speedtraphunter : well put together, thank you. Personally I am not too surprised about the vid mysteriously disappearing from here, its called media censorship and it exists everywhere to prevent the good people knowing the truth. Good work.
there is actually a prominate curve with drivers becoming worse as we progress through time because if nobody takes to much offence to it in the old days if you were a bad driver and crashed you would most likely die thereby a bad driver has been removed from the gene pool but now with safer cars most people can have a serious crash and be fine and are not removed from the gene pool so drivers will keep getting worse the safer cars are so if we had less safe cars our roads might actually be safe
@lochlandb You originally supplied a seven line paragraph with no capital letters, no periods or commas, or punctuation of any description. This is indicative of shoddy thinking that spills out onto public carriageways. People will of course, deny this possibility which you have done, so I am simply highlighting that many such similies are intrinsically relevant & I am unable to be eleemosynary in such circumstances, as I genuinely believe what I say.
@lollygaggle ok so you've gone from driving to grammar to people believing the earth is flat. you're trying to say that because i haven't had as good education early on and im willing to admit dont know my times tables or how to spell to well or much about grammar but does that really effect my driving if i understand the rules and even last year in year 11 (in australia) upon asking the teacher why grammar is important i get a 90min detention for asking a stupid question so im told
@lollygaggle does this really show humanity moving forward when those who are willing to learn are shuned and then because they have not been given the opportunity to learn from someone the only knowlege is the knowlege i have to obtain by myself and then to have someone say that it makes me worse in another respect is a bit annoying. I DO kindof see were youre coming from because i seem less/ probably am less educated but please give me the chance to have an opinion im leaving this post forever
@SpeedTrapHunter This is one of the key problems with those who go to such lengths to cast doubt. No wonder so many people are confused by such misleading nonsense.
The success? We got a copy of the video held by the police. I think if you search for "Norfolk camera crash" it comes up on utube. It was also published by MCN. It also upset the Norfolk camera partnership quite a bit. Incidentally the fallout from it resulted in me changing jobs and getting a 10k rise so it obviously pays to complain.
@PlasticSpongeCake Your personal circumstances hardly constitute a successful campaign. Can you supply a link that substantiates an 'upset camera partnership' please or anything that supports your claim? If Norfolk Safety Camera Partnership are still in operation, then I suggest the above has achieved nothing.
@PlasticSpongeCake Ran a search and: 'Carol Croft, who has lived next to the road for 25 years, told BBC Radio Norfolk that she had witnessed and helped victims of several crashes and hoped the cameras would make the road safer.
She said: "I have seen a number of fatal accidents since living here and hopefully we won't have any more.' indicate that crashes happened there long before speed enforcement measures.
i thought the above was a cartoon til i saw the man drivin upsidedown and he looks like my dad he used to sell ice cream so i can see it isnt a toon especally after the bird flies along and all the money goes into the sky why would walt dizney waste cartoon drawers time drawing birds flying along and money going up into the sky when they could be making pocahontas 2 where she fights predators in the jungle carl weathers was so good that i wanted to look like him but i used to much shoe polish
ii) To which of the 1000-or-so comments/questions posted asked in a 6-month period are you referring?
iii) Right, okay... But what does 'Fagism' have to do with the price of fish? No background?
Right, down to the important stuff - FINALLY!
Either it's taxpayerfunded work - you guys are sitting about, sipping coffee, playing on the Internet at the Private Sector's cost - or this is a private indulgence in which you are abusing Police privileges to harangue the public!
TrollyGaggle, shall I ask you YET AGAIN what kind of reasons can explain the INCREASED rate of motorcyclist deaths in the past 10 years?...
Got an answer to this, yet?.. Or are you going to wander off into the verbose and abstract - YET AGAIN - and try to suggest that records of road deaths (when they're increasing) aren't applicable to the discussion, but road deaths (when they're decreasing) are applicable to increased expenditure on SPEED ENFORCEMENT?
Beautiful sidestep, anything to avoid the question posed. You've now checked & realised you quoted the wrong person, so the old smokescreen machine is cranked right up = waffle/waffle/UPPERCASE SHOUTING/waffle/waffle.
Your question is very easily answered - in the UK there are @ 78% more bikes registered now than were ten years ago.
With increased road traffic & rising fuel costs, people want to avoid holdups & reduce costs so the numbers will continue to rise.
Just answered 5 damn points above! Yet you claim I do more "sidestepping" than a drunken crab!
Format: Again, your obvious lack of computing knowledge means you don't understand anything about layout. Normally I'd be adjusting my text with italics and emboldening to provide CONTRAST and make it easier to read/provide emphasis on certain points. (It's not SHOUTING, it's just emphasis.)
SO, back to the bikes - as I said at the top of this thread "people cause crashes, so get rid of the people"?
Good observation, your literary perambulations are generically laterigrade.
I clearly answered your point about the rise in motorcycle accidents, which you do not mention. In fact, the number of bike accidents have not risen in proportion to the large numbers registered over the past decade, so in reality, the accident rate is dropping percentage wise.
Cool huh?
You have no interest in responding to any question put to you, you mince & meander with directionless diatribe.
Heheh... "Generic"? No, I don't think my speed-cam-road-death-safety remarks could be dropped seamlessly into any other conversation. (They're rather Subject-Specific.)
As for "laterigrade"? Well, it can be explained by the viewer's POV (and more than likely their own sideways travel in the other direction).
"accident rate dropping %age wise"? Just sounds like Brownonomics: A "0% increase" is not an increase,Gordon.
It may be a diatribe,but it is targeted at all the things that are so wrong.
Haven't voted on my posts? I have no clue what this means? I have never voted on any posts, ever.
You clearly typed you felt you were being 'played' & I was attempting to discredit you, then get all coy when I mention it?
I have only ever debated speed enforcement, never used bad language, yet people get swirled away by crazy ideas & notions. I am constantly mis-quoted & mentioned in issues I have never taken part in, in fact things I have never even hinted at.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Lolly,
1) 'voted' = 'thumbs up' / 'thumbs down'
and
2) I have never written any comments under another account, claiming to have support from imaginary friends, and then used multiple accounts to administer multiple "thumbs down". The same cannot be said of you (a.k.a. "CrossChannelFairy" for one).
I suppose you'd probably try to dismiss this with something like, "Ooh, I only cheat fairly.."
I fully understand the concept of voting, but not in relation to me. You appear to be assigning someone else's behaviour in my direction. I see this as a forum to deliver information, not a game to 'cheat' in.
As for your 'historical' comment - in which thread am I supposed to have dismissed you which has left such a lasting hole in your ego? Cite the thread & paste the text.
Whatever has been typed, have deep seated issues about being compromised in any way.
'Anyhow, I'm still chuckling at your line that I shouldn't be able to cite "historical" (i.e, for me and my evidence, anything that happened yesterday or before) data and statistics because you reckon they're iirelevant.'
When I cite a piece of evidence dating from 1 or more years back (maybe even 50 or 100 years), you try to dismiss it as "historical" and therefore irrelevant to the current day.
And yet you cite multiple pieces of such evidence, dating from the 1960s forward, and yet don't seem to see a problem with that!
"One rule for you and another rule for us."
One has to look at these things holistically! (I.e. Controlled experiment - with/without cars, etc.)
Note Tj930, that a question has been asked of you;
'As for your 'historical' comment - in which thread am I supposed to have dismissed you, which has left such a lasting hole in your ego? Cite the thread & paste the text.'
No doubt we'll have to go through the whole, 'Question for me? When? I was dealing with all the other comments first. Never saw it', waffle first.
Waits now for the usual evasive nonsense about the agricultural land mass of the UK or toilet rolls.
I cannot copy'n'paste in entirety, you idiot - try it for yourself, you'll see why! (Large chunks of duplication aren't permitted - have to teach you more about how to use computer systems again, do I?)
And when you ask multiple questions in a single post,you cannot reasonably expect multiple, detailed answers in <500chars!
"Personally, I believe it impossible to quantify the number of road collisions from year to year with their reasons."
One thing that I have noticed (& others who discuss you by PM), you treat this all like some form of contest, i.e. 'Game, set & match' & when flustered are prone to name calling '..you idiot'.
You may benefit from composing yourself before typing next time & most importantly, ensure you are actually quoting the right text.
Your track record thus far hasn't been so hot as you never quite keep your eye on who you're trolling.
YOU'RE THE ONE TREATING IT LIKE SOME KIND OF GAME!
& I really don't like having my word brought into question,& particularly don't like having my word repeatedly brought into question - as you have done REPEATEDLY!
1)I am not the 'Troll' 2)I have never been a 'Troll' 3)You have created numerous pen names for yourself, so you should not be surprised when ambiguity results!4)I have never initiated ANY PMs about you - but I've received fricking hundreds! 5)if you intend to come across a simple..
