!
Weazell 2 years ago
They are starting to do automated ticketing for stop signs here.
alterbr33d 2 years ago
Where's that? I know they have camera's at a few intersections for traffic lights here, but I don't know how effective they are. I'm in CT, btw.
Weazell 2 years ago
CA and WA as far as I know are starting to have cameras for the stop signs. Personally I don't always come to a total stop, but I go down to a slow roll, and I look.
alterbr33d 2 years ago
me too in ct. we're lucky that ct is mostly conservative old white people voting and they will never pass speed cameras
WIGTRON5000 2 years ago
@WIGTRON5000 Agreed, old white people can never pass speed cameras due to the size of their colon.
lollygaggle 2 years ago
Its a miracle i dont have any "expensive photos"...Even though i drive like a bat out of hell....red..red..red..green...wroooooaaahh 0-60 in 1 second XD
FearlessSpinner 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The key flaw with Mr Clarkson's figures concerning so-called static road accident figures, is that they don't take into account the rise in the numbers of vehicles on the roads. So whilst motorists slow down at camera locations, they then hurtle away to have an accident elsewhere.
Do Mr Clarkson's figures demonstrate accidents at camera locations?
lollygaggle 2 years ago
speed doesn't kill...stupid driving kills....
whether you are going fast or slow, if you do shit or someone else is doing shit and u have to avoid them, you can have an accident.
I once had an accident going at the speed limit...a guy came out on me, I swerved to avoid him and ran into another car. THe jackass got away scot free.
Chaupro 2 years ago 7
I see, so when this guy pulled out, you were killed?
It was only because your velocity was moderated that you lived.
If someone does 'shit' by running into the back of you in a queue of traffic at 2mph, you get a dented bumper. Do the same at 50mph.......
Speed is virtually (not in every case obiously), the single factor that determines the level of injury in every RTC.
lollygaggle 2 years ago
I never argued that...speed makes accidents worse...but it doesn't CAUSE accidents...stupidity does.... if the guy didn't pull out in the first place, there would have been no accident...no death, no injury, no dmged vehicles with expensive repair bills....
Chaupro 2 years ago
I disagree, exceeding the posted threshold does account for a percentage of road traffic collisions, not all, but unquestionably some.
It is a combination of poor judgement combined with not being able to stop safely within the distance you can see that is the biggest cause - the latter part being speed related.
Reducing speeds nationally would reduce the trauma inflicted by collisions.
lollygaggle 2 years ago
go blow it out your ass
whatthehallbetch 2 years ago
@whatthehallbetch Hi betch, thanks for replying with such an erudite, & well thought through response.
It appears the old realisation penny has dropped & you now 'get it' as you offer nothing other your mild philippic.
Good to see another convert. Perhaps you'd now pass the message on to the others you know are still confused?
lollygaggle 2 years ago
relax,im joking. i think speed is a factor in automotive accidents, but i dont think it outright kills
whatthehallbetch 2 years ago
@whatthehallbetch What do you believe is therefore the principle factor that determines the level of injury then?
lollygaggle 2 years ago
the skill of the driver
whatthehallbetch 2 years ago
moreso than speed.. the quality of the vehicle/vehicle safety measures is/are the principle factor that determines the level of injury haha. Also type of accident, location of accident, and yes speed is a factor as well
LemUUU 2 years ago
@lollygaggle I still disagree, though
If you are good behind the wheel, then speed doesn't matter... if u're not good with a vehicle, then OBVIOUSLY u have to drive slower... ur speed to mirror your driving skill. It still isn't "speed"...
Chaupro 1 year ago
@Chaupro Who makes the decision about a driver's capabilities? It will always be the individual themselves - how often do you see a teenager out in the fast lane behind the wheel of a Corsa doing 90mph+?
More often than not, those who consider themselves 'good' behind the wheel are just kidding themselves.
lollygaggle 1 year ago
@lollygaggle And for the record, I agree with you about most ppl who think they they can drive usually can't. But that's why I mentioned abt ppl being honest with themselves... and people tkaing their time to learn... and people observing other drivers and how things are done...
also, the way people are taught to drive needs to change INTERNATIONALLY....
Chaupro 11 months ago
@lollygaggle but again... understand that speed or no speed, if ppl drove less wrecklessly, there would be few or no accidents. If you serviced your vehicle regularly so there's a less likely chance of a malfunction. If you were honest with your abilities rather than tryign to drive fast to impress someone. If people would use indicators/hand signals and would check theri mirrors before turning or changing lanes. If people would know to slow down on a wet or unsure surface....
Chaupro 11 months ago
@Chaupro The key word is 'if' - but nothing will change. People continue to smoke knowing it causes respiratory disease, & drink even though it destroys your liver. Human beings do not alter their behaviours to better the system, just themselves.