Oh and "P.s.", Lolly - I heard some interesting statistic the other day that Great Britain only has the agricultural land mass to support a 40million population, sustaining the other 25-30million has only been made possible by the Internal Combustion engine...
Enviro. Boom & Bust... Sounds like half of us are going to die whatever happens!.. The rest will have to move up to the mountains of Scotland when the 'tide comes in'
Lollita, the point you conveniently seem to be ignoring is that your comments are in themselves "evidence." (They may be garbage, but they're still evidence.)
If there is no "pressure" (as you put it) to expand, why have you stated that Ave-Speed-Cams will "quadruple in the next 36 months"?
P.s. Have really lost Public's faith with AveCams flawed technology and 50mph limit on M1.
On the motorway, if I take shorter path by straight-lining a bend (i.e. by moving from inside to outside lanes on a right-hand bend), I am not breaking the law. Although my momentary speed (50mph) will be the same as those around me (i.e. those who stay in the same lane), my average speed will be much higher because I have travelled a shorter distance in the same time.
Therefore, you'll have to build into your calculations a massive %age error - 65mph?
I went past Derby on the M1 the other Saturday in both directions.
If there had been a SINGLE person standing by the side of the road, working, I wouldn't have a thing to say on the matter. HOWEVER, NO-ONE was working! NOT 1 PERSON! No dug-up road!
Put these stupid AveSpeedCams with a strictly enforced 50mph limit for no tangible safety reason, other than that somebody during the day will inevitably nudge a speed that will result in them getting a ticket and having to pay a costly fine
Because average speed cameras have nothing whatsoever to do with Safety Camera Partnerships - owned, run & administered by a completely different organisation.
However, ignoring a NIP will result in contravention of section 172 & because speeding hasn't been decriminalised & can only be dealt with by sanctioned staff, the CPS will pursue it & ultimately the registered keeper will be up in court for a hefty fine & 6 points.
Like Bandit Wheel-Clampers? Way different, but your choice of course.
"research" - why? The other old adage, "Know your enemy"?
Hmmm... Still all sounds like part of the same, clunking, malfunctioning system to me.
Anyhow, I'm still chuckling at your line that I shouldn't be able to cite "historical" (i.e, for me and my evidence, anything that happened yesterday or before) data and statistics because you reckon they're iirelevant.
Have you not heard of controlled tests? 'Double-Blind Tests'? etc. etc.?
Bob Hoskins once said it is good to talk, Tj also enjoys the odd chuckle.
Research will assist you if you continue attempting to debate the subject on the table. You clearly have no clue who administers SPECS & lump everything into one big pot & stir. To your untrained ear, yes it may very well all make one sound. However, you are stuck with it. Unlucky.
I know how makes the laws AND (despite what Founty might says) who's responsible for bad law, and who exacts this bad law and 'pseudo justice' on the public.
I recognise "mission creep" when I see it.
Everything has a weakness mate; whether it's the machinery itself, or the person operating it. There's always a 'weak link in the chain'
If, for example, one were to fire paint balls into the air,from what I'm told,they tend to bend from right to left, making target shooting more difficult..But
Just think - in this mind experiment - if there are 3 cameras (start/middle/end) and the 1 in the middle stops working for some reason, it's really going to stuff up the conviction rate...
As already mentioned, all those bends in the road over such a long distance is going to give a massive spread of entirely legal results.. Hmmm, it would be like allowing one to do 70mph in the 50 zone... Hmmm
It is an offence to be stationary on the Central Reservation or verge of a motorway. The Verge of a motorway, is any part of it that is not either the carriageway (i.e. part of the road that is normally driven on) or the hard shoulder.
Read the paper? Where?
Take no notice of Mr Clarkson, he is a complete & utter idiot with little to no regard for the environment or his fellow human beings.
You are entitled to an opinion, but you lack any real core knowledge about the subject.
I can think of a strip of dual-carriageway 40mph zone with ave-speed cams on it (where Clarkson's analogy could legally take place - well, all except the 200mph hour bit... But ave-cams won't catch him).. Game, Set, Match, matey.
You're just trying to discredit me, personally, "Playing the man; not the ball.."
You say you're feeling victimised. This is quite common in such forums, especially when your core knowledge is flakey. You also say you are being 'played', which can't be comfortable as men are driven by their egos & consequently anything that takes control away is a challenge to their masculinity.
However, you've 'come out' & admitted you're feeling compromised which is a step in the right direction. Don't now go backwards & get all defensive, you've done well to get this far.
Mate,hold down Ctrl+F, type the word 'victim' into the search field, and (besides what I've just typed here this second) try and find that word against my name. You won't.
Clearly you're trying to 'put words into my mouth.'
For me, it's not about ego;I just loath bad driving/riding, inconsiderate driving/riding,and a system fixated on SPEED+FINES rather than SAFETY. (Fast travel alone does not = danger)
When I'm not on a race track, I don't drive like I am/position car to block other people
But a great many oafs would honestly rather have a smash than let somebody overtake them - these people don't need fining, they need putting against the wall and...
People who plod along at 40mph in a 60 zone - UNTIL you pull out to overtake them - then they stomp on the throttle, narrowing the overtaking window, and try to cause a head-on collision.
"If you were doing 80mph before, I wouldn't have tried overtaking!" If you lift the throttle,tuck in behind them, the speed drops to back 40mph..
Some people, sauntering along, drift violently towards the centre of the road - to make overtaking more difficult - once they finally check their rearview mirrors and they realise they're holding everybody up.
I've seen this so many times.
"When a motorcyclist, with his headlight glowing, whistles up behind you, do you swerve into his path and try and knock him off and kill him?! Well why do you do it to a car then?! It's not a race, just let people past! It doesn't cost you a thing!"
well i told you about your friends as ive said before ive no doubt we can meet up in some local services you all scive off in and sort this out thats if you little friends can drag themselves away from the tiolets wanking each other off
The old adage, "You don't have to be a mechanic to drive a car," can certainly be applied to your last comment.
Do I need to know the inside-leg measurement, shoes size and favourite piece of Spanish Guitar music of the particular Bandit who happens to be robbing me at a particular time to know that I'm robbed?
harry;, it appears your comments have been squashed, but you posed;
'Therefore, they exist to build more speed cameras.'
You still do not understand the principle point, SCP's do not make money - they only get their running costs from the government - there is NO incentive whatsoever to increase the number of camera sites.
Are you suggesting there is pressure to keep expanding camera numbers?
Personally, I believe it impossible to quantify the number of road collisions from year to year with their reasons.
Modern vehicles have become much quieter, have an increasing range of safety features, better brakes & crash test results generate a sense of invincibility in their occupants. Also, moving at 70 in a car from 15 years ago is considerably different to one built in the last couple.
To juggle figures to illustrate accident trends & causes is intrinsically flawed from the off.
Yeah, so.. Let me get this right.. Any arguments and statistics and evidence that might point to an improvement in safety due to Heavy-Handed Speed-Limit Enforcement is entirely germane and valid and relevant and submissible...
But anything which points to the opposite, isn't?
Arguing/debating accident statistics will get you nowhere - speed cameras, both static & mobile are out there today, tomorrow. Average speed technology is expanding & is set to quadruple in the next 36 months.
What is the ultimate purpose of continually churning over your displeasure?
It's not enough for you guys to rob us blind; it's not enough for you to victimise and moralise us; it's not enough for your clumsy, unnecessary acts to kill us; no, you want our souls, too! And then you expect us to be grateful!
Not heard of "countermeasures"? It'll be like Darwinian evolution..
In the early 1900s,despite the lack of many other cars (& complete absence of speed cameras), the number of accidents/deaths was proportionally horrendous.
The answer,at the time, was to reduce the driver's anonymity & insist upon registration plates. People drove more carefully (because they could be traced) and held to account.
What are you going to do if people think, "You know, to start with, I thought they were a good thing. But now, I've had enough.."
What would you do if our Islamic 'friends' decided to put their Hydrogen Peroxide to more productive use, and synchronised efforts to destroy the cameras, all at once.
so, our government can do whatever it wants and we are expected to sit back and accept it without question? The people who are supposed to listen to us show immense incompetence and waste public money on persecuting it's honest citizens and we should not complain? I am not surprised that people take the law into their own hands when it comes to speed cameras, after all, the law is now a farce. People do not want or need speed cameras yet we are forced to spend our money on them! It is a joke.
i see someone here using my user name in vein like i need to guess who all i have to do is look below at the list of saddo,s well ive said before you got a problem we can sort it FACE TO FACE
It is ridiculous that speed cameras are administered by partnerships who rely on increasing numbers of speed cameras in order to survive. Who is going to stand up and say; "we are ripping off the public and preventing road safety" when speed cameras pay their wages?
If common sense and objectivity was applied to road safety thinking, we would have safer roads, not 'safety' cameras. We would see that they have destroyed the downward trend in casualties on our roads.
No, it is just common sense. A speed camera partnership is a bureaucracy. In order to exist, it requires something to administer. If the number of speed cameras remained static, the people in charge of new installations would be surplus to requirements. Then the precedent for economies would be set and the size of the bureaucracy would decline until it was forced to merge with other partnerships.
The nature of any administration organisation is to increase the scope of its influence.
You have avoided the issue of the partnership surviving due to new installations in favour of an individual's responsibilities.
You need to research how the cessation of hypothecation two years ago completely changed the financial basis of SCP's cash flow. The amount of cameras and/or detections is not proportionate to their 'income'.
I would add that I am unaware of groups of people whose sole job is 'add more camera sites'. In reality, this is just part of a raft of responsibilities & not 'another day, another camera site'.
SCP 'head office' is usually a tiny affair, with a small number of people with multiple roles, adding new cameras is not a burning imperative for when netting-off ceased, then so did the financial benefits. As only running costs are now returned by the government, no-one cares about camera numbers.
No such thing as common sense you dork. As proven when you ask me silly questions such as, "Because I had sex with a man does this make me gay". Not only is that a stupid question but the answer should be obvious. So this applies right now, common sense, you don't have it. Harry, Harry, Harry, what are you doing with your life. Maybe you could be more like me!
Rattle the tin Harry, oh the relief. Get back to your dick magling and leave this conversation. Open chat is for the real brains, not for dumbledasses der der der. Sorry Harry but I told you lies, spinning you a line here. But being feeble-minded does hold you back at well, everything. If you read back my posts most of your answers will be, duderda, arnshwad.
People are often too close to a problem to see that THEY ARE the problem - if the great reduction in road deaths ENTIRELY due to increased SpeedCamEnforcement,why has number motorcyclist deaths DOUBLED in past 10 years?
Sir Winston Churchill: "However beautiful the strategy,one should occasionally look at the results."
1960s (far fewer vehicles) 6000-odd annual deaths! But we've always had fewer deaths (driving on the left) than the continent.
Yes. As I put to Lolly some time ago,reduced number fatalities/serious injuries is due to improved crumple zones/safety-cells/structural rigidity,air bags, seat belts, tyres, suspension, and braking/traction-control/stability-management systems - despite there being more cars and more crashes on the roads today.
Motorbikes don't have the above safety features and, by victimising the car driver, they actually push ThrillSeekers onto the more dangerous bikes!(Which are more immune to detection!)
"No answer" - what?! You have no answer? Or I have no answer? Please, write clearer, less ambiguous English.
But once again, Lolly, you cross from Statistical to Analytical Mathematics without realising you are doing so. Stats work in probabilities (likelyhood of an event happening);analytical maths (provided solution exists) give absolutes.
as i am sure you are aware, the speed camera bully boys will try to censor your comments, you and I are dangerous dissenters who must be prevented from contradicting the party line, comrade.
I have searched out your comments, and they are the only ones worth reading. I wonder why they are voted down and marked as spam? One person couldn;t have made 10 accounts and used them to block you?
trolls. The only way to make yourself heard is to post your comment 100 times. They make me sick.
The issue of the hypothecation changes dramatically changed the way in which speed enforcement is administered. The 'anti's' really struggle with this & many can't quite grasp that enforcement officers deliberately just don't bother to generate anywhere near as many prosecutions as the money goes directly to the government & not into the pockets of the partnership for growth.
Why strive to bake 200 pasties a day, when making only 10 still gives you the same monthly wage?
im telling you to tell your freaky friends cloning my account is just not on and if you really got a problem well ive no doubt we can all meet up for a nice coffee
I am not saying that all people manning speed cameras are inherently bastards who's sole aim in life is to issue more tickets. I am saying that the nature of any bureaucracy is to expand it's sphere of influence and to grow. Therefore, they exist to build more speed cameras, not to encourage road safety.
If you subscribe to the view that speed cameras are the only way to increase road safety, or that they make roads safer at all, camera partnerships are a good thing, otherwise, not.
The fact that you show an interest in the concept called 'coincidence' I find very interesting. Box say-"Me go to cinny to see Die Hard 4 and see same manny Bruce Wiloes is as in the Die Hard 2 with Jezzer Irono. Box muzo coincidenco likey the manny Arthur C Clarko and his worldy strangey"
Looks across the police headquarters communications centre & waves at Fonty who is on one of the other 'YouTube' interception teams designed at squashing unrest in the masses.
Tj930, People like you sadly mangled the English language. There is no egg in an eggplant nor ham in a hamburger. I can only show you the door, but open it, I can't.
So no "man" in "Policeman"? No "safety" in "Safety Cameras"? Okay, if you say so. (Funny, when people "get shown the door", it normally precedes them getting pushed out of it.)
Matey, I have never professed to speaking or writing perfect English. (I am educated enough to know how ignorant I am; but it's amazing how many people - yes, even those in power - aren't even that clever.)
Your personal abuse is beneath contempt. You speak "Boxglish", then expect to be taken seriously?
"Box", like many English words, has numerous meanings depending upon the context.
Could be a cuboid (like Cardboard box or Speed Camera Box), could be Horsebox (like the thing used to house a speed camera), could be Football (penalty box), could be Boxing (the verb 'to box'), or it could be female genitalia...
Which is it, mate? Is it the last one? So 'box speak' = 'tw@t speak' or something terribly sophisticated like that?
Being in conversation with you is like having to communicate with an elderly, deranged relative.. Only without the sense of duty, loyalty and family ties.. And possibly with the addition of some confiscated 'hallucinogens' to the elderly relative's medication.
I simply have no idea what you're on about.
Do I wish to invest a large chunk of time in decoding the latest, opaque epithet's obscure meaning from tw@tspeak into English? No, I don't.
Problem is, you see, County, I answer your questions and then LollyGa & LollyGo accuse me of not answer his/her/their question... (Which, incidentally, they/he/she/it don't/doesn't even bother to tell me in the first place!)
I've just trudged through this thread - the only person on here talking about NK was you, about 5 months ago, saying something like, "Iran, NK, Afghanistan put the speed cameras there, live under a toad stool.."
Right, so that's "the question", is it?... Okay... Err.. No.. Sorry. You've lost me.
Here we have another example of avoiding a direct question, again in favour of bitterness. Every aspect of Tj930's stance is based upon speculation, no surveys, no hard data, just what she/he prefers to believe.
Tj calm down and think-you said that the North Koreans are trying to blow us up with nuclear weapons. I asked how testing a nucelar weapon means they are trying to blow us up. You are not very clever and cannot answer the question-as the meerkat says "simples"!
"Fewer Police" not "less Police." Come on FountyVonCounty, pull your blue socks up.
So, let me get this right, you guys have been trying to use Police Dogs to trap speeders?.. I could let you into a little secret here.. I think I can see where you've been going wrong! ;o)
Sorry, in my ignorance, I don't know about that one. The only USSR of which I know is the "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics", and clearly you didn't mean that one?!
Sorry, what about NK and your great, buddy, Kim Jong-il?
Do I enjoy them proving not only to the trembling Southerners but the Japanese that NK's missiles have the range?
No, I didn't.
Tell your best mate, Kim, that's he's got at least x1 screw loose!
I have a knife, does it mean I am going to use it to stab you? No! This is defence for them not offence, you are yet to prove that they are trying to blow us up as you said.
Yes, well the Police force takes such an entirely reasonable, too, doesn't it?
Policeman walking the streets, guy with shot gun fires in Policeman's direction but doesn't hit. Clearly, the Policeman is just going to carry on walking past as if nothing had happened?
"Oooh, what could be more normal?"
No charges of brandishing an offensive weapon or such like? No attempted murder? No, no, no.
Personally, I'd prefer not to see radioactive mushroom clouds filling the skies, with radioactive half-lives making the land uninhabitable for decades and decades, if it's all the same to you.
But, from a strategic viewpoint, one could certainly make a case for 'attack being the best form of defence' and the U.S. electing to flatten N.K. before "the crazy kid" builds up a big enough arsenal of nuclear weapons to threaten South Korea, Japan and the U.S.
"Speak now or forever hold your peace" is a bit tricky when 'peace' isn't going to be peaceful! But you just keep defending the crazy Commi guys.. Jeeze!
'Communism' = 'Slavery by another name'
If you genuinely think the State has all the answers for everything, then you know where to go. (But I think you might be walking into a Nuclear War Zone!)
'Communism=slavery by another name.' 'If you genuinely think the state has all the answers for everything'. 2 Tj gems! Firstly communism is a system that seeks to do away with mankinds incessant individualist ego. Rather than us competing with each other it focuses on co-operation. I never said the state has all the answers for everything so that is absurd. You really do have the debating skills of a three year old. Why does the US have nukes? They say it is for their defence! Same for NK.