Speed is still unquestionably the number one determining factor of the level of physical trauma WHEN a collision takes place & they will continue to do so. Observing the 30 limit would unquestionably reduce pedestrian road deaths.
lollygaggle 11 months ago
exactly.
whatthehallbetch 2 years ago
Speed kills! Think of the logic: If all cars went zero mph, car accidents would, amazingly be a thing of the past... Sounds ridiculous yes but that argument eventually being used wouldn't surprise me.
I am curious about Jeremy's comment about police interrogation: How can the british police force you to incriminate yourself by verifying the speed camera picture?
newcamper 2 years ago
i think your question relates to the fact of the British transportation acts. Im sure the British parliament amended the law in the transportation act to allow police officers to force you to say who the driver was or else face "obstruction of justice" charges.
Speed Camaras are there just to raise money for the transportation department, it really doesnt help people.
What if someone get fined once? Its unlikely they will not speed again.
yuna238 2 years ago
Obesity kills too, so let's ban eating utensils. Better yet, let's food altogether. That'll stop people from dying. -_-
Otacon237 2 years ago
Although an old clip, Mr Clarkson also fails to grasp the concept of 'speeding kills'.
The velocity at the moment of impact is primarily the determining factor as to the level of physical trauma, the higher the speed, the greater the level of injury.
Speeding kills does not infer that all accidents are caused by excessive velocity, more, that if you go faster than the posted threshold & hit something, personal injury levels will be resultingly much higher.
lollygaggle 2 years ago
true that if u get into an accident going faster, there is a higher likelihood of dying or getting seriously injured, but if more ppl would drive intelligently and considerately, we wouldn't have as many accidents...anywhere...
Chaupro 2 years ago
As for your puzzling over the 'police interrogation' comment;
Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 dictates that the registered keeper must supply tthe name of the driver at the time of the alleged offence.
Are you suggesting that having had lessons, passed the test to the prescribed standard, bought a vehicle, got insurance, a VEL, MOT if applicable, we then opt to pick & choose which road trafffic legislation to follow or ignore?
lollygaggle 2 years ago
whats a VEL and/or MOT?
whatthehallbetch 2 years ago
VEL = vehicle excise licence = road tax.
MOT = after three years from new, every vehicle must be tested annually for road worthiness.
The skill of the driver what?
lollygaggle 2 years ago
where do you live because we dont have to do that in alberta
whatthehallbetch 2 years ago
lollygaggle
Country:United Kingdom
lollygaggle 2 years ago
aah, makes sense. you only need a road worthiness test every ten years and only if you're selling it to someone else here in Alberta
whatthehallbetch 2 years ago
I thought Britain was a "monarchy" but that comment about the RTA "dictates," does slightly reek of totalitarian. Was that 1988 or "1984?" In Canada we are not yet forced to testify against ourselves... sorry for the misunderstanding.
Again I am not familiar with totalitarian governments. I do have a question in response to your last: Stop signs, do you stop the duration "dictated" by RTA 1988? If 70MPH is the limit on the motorway, than by your reasoning, 71mph would be...?
newcamper 2 years ago
We are not forced to testify against ourselves in the UK - you do have a choice.
You stop at stop signs.
71mph would be....one louder?
lollygaggle 2 years ago
Fair enough; "testify" would imply a courtroom setting but being forced to incriminate yourself is the same thing.
You had mentioned the picking and choosing what parts of the statutes one chooses to disregard: 70MPH Maximum posted, 71mph is then disregarding that portion of the RTA?
newcamper 2 years ago
Intent is key in every aspect of legislation infringement - hence murder becomes manslaughter if unintentional. The Uk does not operate a zero tolerance policy with regard to speed enforcement - the leeway is usually 10%+2 give or take.
lollygaggle 2 years ago
Sure its a monarchy.. its just not a pleasant place to live. I know.. I tried for 7 years and ran away from there.
Janusha 2 years ago 2
@newcamper Whilst on paper we are indeed a monarchy, both the Queen & her cohorts have taken a very obvious backseat in the level of coverage & profile they once enjoyed.
This can be attributed to several factors, but the death of Diana played a significant role in the decline of 'their' popularity.
Much of the way the 'system' is viewed is based upon urban legend & pure nonsense about Big Brother. Odd when you consider that all the recent moves have reduced the numbers of regular police.
lollygaggle 2 years ago 3
Ooooor... everyone could band together to drive better and more responsably? Thus making the convictions and fine money whither away in one of the most satisfying victorys I can think of.
GriffinR34 2 years ago
Everyone could band together to drive better? You can't be serious.
There is no 'unity' out on the roads, the 'I must get in front of you at any cost' mentality is rife & the concept of everyone suddenly 'uniting' & dropping overall speeds is quite ludicrous.
We currently have a system where everyone is taught how to drive & what is expected of them. They are then tested, but once passed, you can't expect anyone to be interested in joining a great big buddy club to all drive the same?
lollygaggle 2 years ago
Yeah... I wasn't serious really, but the concept I was shooting for was not without reward. If that were to happen, it would not be for the betterment of having a drive thats not some form of stock car race.
It would be to stop the govermant from reaping the rewards of human nature via ticketing us to oblivion.