That's why China needs tanks to keep unarmed pedestrians 'in order'+employs state censorship of the Internet; it's to quell their "incessant individualist ego"&has nothing to do with the "incessant individualist ego" of the Dictator & his 1-party state!
So,paraphrasing you slightly, communism seeks to do the impossible? (With predictable results:FAIL)
Eh? You have the debating skills of a 3-year-old bottle of vinegar - bitterness,acidity & it stinks! ;o)
Good claim, can you support with evidence a team of schizophrenics? Got to admire the covert avoidence system used by old Tj, take notes people! In the event the question can be answered it will start with Yes, followed by evidence but I can without any doubt say this will not happen. Waffle about opinions is the only thing you can come up with pea brain.
Still staying silent and yet to bring forward a good point, just well performed avoidance. Waiting for this reply is like entering the Grow Brain association.
I particularly enjoy the lengths people go to avoiding answering difficult questions;
'I'm not avoiding! Had written reply, clicked, "Post Comment", & then Internet connection bombed - could not be bother to retype all righteous indignation & fury for a second time!'
AS my little test has just irrefutably proven:little point in me posting here because despite SpeedTrapHunter's generous (disingenuous) invitation for "an open transnational intellectually honest dialogue",you guys keep shouting me down!It's just mob rule!
1HourAgo,I write a deliberately inoffensive,innocuous,2-line comment - *BANG*BANG*thumbs down & my harmless comment is but 3clicks away from sliding into the ether.
You haven't won the argument.(You can't.) So just 'press the mute button'!
You see it is an 'argument'? There can be no such interchange as the questions posed you just refuse to acknowledge - I asked you the method used to measure Tom Riall's speed? You declined. I asked you what is the principle element that determines injury in a RTC? You avoided.
There is no 'argument', this is a one-sided whitewash - your comments are empty, pointless, biased rubbish that makes no attempt to tackle anything put to you.
You know you are out of your depth. You can 'larf' now.
This has been flagged as spam show
speedtraphunter : well put together, thank you. Personally I am not too surprised about the vid mysteriously disappearing from here, its called media censorship and it exists everywhere to prevent the good people knowing the truth. Good work.
rodjames98 1 year ago
there is actually a prominate curve with drivers becoming worse as we progress through time because if nobody takes to much offence to it in the old days if you were a bad driver and crashed you would most likely die thereby a bad driver has been removed from the gene pool but now with safer cars most people can have a serious crash and be fine and are not removed from the gene pool so drivers will keep getting worse the safer cars are so if we had less safe cars our roads might actually be safe
lochlandb 1 year ago
@lochlandb Do you believe that bad drivers ever use commas, capitals or full stops?
lollygaggle 1 year ago
@lollygaggle i dont believe that grammar has anything to do with driving
lochlandb 1 year ago
@lochlandb There are also people who still believe that the earth is flat.
lollygaggle 1 year ago
@lollygaggle What has that got to do with me? out of interest
lochlandb 1 year ago
@lochlandb You originally supplied a seven line paragraph with no capital letters, no periods or commas, or punctuation of any description. This is indicative of shoddy thinking that spills out onto public carriageways. People will of course, deny this possibility which you have done, so I am simply highlighting that many such similies are intrinsically relevant & I am unable to be eleemosynary in such circumstances, as I genuinely believe what I say.
lollygaggle 1 year ago
@lollygaggle ok so you've gone from driving to grammar to people believing the earth is flat. you're trying to say that because i haven't had as good education early on and im willing to admit dont know my times tables or how to spell to well or much about grammar but does that really effect my driving if i understand the rules and even last year in year 11 (in australia) upon asking the teacher why grammar is important i get a 90min detention for asking a stupid question so im told
lochlandb 1 year ago
@lochlandb The sun is very strong in Australia.
lollygaggle 1 year ago
@lollygaggle does this really show humanity moving forward when those who are willing to learn are shuned and then because they have not been given the opportunity to learn from someone the only knowlege is the knowlege i have to obtain by myself and then to have someone say that it makes me worse in another respect is a bit annoying. I DO kindof see were youre coming from because i seem less/ probably am less educated but please give me the chance to have an opinion im leaving this post forever
lochlandb 1 year ago
@lochlandb Acknowledged.
lollygaggle 1 year ago
What exactly is the 'calibration error' highlighted in the above clip?
lollygaggle 1 year ago
@lollygaggle
I suspect it was a "tongue-in-check" reference of the potential faults with such a system.
SpeedTrapHunter 1 year ago
@SpeedTrapHunter This is one of the key problems with those who go to such lengths to cast doubt. No wonder so many people are confused by such misleading nonsense.
lollygaggle 1 year ago
@SpeedTrapHunter So are you suggesting that the above cartoon is more a parody of reality than based upon real events?
lollygaggle 1 year ago
Hi lollygaggle
The success? We got a copy of the video held by the police. I think if you search for "Norfolk camera crash" it comes up on utube. It was also published by MCN. It also upset the Norfolk camera partnership quite a bit. Incidentally the fallout from it resulted in me changing jobs and getting a 10k rise so it obviously pays to complain.
Cheers
Keith
PlasticSpongeCake 1 year ago
@PlasticSpongeCake Your personal circumstances hardly constitute a successful campaign. Can you supply a link that substantiates an 'upset camera partnership' please or anything that supports your claim? If Norfolk Safety Camera Partnership are still in operation, then I suggest the above has achieved nothing.
lollygaggle 1 year ago
@PlasticSpongeCake Ran a search and: 'Carol Croft, who has lived next to the road for 25 years, told BBC Radio Norfolk that she had witnessed and helped victims of several crashes and hoped the cameras would make the road safer.
She said: "I have seen a number of fatal accidents since living here and hopefully we won't have any more.' indicate that crashes happened there long before speed enforcement measures.
Next? Remember to hit 'Reply' this time.
lollygaggle 1 year ago
Hi
Thanks for keeping my video alive.
It was a successful campaign.
Cheers
Keith
PlasticSpongeCake 1 year ago
@PlasticSpongeCake What success was enjoyed?
lollygaggle 1 year ago
i thought the above was a cartoon til i saw the man drivin upsidedown and he looks like my dad he used to sell ice cream so i can see it isnt a toon especally after the bird flies along and all the money goes into the sky why would walt dizney waste cartoon drawers time drawing birds flying along and money going up into the sky when they could be making pocahontas 2 where she fights predators in the jungle carl weathers was so good that i wanted to look like him but i used to much shoe polish
eviIbreebIes 2 years ago 16
This has been flagged as spam show
i) What's to debate?
ii) To which of the 1000-or-so comments/questions posted asked in a 6-month period are you referring?
iii) Right, okay... But what does 'Fagism' have to do with the price of fish? No background?
Right, down to the important stuff - FINALLY!
Either it's taxpayerfunded work - you guys are sitting about, sipping coffee, playing on the Internet at the Private Sector's cost - or this is a private indulgence in which you are abusing Police privileges to harangue the public!
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Either way, at the very least, what you are both doing is morally wrong and legally questionable.
I am neither "scum" nor a "fag", so what libellous remark are you going to make next?
And what the hell is "£60.50 per week"? No, don't bother telling me. I don't care.
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
HA! You almost got me to give you a real answer on that one.
Iollygaggle 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
TrollyGaggle, shall I ask you YET AGAIN what kind of reasons can explain the INCREASED rate of motorcyclist deaths in the past 10 years?...
Got an answer to this, yet?.. Or are you going to wander off into the verbose and abstract - YET AGAIN - and try to suggest that records of road deaths (when they're increasing) aren't applicable to the discussion, but road deaths (when they're decreasing) are applicable to increased expenditure on SPEED ENFORCEMENT?
No?.. Because you CAN'T.
Tj930 2 years ago 7
Beautiful sidestep, anything to avoid the question posed. You've now checked & realised you quoted the wrong person, so the old smokescreen machine is cranked right up = waffle/waffle/UPPERCASE SHOUTING/waffle/waffle.
Your question is very easily answered - in the UK there are @ 78% more bikes registered now than were ten years ago.
With increased road traffic & rising fuel costs, people want to avoid holdups & reduce costs so the numbers will continue to rise.
Any more info you need?
lollygaggle 2 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
Just answered 5 damn points above! Yet you claim I do more "sidestepping" than a drunken crab!
Format: Again, your obvious lack of computing knowledge means you don't understand anything about layout. Normally I'd be adjusting my text with italics and emboldening to provide CONTRAST and make it easier to read/provide emphasis on certain points. (It's not SHOUTING, it's just emphasis.)
SO, back to the bikes - as I said at the top of this thread "people cause crashes, so get rid of the people"?
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Good observation, your literary perambulations are generically laterigrade.
I clearly answered your point about the rise in motorcycle accidents, which you do not mention. In fact, the number of bike accidents have not risen in proportion to the large numbers registered over the past decade, so in reality, the accident rate is dropping percentage wise.
Cool huh?
You have no interest in responding to any question put to you, you mince & meander with directionless diatribe.
No more.
lollygaggle 2 years ago 23
This has been flagged as spam show
Heheh... "Generic"? No, I don't think my speed-cam-road-death-safety remarks could be dropped seamlessly into any other conversation. (They're rather Subject-Specific.)
As for "laterigrade"? Well, it can be explained by the viewer's POV (and more than likely their own sideways travel in the other direction).
"accident rate dropping %age wise"? Just sounds like Brownonomics: A "0% increase" is not an increase,Gordon.
It may be a diatribe,but it is targeted at all the things that are so wrong.
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Oh, Lolly... Before you go, one last question:
"How many people have you caught?"
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I think Lolly made this clear in other comments. A poor question newfag!
FountainbIeau 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i) made what clear?
ii) which other comments (on which threads)?
iii) improve your English - learn to punctuate/spell - what the hell is a "question newfag"? (Or perhaps you meant something else, you psychopath?)
The questions I have repeatedly put to you guys (you little swarm of YouTube 'buzzy bees' on) is:
1) How many criminals have you managed to get to incriminate themselves on here?
2) How much has this cost the taxpayer?..
I feel a Freedom-Of-Information enquiry coming on.
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i) - You take too much out of lollygaggle, he can't debate with you.
ii) - Why don't you know, you did hit reply to it!
iii) - question newfag, a question of which is new but made by a 'fag'. What is your background in personality disorders?
1) - 0. Just a side topic Tidji, a 'fun zone' you may call it.
2) - In total or at this time? (GBP) £60.50 per week.
FountainbIeau 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Obviously, Lolli, it's interesting to do some rough analysis of what gets taken to '-5' and what gets left well alone.
Only conclusion one can arrive at is that you don't like comments which make short work of your allegations and totally refute your coarse assertions.
And remember: I haven't voted on any of your posts. (I'm not a CHEAT and I'm not a LIAR.)
Tj930 2 years ago
Haven't voted on my posts? I have no clue what this means? I have never voted on any posts, ever.
You clearly typed you felt you were being 'played' & I was attempting to discredit you, then get all coy when I mention it?
I have only ever debated speed enforcement, never used bad language, yet people get swirled away by crazy ideas & notions. I am constantly mis-quoted & mentioned in issues I have never taken part in, in fact things I have never even hinted at.
Sort yourselves out.
lollygaggle 2 years ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Lolly,
1) 'voted' = 'thumbs up' / 'thumbs down'
and
2) I have never written any comments under another account, claiming to have support from imaginary friends, and then used multiple accounts to administer multiple "thumbs down". The same cannot be said of you (a.k.a. "CrossChannelFairy" for one).
I suppose you'd probably try to dismiss this with something like, "Ooh, I only cheat fairly.."
Tj930 2 years ago
I fully understand the concept of voting, but not in relation to me. You appear to be assigning someone else's behaviour in my direction. I see this as a forum to deliver information, not a game to 'cheat' in.
As for your 'historical' comment - in which thread am I supposed to have dismissed you which has left such a lasting hole in your ego? Cite the thread & paste the text.
Whatever has been typed, have deep seated issues about being compromised in any way.
lollygaggle 2 years ago 3
Example; you typed this to me -
'Anyhow, I'm still chuckling at your line that I shouldn't be able to cite "historical" (i.e, for me and my evidence, anything that happened yesterday or before) data and statistics because you reckon they're iirelevant.'
No clue what you refer to whatsoever.
lollygaggle 2 years ago 6
This has been flagged as spam show
When I cite a piece of evidence dating from 1 or more years back (maybe even 50 or 100 years), you try to dismiss it as "historical" and therefore irrelevant to the current day.
And yet you cite multiple pieces of such evidence, dating from the 1960s forward, and yet don't seem to see a problem with that!
"One rule for you and another rule for us."
One has to look at these things holistically! (I.e. Controlled experiment - with/without cars, etc.)
Tj930 2 years ago
Note Tj930, that a question has been asked of you;
'As for your 'historical' comment - in which thread am I supposed to have dismissed you, which has left such a lasting hole in your ego? Cite the thread & paste the text.'
No doubt we'll have to go through the whole, 'Question for me? When? I was dealing with all the other comments first. Never saw it', waffle first.
Waits now for the usual evasive nonsense about the agricultural land mass of the UK or toilet rolls.
lollygaggle 2 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
I cannot copy'n'paste in entirety, you idiot - try it for yourself, you'll see why! (Large chunks of duplication aren't permitted - have to teach you more about how to use computer systems again, do I?)
And when you ask multiple questions in a single post,you cannot reasonably expect multiple, detailed answers in <500chars!
"Personally, I believe it impossible to quantify the number of road collisions from year to year with their reasons."
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Have tried a few times to see how much I can copy from one of you messages - but this flawed approach is limited by the computer system!
I say again (before yet again you mistakenly accuse me of dishonesty), TRY IT FOR YOURSELF!
Press Ctrl + F, enter "Modern vehicles" into the search field, go to the Comment with 'LollyGaggle' next to it - "Et voilà!"
Tj930 2 years ago
Hi Tj;
You typed;
'And yet you cite multiple pieces of such evidence, dating from the 1960s forward, and yet don't seem to see a problem with that!'
Having searched on 'Modern vehicles', I find no reference to the 1960's made by me & no multiple references - can try again please?
lollygaggle 2 years ago 3
Hi again Tj;
Still awaiting anything to back up your claims.
One thing that I have noticed (& others who discuss you by PM), you treat this all like some form of contest, i.e. 'Game, set & match' & when flustered are prone to name calling '..you idiot'.
You may benefit from composing yourself before typing next time & most importantly, ensure you are actually quoting the right text.
Your track record thus far hasn't been so hot as you never quite keep your eye on who you're trolling.
lollygaggle 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
YOU'RE THE ONE TREATING IT LIKE SOME KIND OF GAME!
& I really don't like having my word brought into question,& particularly don't like having my word repeatedly brought into question - as you have done REPEATEDLY!
1)I am not the 'Troll' 2)I have never been a 'Troll' 3)You have created numerous pen names for yourself, so you should not be surprised when ambiguity results!4)I have never initiated ANY PMs about you - but I've received fricking hundreds! 5)if you intend to come across a simple..
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Oh and "P.s.", Lolly - I heard some interesting statistic the other day that Great Britain only has the agricultural land mass to support a 40million population, sustaining the other 25-30million has only been made possible by the Internal Combustion engine...
Enviro. Boom & Bust... Sounds like half of us are going to die whatever happens!.. The rest will have to move up to the mountains of Scotland when the 'tide comes in'
:o(
Tj930 2 years ago
Lollita, the point you conveniently seem to be ignoring is that your comments are in themselves "evidence." (They may be garbage, but they're still evidence.)
If there is no "pressure" (as you put it) to expand, why have you stated that Ave-Speed-Cams will "quadruple in the next 36 months"?
P.s. Have really lost Public's faith with AveCams flawed technology and 50mph limit on M1.
Tj930 2 years ago
Speed = Distance/Time
On the motorway, if I take shorter path by straight-lining a bend (i.e. by moving from inside to outside lanes on a right-hand bend), I am not breaking the law. Although my momentary speed (50mph) will be the same as those around me (i.e. those who stay in the same lane), my average speed will be much higher because I have travelled a shorter distance in the same time.
Therefore, you'll have to build into your calculations a massive %age error - 65mph?
POINTLESS!
Tj930 2 years ago
I went past Derby on the M1 the other Saturday in both directions.
If there had been a SINGLE person standing by the side of the road, working, I wouldn't have a thing to say on the matter. HOWEVER, NO-ONE was working! NOT 1 PERSON! No dug-up road!
Put these stupid AveSpeedCams with a strictly enforced 50mph limit for no tangible safety reason, other than that somebody during the day will inevitably nudge a speed that will result in them getting a ticket and having to pay a costly fine
Tj930 2 years ago
Because average speed cameras have nothing whatsoever to do with Safety Camera Partnerships - owned, run & administered by a completely different organisation.
Research, research ,research.
lollygaggle 2 years ago
..And where do the fines collected disappear to?
Tj930 2 years ago
You'll have to make that enquiry of those who collect them.
lollygaggle 2 years ago
Sounds like a skittish bit of chicanery!
Sounds like these guys have no more legal authority, then, than those Bandit Wheel-Clampers! ;o)
Tj930 2 years ago
If you like to think of it that way.
However, ignoring a NIP will result in contravention of section 172 & because speeding hasn't been decriminalised & can only be dealt with by sanctioned staff, the CPS will pursue it & ultimately the registered keeper will be up in court for a hefty fine & 6 points.
Like Bandit Wheel-Clampers? Way different, but your choice of course.
lollygaggle 2 years ago
Anyway, I have no connection to SPECS, other than what I learn at various meetings.
My input on that subject now ceases.