But honestly it was just an amusing concept to just throw out there..
GriffinR34 2 years ago
In Phoenix Arizona one of the speed cameras ran out of digital storage space for all of the many thousands of speeding ticket pictures it had to take in just ONE DAY. The reason? An individual I know replaced the 55mph sign with a 65mph sign.
81broncoman 2 years ago 5
lol..really funny
tkgeezy01 2 years ago 2
if you look at the germans,, they almost never speed in the city, They make up time on the autobahn and stay within the speed limits in the city, MAKE ALL HIGHWAYS LIKE THE AUTOBAHN!!
vamphunte 2 years ago 51
@vamphunte
well said and if the Gov. wants money build the auto bahns so more tourists would come and you get money and the citizens will be happy
brilliant srsly they should put you as head of charge in ministry of transportation :)
randomvidz14 1 year ago
@vamphunte I see an obvious flaw in that. The Autobahns are not bumper car arenas, they cannot take the impact of someone slamming into the barriers at 100+mph. So, with no limit, who's to say the percentage of death's by speed won't go up as people try to push their cars to the limit and fail?
SantaFebuff 1 year ago
@vamphunte Vamphunte for Prime Minister!
DriftProXL 1 year ago
This really pisses me off.. the whole money thing. Last year the cops where I live (Western Australia) made $33 million off speeding - out of a population of 2 million, yet as Jeremy points out, just like Britian, the death toll remains at an almost constant. If the money was put to a better use, such as 1 or 2 days of driver training a year for every registered driver I wouldnt care but its just an obvious money maker for the government anywhere in the world and they'll never remove or admit it
FunkMasterJono 2 years ago 6
I think it is rarely about money.
It is more about POWER.
Law makers will NEVER admit they are wrong.
'Common' people almost always do not have the voice, or conviction, or the $ to commit to change the laws or the way they are enforced; Law makers know this; and will continue to make ridiculous, secretive, biased-researched, knee-jerk and self-serving laws.
I think that's the way it is.
YOU must do something -at the great expense of being ridiculed - if you want things to change.
schumacher500 2 years ago 10
Money and control
Paganiproductions 2 years ago 2
Revolution. At this point that is the only way to truly save the United States government.
nosnhoj1987 2 years ago
the government has got the wrong end of the stick, speed doesn't kill.... lack of driving skill and stupidity kills... yet even though speed cameras have had a negative effect on the number of road related deaths, the governmets still keep them because they are a significant source of revenue.
MJM153 2 years ago 9
send me the link plz for all top gear episodes THNX!!
soldiermanking 2 years ago
i can say now if they try and put a limiter in my car or bike ide take it right out coz there crap and pointles u make a car to get places fast not kina fast lol
michaelisdude 2 years ago
its all revenue!!!! FUCKING MONEY MAKING BULLSHIT!!!!!!!!!!! ITS ALL A SCAM TO MAKE MONEY! TRY HAVING EVERY CAR LINKED UP TO A GPS STYLE SPEED LIMITER. THEREFORE THE CARS ARE LIMITED TO CERTEN SPEEDS ON THE ROAD. EVEN BETTER TEACH PEOPLE HOW TO DRIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
discopigs69 2 years ago
calm down!
MrAndrewjs 2 years ago 4
speed limits suck the sped limit should be 200 mhp and everyone should have supercars
nickalexrock 2 years ago 8
I agree.
ACxii 2 years ago 2
thanks
nickalexrock 2 years ago
not everyone can drive a car though i mean put a 75 year old in a lambo and he'd still do 20 in a 60 zone lol
a9059 2 years ago 4
i dont think speed cameras are there for your own safety. what people tend to do is speed anyway, when a camera approaches they slow down, when the camera is passed speed up. if they really were there for our safety, we'd have one every 500 meters. its just another way for the government to make money, and its a successful method apparently
dimeabb 2 years ago 10
They could pass a law to instal a speed monitor hooked up with a GPS in every car so they would always know when your'e speeding and I'm sure that would decrease the number of people speeding, however that would cost A LOT so screw peoples lives, let them pay for breaking the law, right?
Nighthawk532 2 years ago
if the government really wanted us to not speed they could pass a law outlawing BMW's and give everyone a ford focus. but they're obviously not going to do that, so pointing out something as irrelevant as this is pretty much a waste of everyones life
cdAlaine 2 years ago
Go to the Emirates High way road in the UAE . I calculate a camera each 3.4 KM along the 167 km Strech.
Jordan a speed trap every 8 Km on the way to my university & they even cheat some times ..I got fined for going 90 in a 100 zone !!!
kosummak 2 years ago
So what are the major causes of road deaths?
Chronobeanz 2 years ago
People being distracted while driving, eating, talking, lack of sleep ect.
Veece07 2 years ago
slow drivers causin fast moving vehicles and people in them to die on impact
zits10 2 years ago
If every country had an autobuhn we would have less speeders because we could get the high speed driving out of our system. Germany is wonderful !!!!!!
ChuckMullis 2 years ago 7