You however need to do some more research on the subject.
lollygaggle 2 years ago 2
"research" - why? The other old adage, "Know your enemy"?
Hmmm... Still all sounds like part of the same, clunking, malfunctioning system to me.
Anyhow, I'm still chuckling at your line that I shouldn't be able to cite "historical" (i.e, for me and my evidence, anything that happened yesterday or before) data and statistics because you reckon they're iirelevant.
Have you not heard of controlled tests? 'Double-Blind Tests'? etc. etc.?
Tj930 2 years ago
Bob Hoskins once said it is good to talk, Tj also enjoys the odd chuckle.
Research will assist you if you continue attempting to debate the subject on the table. You clearly have no clue who administers SPECS & lump everything into one big pot & stir. To your untrained ear, yes it may very well all make one sound. However, you are stuck with it. Unlucky.
lollygaggle 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
I know how makes the laws AND (despite what Founty might says) who's responsible for bad law, and who exacts this bad law and 'pseudo justice' on the public.
I recognise "mission creep" when I see it.
Everything has a weakness mate; whether it's the machinery itself, or the person operating it. There's always a 'weak link in the chain'
If, for example, one were to fire paint balls into the air,from what I'm told,they tend to bend from right to left, making target shooting more difficult..But
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
;o)
Just think - in this mind experiment - if there are 3 cameras (start/middle/end) and the 1 in the middle stops working for some reason, it's really going to stuff up the conviction rate...
As already mentioned, all those bends in the road over such a long distance is going to give a massive spread of entirely legal results.. Hmmm, it would be like allowing one to do 70mph in the 50 zone... Hmmm
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
But as Jeremy Clarkson once put it. "Drive past the first camera, pull over, read the paper, then drive past the second at 200mph!"
Heheh
Tj930 2 years ago
It is an offence to be stationary on the Central Reservation or verge of a motorway. The Verge of a motorway, is any part of it that is not either the carriageway (i.e. part of the road that is normally driven on) or the hard shoulder.
Read the paper? Where?
Take no notice of Mr Clarkson, he is a complete & utter idiot with little to no regard for the environment or his fellow human beings.
You are entitled to an opinion, but you lack any real core knowledge about the subject.
lollygaggle 2 years ago
Q) Who said it had to be a motorway?
A) Nobody.
I can think of a strip of dual-carriageway 40mph zone with ave-speed cams on it (where Clarkson's analogy could legally take place - well, all except the 200mph hour bit... But ave-cams won't catch him).. Game, Set, Match, matey.
You're just trying to discredit me, personally, "Playing the man; not the ball.."
Where as I'm just "playing the system!" ;o)
Tj930 2 years ago
Hi Tj;
You say you're feeling victimised. This is quite common in such forums, especially when your core knowledge is flakey. You also say you are being 'played', which can't be comfortable as men are driven by their egos & consequently anything that takes control away is a challenge to their masculinity.
However, you've 'come out' & admitted you're feeling compromised which is a step in the right direction. Don't now go backwards & get all defensive, you've done well to get this far.
lollygaggle 2 years ago 6
This has been flagged as spam show
Mate,hold down Ctrl+F, type the word 'victim' into the search field, and (besides what I've just typed here this second) try and find that word against my name. You won't.
Clearly you're trying to 'put words into my mouth.'
For me, it's not about ego;I just loath bad driving/riding, inconsiderate driving/riding,and a system fixated on SPEED+FINES rather than SAFETY. (Fast travel alone does not = danger)
When I'm not on a race track, I don't drive like I am/position car to block other people
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
But a great many oafs would honestly rather have a smash than let somebody overtake them - these people don't need fining, they need putting against the wall and...
People who plod along at 40mph in a 60 zone - UNTIL you pull out to overtake them - then they stomp on the throttle, narrowing the overtaking window, and try to cause a head-on collision.
"If you were doing 80mph before, I wouldn't have tried overtaking!" If you lift the throttle,tuck in behind them, the speed drops to back 40mph..
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Some people, sauntering along, drift violently towards the centre of the road - to make overtaking more difficult - once they finally check their rearview mirrors and they realise they're holding everybody up.
I've seen this so many times.
"When a motorcyclist, with his headlight glowing, whistles up behind you, do you swerve into his path and try and knock him off and kill him?! Well why do you do it to a car then?! It's not a race, just let people past! It doesn't cost you a thing!"
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
well i told you about your friends as ive said before ive no doubt we can meet up in some local services you all scive off in and sort this out thats if you little friends can drag themselves away from the tiolets wanking each other off
evilbreebles 2 years ago
As I have stated many times previously, your average herbert really has little to no clue how speed enfocement works.
Tj highlights this beautifully.
lollygaggle 2 years ago
The old adage, "You don't have to be a mechanic to drive a car," can certainly be applied to your last comment.
Do I need to know the inside-leg measurement, shoes size and favourite piece of Spanish Guitar music of the particular Bandit who happens to be robbing me at a particular time to know that I'm robbed?
No. I don't.
Robbery is robbery.
"Oooh, but it's for you own good."
"No. It isn't."
Tj930 2 years ago
harry;, it appears your comments have been squashed, but you posed;
'Therefore, they exist to build more speed cameras.'
You still do not understand the principle point, SCP's do not make money - they only get their running costs from the government - there is NO incentive whatsoever to increase the number of camera sites.
Are you suggesting there is pressure to keep expanding camera numbers?
If so, supply evidence not conjecture.
If not, then change the record.
lollygaggle 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"You only sing when you're winning, sing when you're winning, you only sing when you're winning..."
Which must be why you're so quiet. (Just keep *clicking* that thumbs-down button.)
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Evidence" - not heard of Primary, Secondary and Circumstantial evidence?
It's all evidence! (The clue's in the name!)
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Yeah, "Say hello to Mr. 'I've Ended Boom and Bust' Brown on your way out..."
Tj930 2 years ago
Personally, I believe it impossible to quantify the number of road collisions from year to year with their reasons.
Modern vehicles have become much quieter, have an increasing range of safety features, better brakes & crash test results generate a sense of invincibility in their occupants. Also, moving at 70 in a car from 15 years ago is considerably different to one built in the last couple.
To juggle figures to illustrate accident trends & causes is intrinsically flawed from the off.
lollygaggle 2 years ago 14
This has been flagged as spam show
Yeah, so.. Let me get this right.. Any arguments and statistics and evidence that might point to an improvement in safety due to Heavy-Handed Speed-Limit Enforcement is entirely germane and valid and relevant and submissible...
But anything which points to the opposite, isn't?
Right.
Funny that.
Why didn't I guess that before?
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Silence is golden, golden, but my eyes still see..."
Yeah, just keep *clicking* that thumbs-down button, Lolly sucker and friends.
Tj930 2 years ago
Arguing/debating accident statistics will get you nowhere - speed cameras, both static & mobile are out there today, tomorrow. Average speed technology is expanding & is set to quadruple in the next 36 months.
What is the ultimate purpose of continually churning over your displeasure?
lollygaggle 2 years ago 10
This has been flagged as spam show
Sounds like you're trying to dress this situation up like a fait accompli - if so, and everything's done, why are you here?
Say hello to Mr. Gordon "I've Ended Boom and Bust" Brown on your way out...
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It's not enough for you guys to rob us blind; it's not enough for you to victimise and moralise us; it's not enough for your clumsy, unnecessary acts to kill us; no, you want our souls, too! And then you expect us to be grateful!
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Not heard of "countermeasures"? It'll be like Darwinian evolution..
In the early 1900s,despite the lack of many other cars (& complete absence of speed cameras), the number of accidents/deaths was proportionally horrendous.
The answer,at the time, was to reduce the driver's anonymity & insist upon registration plates. People drove more carefully (because they could be traced) and held to account.
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You push people toooooo far and what do you think is going to happen?...
What would you do if, one day, everybody in the country rebelled and tore off their number plates?
How are your sh1ty l155le Average Speed cameras going to work then?
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What are you going to do if people think, "You know, to start with, I thought they were a good thing. But now, I've had enough.."
What would you do if our Islamic 'friends' decided to put their Hydrogen Peroxide to more productive use, and synchronised efforts to destroy the cameras, all at once.
It would be beautiful!
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
so, our government can do whatever it wants and we are expected to sit back and accept it without question? The people who are supposed to listen to us show immense incompetence and waste public money on persecuting it's honest citizens and we should not complain? I am not surprised that people take the law into their own hands when it comes to speed cameras, after all, the law is now a farce. People do not want or need speed cameras yet we are forced to spend our money on them! It is a joke.
gloucesterharry 2 years ago
i see someone here using my user name in vein like i need to guess who all i have to do is look below at the list of saddo,s well ive said before you got a problem we can sort it FACE TO FACE
evilbreebles 2 years ago
It is ridiculous that speed cameras are administered by partnerships who rely on increasing numbers of speed cameras in order to survive. Who is going to stand up and say; "we are ripping off the public and preventing road safety" when speed cameras pay their wages?
If common sense and objectivity was applied to road safety thinking, we would have safer roads, not 'safety' cameras. We would see that they have destroyed the downward trend in casualties on our roads.
gloucesterharry 2 years ago
Quote; 'partnerships who rely on increasing numbers of speed cameras in order to survive'.
Can you back this up with anything substantive? Did you read it somewhere? Were you told it down the pub? Have you just made it up?
lollygaggle 2 years ago
No, it is just common sense. A speed camera partnership is a bureaucracy. In order to exist, it requires something to administer. If the number of speed cameras remained static, the people in charge of new installations would be surplus to requirements. Then the precedent for economies would be set and the size of the bureaucracy would decline until it was forced to merge with other partnerships.
The nature of any administration organisation is to increase the scope of its influence.
gloucesterharry 2 years ago
You have avoided the issue of the partnership surviving due to new installations in favour of an individual's responsibilities.
You need to research how the cessation of hypothecation two years ago completely changed the financial basis of SCP's cash flow. The amount of cameras and/or detections is not proportionate to their 'income'.
Your thinking is simply incorrect.
lollygaggle 2 years ago
I would add that I am unaware of groups of people whose sole job is 'add more camera sites'. In reality, this is just part of a raft of responsibilities & not 'another day, another camera site'.
SCP 'head office' is usually a tiny affair, with a small number of people with multiple roles, adding new cameras is not a burning imperative for when netting-off ceased, then so did the financial benefits. As only running costs are now returned by the government, no-one cares about camera numbers.
lollygaggle 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
No such thing as common sense you dork. As proven when you ask me silly questions such as, "Because I had sex with a man does this make me gay". Not only is that a stupid question but the answer should be obvious. So this applies right now, common sense, you don't have it. Harry, Harry, Harry, what are you doing with your life. Maybe you could be more like me!
Iollygaggle 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Rattle the tin Harry, oh the relief. Get back to your dick magling and leave this conversation. Open chat is for the real brains, not for dumbledasses der der der. Sorry Harry but I told you lies, spinning you a line here. But being feeble-minded does hold you back at well, everything. If you read back my posts most of your answers will be, duderda, arnshwad.
Iollygaggle 2 years ago
Leave it to this idiot to put down an incoherent spiel of rubbish when he runs out f things to say.
Expect any posts he disagrees with to be voted down. Too much free time you know, tragic.
gloucesterharry 2 years ago
Comment removed
eviIbreebIes 2 years ago
oh yes, I realised a while ago that there are two; one is a troll and the other is, whilst I do not agree with him, a good debater.
gloucesterharry 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Sorry, Harry, which is which? (Heheh ;o)
People are often too close to a problem to see that THEY ARE the problem - if the great reduction in road deaths ENTIRELY due to increased SpeedCamEnforcement,why has number motorcyclist deaths DOUBLED in past 10 years?
Sir Winston Churchill: "However beautiful the strategy,one should occasionally look at the results."
1960s (far fewer vehicles) 6000-odd annual deaths! But we've always had fewer deaths (driving on the left) than the continent.
Tj930 2 years ago
ah, but from the time they introduced speed cameras, road deaths, which were falling nicely, levelled off. There was even a slight increase one year.
gloucesterharry 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Yes. As I put to Lolly some time ago,reduced number fatalities/serious injuries is due to improved crumple zones/safety-cells/structural rigidity,air bags, seat belts, tyres, suspension, and braking/traction-control/stability-management systems - despite there being more cars and more crashes on the roads today.
Motorbikes don't have the above safety features and, by victimising the car driver, they actually push ThrillSeekers onto the more dangerous bikes!(Which are more immune to detection!)
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
No answer, what else can Tj come up with that he wont be able to back up with evidence.
Iollygaggle 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"No answer" - what?! You have no answer? Or I have no answer? Please, write clearer, less ambiguous English.
But once again, Lolly, you cross from Statistical to Analytical Mathematics without realising you are doing so. Stats work in probabilities (likelyhood of an event happening);analytical maths (provided solution exists) give absolutes.
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
as i am sure you are aware, the speed camera bully boys will try to censor your comments, you and I are dangerous dissenters who must be prevented from contradicting the party line, comrade.
I have searched out your comments, and they are the only ones worth reading. I wonder why they are voted down and marked as spam? One person couldn;t have made 10 accounts and used them to block you?
trolls. The only way to make yourself heard is to post your comment 100 times. They make me sick.
gloucesterharry 2 years ago
The issue of the hypothecation changes dramatically changed the way in which speed enforcement is administered. The 'anti's' really struggle with this & many can't quite grasp that enforcement officers deliberately just don't bother to generate anywhere near as many prosecutions as the money goes directly to the government & not into the pockets of the partnership for growth.
Why strive to bake 200 pasties a day, when making only 10 still gives you the same monthly wage?
lollygaggle 2 years ago 8
im telling you to tell your freaky friends cloning my account is just not on and if you really got a problem well ive no doubt we can all meet up for a nice coffee
evilbreebles 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I am not saying that all people manning speed cameras are inherently bastards who's sole aim in life is to issue more tickets. I am saying that the nature of any bureaucracy is to expand it's sphere of influence and to grow. Therefore, they exist to build more speed cameras, not to encourage road safety.
If you subscribe to the view that speed cameras are the only way to increase road safety, or that they make roads safer at all, camera partnerships are a good thing, otherwise, not.
gloucesterharry 2 years ago
camera lights cause lots of prob when the turn yellow and your gottas screach to a stop
theoriginalmodz 2 years ago
Box laugh-tj talksy to the false fount!
countkorzybski 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Pseudofount?
Oh well, I'm afraid it's that old line again: "I think you confuse me for somebody who gives a ****"
Hope that helps
Tj930 2 years ago
Box say-"Me larkey the Norfy Numptoes, they heapo funny like the Bob Nastardly in the Wackoes Racoes, Bob have a doggy called muttoes"
countkorzybski 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I post a reply and the message doesn't stick.
Coincidence?
Tj930 2 years ago
The fact that you show an interest in the concept called 'coincidence' I find very interesting. Box say-"Me go to cinny to see Die Hard 4 and see same manny Bruce Wiloes is as in the Die Hard 2 with Jezzer Irono. Box muzo coincidenco likey the manny Arthur C Clarko and his worldy strangey"
Fountainbleau 2 years ago 6
Looks across the police headquarters communications centre & waves at Fonty who is on one of the other 'YouTube' interception teams designed at squashing unrest in the masses.
lollygaggle 2 years ago 3
Fonty waves back....then feels very tired...suddenly remembers-"all that waving would wear anyone out"
Fountainbleau 2 years ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Yes, but 'electromagnetic' or 'deterministic and resolute in principal' waving?
Tj930 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Yes, the Police have never used Triangulation before..
Oops, sorry. Sarcasm again. I do apologise.
Tj930 2 years ago
Triangle isn't it? Kate O'Mara......
Fountainbleau 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
....And in English, please?
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Tj930, People like you sadly mangled the English language. There is no egg in an eggplant nor ham in a hamburger. I can only show you the door, but open it, I can't.
FountainbIeau 2 years ago
The copy cat fount is very gracious in his/her work and in showing how great the real fount is!
countkorzybski 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Who are you?
FountainbIeau 2 years ago
Song by the Who!...who are you ooh ooh oooh ooh!
countkorzybski 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
So no "man" in "Policeman"? No "safety" in "Safety Cameras"? Okay, if you say so. (Funny, when people "get shown the door", it normally precedes them getting pushed out of it.)
Matey, I have never professed to speaking or writing perfect English. (I am educated enough to know how ignorant I am; but it's amazing how many people - yes, even those in power - aren't even that clever.)
Your personal abuse is beneath contempt. You speak "Boxglish", then expect to be taken seriously?
Tj930 2 years ago
CAN YOU NOT READ? IT IS BOX SPEAK!!!
FountainbIeau 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Box", like many English words, has numerous meanings depending upon the context.
Could be a cuboid (like Cardboard box or Speed Camera Box), could be Horsebox (like the thing used to house a speed camera), could be Football (penalty box), could be Boxing (the verb 'to box'), or it could be female genitalia...
Which is it, mate? Is it the last one? So 'box speak' = 'tw@t speak' or something terribly sophisticated like that?
Tj930 2 years ago
Box has one meaning-a small man in shorts in the cinema watching Bruce Willy with a small device near his ear.
countkorzybski 2 years ago
Being in conversation with you is like having to communicate with an elderly, deranged relative.. Only without the sense of duty, loyalty and family ties.. And possibly with the addition of some confiscated 'hallucinogens' to the elderly relative's medication.
I simply have no idea what you're on about.
Do I wish to invest a large chunk of time in decoding the latest, opaque epithet's obscure meaning from tw@tspeak into English? No, I don't.
Either speak good English, or just Shut TFU!
Tj930 2 years ago
Still no answer about North Korea then?
countkorzybski 2 years ago
What's the question?
Tj930 2 years ago
If you check the home page Mr Tj this is the false fount not the real one. You are replying to a baboon!
countkorzybski 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
To be honest, chaps / chapesses, I really cannot be bothered to worry about the:
i) single person with numerous split-personalities and associated monikers
ii) team of persons with round-the-clock 'role play'
iii) the all of the above/none of the above who've had their accounts hacked (or pretending to have their accounts hacked).
The cost/benefit analysis for decoding whatever the hell you are on about tells me that it just isn't worth the effort.
None of you raises a compelling argument
Tj930 2 years ago
North Korea? Still no answer?
countkorzybski 2 years ago
Problem is, you see, County, I answer your questions and then LollyGa & LollyGo accuse me of not answer his/her/their question... (Which, incidentally, they/he/she/it don't/doesn't even bother to tell me in the first place!)
Tj930 2 years ago
Yep, British and American Diplomats are still searching for an answer.
Tj930 2 years ago
I've just trudged through this thread - the only person on here talking about NK was you, about 5 months ago, saying something like, "Iran, NK, Afghanistan put the speed cameras there, live under a toad stool.."
Right, so that's "the question", is it?... Okay... Err.. No.. Sorry. You've lost me.
Psychic abilities must have failed me today.
Tj930 2 years ago
Here we have another example of avoiding a direct question, again in favour of bitterness. Every aspect of Tj930's stance is based upon speculation, no surveys, no hard data, just what she/he prefers to believe.
Iollygaggle 2 years ago
I ask, "What question?"
And in reply I get, "The question!"
"Which is?"
"The question - answer the question."
"What is the question?"
"The question is the thing you haven't answered!"
And so on and so on...
Tj930 2 years ago
Tj calm down and think-you said that the North Koreans are trying to blow us up with nuclear weapons. I asked how testing a nucelar weapon means they are trying to blow us up. You are not very clever and cannot answer the question-as the meerkat says "simples"!
countkorzybski 2 years ago
All I seem to remember is you trying to describe living in a Communist Dictatorship as the way forward!
I ask you, "And which Communist State would you hold up as an exemplar to us all?"
I don't get a reply!
Why? 'Coz there isn't one! There never was! And there never will be!
IT IS (and I know how much you love me using the word 'is') a terrible FKing idea!
Then you start describing the Americans as the enemy and blaming all the World's problems on them.
Tj930 2 years ago
Amazing!
And then you put on your blue uniform & expect to be taken seriously?
Communism is a stupid idea. It's been tried. It failed.
Tj930 2 years ago
Don't wear blue when dog training.
countkorzybski 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
At the Police HQ's BBQ yesterday:
"Hotdog, anyone?.."
Some stupid B deserves to be thoroughly ashamed of him-/her-self.
"Oooh, hottest day of the year; let's wind the windows up and wander off for an hour..."
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
More reason for less Police and more Speed Cameras. Well done Tj, you finally agree! So... North Korea?
FountainbIeau 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Fewer Police" not "less Police." Come on FountyVonCounty, pull your blue socks up.
So, let me get this right, you guys have been trying to use Police Dogs to trap speeders?.. I could let you into a little secret here.. I think I can see where you've been going wrong! ;o)
Tj930 2 years ago
Answer-The USSR
Your answer about North Korea?
countkorzybski 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Sorry, in my ignorance, I don't know about that one. The only USSR of which I know is the "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics", and clearly you didn't mean that one?!
Sorry, what about NK and your great, buddy, Kim Jong-il?
Do I enjoy them proving not only to the trembling Southerners but the Japanese that NK's missiles have the range?
No, I didn't.
Tell your best mate, Kim, that's he's got at least x1 screw loose!
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I have a knife, does it mean I am going to use it to stab you? No! This is defence for them not offence, you are yet to prove that they are trying to blow us up as you said.
FountainbIeau 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Yes, well the Police force takes such an entirely reasonable, too, doesn't it?
Policeman walking the streets, guy with shot gun fires in Policeman's direction but doesn't hit. Clearly, the Policeman is just going to carry on walking past as if nothing had happened?
"Oooh, what could be more normal?"
No charges of brandishing an offensive weapon or such like? No attempted murder? No, no, no.
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey, FountyVonCounty, I hear on the radio today that your NK mates are out, throwing nuclear stones about the place again?
"Oooh, they're alright - my communist buddoes - they're only testing.."
"Testing peoples' patience, more like."
Come on then, let's have some more 'Defend the indefensible'
Tj930 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Good for them! Bet the yankees don't invade North Korea!
countkorzybski 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Personally, I'd prefer not to see radioactive mushroom clouds filling the skies, with radioactive half-lives making the land uninhabitable for decades and decades, if it's all the same to you.
But, from a strategic viewpoint, one could certainly make a case for 'attack being the best form of defence' and the U.S. electing to flatten N.K. before "the crazy kid" builds up a big enough arsenal of nuclear weapons to threaten South Korea, Japan and the U.S.
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Speak now or forever hold your peace" is a bit tricky when 'peace' isn't going to be peaceful! But you just keep defending the crazy Commi guys.. Jeeze!
'Communism' = 'Slavery by another name'
If you genuinely think the State has all the answers for everything, then you know where to go. (But I think you might be walking into a Nuclear War Zone!)
Tj930 2 years ago
'Communism=slavery by another name.' 'If you genuinely think the state has all the answers for everything'. 2 Tj gems! Firstly communism is a system that seeks to do away with mankinds incessant individualist ego. Rather than us competing with each other it focuses on co-operation. I never said the state has all the answers for everything so that is absurd. You really do have the debating skills of a three year old. Why does the US have nukes? They say it is for their defence! Same for NK.
countkorzybski 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Yes,that's right.Everything you say.
That's why China needs tanks to keep unarmed pedestrians 'in order'+employs state censorship of the Internet; it's to quell their "incessant individualist ego"&has nothing to do with the "incessant individualist ego" of the Dictator & his 1-party state!
So,paraphrasing you slightly, communism seeks to do the impossible? (With predictable results:FAIL)
Eh? You have the debating skills of a 3-year-old bottle of vinegar - bitterness,acidity & it stinks! ;o)
Tj930 2 years ago
You got it! Well done Tj!!
countkorzybski 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Great!... Got what?.. What was the question?
Tj930 2 years ago
You still haven't explained why the worlds most war-like nation the USA can have nukes, but North Korea can't? What is the reason oh wise one?
countkorzybski 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
To which question do you think I should be answering?!
Remember, I'm have to speak to a team of schizophrenics; there's only one Tj930 - so give him a chance to answer..
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Good claim, can you support with evidence a team of schizophrenics? Got to admire the covert avoidence system used by old Tj, take notes people! In the event the question can be answered it will start with Yes, followed by evidence but I can without any doubt say this will not happen. Waffle about opinions is the only thing you can come up with pea brain.
FountainbIeau 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Don't act stupid, you know the question asked of you. Less trying to be Les Dennis would get the repect you require.
Iollygaggle 2 years ago
Still staying silent and yet to bring forward a good point, just well performed avoidance. Waiting for this reply is like entering the Grow Brain association.
FountainbIeau 2 years ago
The only people (of your age group) with "expanding brains" are those unfortunate souls with tumours in their heads.
Not a nice subject.
Tasteful as ever, I see.
Tj930 2 years ago
..And this is, somehow, a change in my circumstance?
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I particularly enjoy the lengths people go to avoiding answering difficult questions;
'I'm not avoiding! Had written reply, clicked, "Post Comment", & then Internet connection bombed - could not be bother to retype all righteous indignation & fury for a second time!'
lollygaggle 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
AS my little test has just irrefutably proven:little point in me posting here because despite SpeedTrapHunter's generous (disingenuous) invitation for "an open transnational intellectually honest dialogue",you guys keep shouting me down!It's just mob rule!
1HourAgo,I write a deliberately inoffensive,innocuous,2-line comment - *BANG*BANG*thumbs down & my harmless comment is but 3clicks away from sliding into the ether.
You haven't won the argument.(You can't.) So just 'press the mute button'!
Tj930 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"an open transnational intellectually honest dialogue"
I keep telling you, it isn't a forum for dialogue.
No wait, it was you that typed that.
lollygaggle 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You see it is an 'argument'? There can be no such interchange as the questions posed you just refuse to acknowledge - I asked you the method used to measure Tom Riall's speed? You declined. I asked you what is the principle element that determines injury in a RTC? You avoided.
There is no 'argument', this is a one-sided whitewash - your comments are empty, pointless, biased rubbish that makes no attempt to tackle anything put to you.
You know you are out of your depth. You can 'larf' now.
lollygaggle 2 years ago