@darkman4468train Hi, you are clearly not aware of the funding arrangements, for since 2007, speed enforcement has cost more to keep running than it generated. The term 'cash cow' has been penned by those who have no clue how this works.
Whenever you see figures quoted for revenue generated, you never seen the running costs that cancel out the revenue.
Static camera numbers have dropped greatly in number because they are too expensive to run.
@darkman4468train Hi, the situation changed in April of last year, all funding was stopped meaning speed enforcement is now self-funding, so in effect the government has given constabularies the green light to approach enforcement how they choose to. Most are part of the national scheme, meaning it only carries on due to speed awareness course fees.
That guy in the van looks more familiar every time I watch this, he looks like someone off neighbours or should that be one off my neighbours, Norfolkshires finest he is - what an asshole of the nth degree
The level of damage determines the cost. A complete Crown Pole, radar & flash unit, controller, camera & cassette is listed in the current SERCO price list as being just shy of £40k. Fires burn in different ways, depending on methodology used, weather etc, so the damage varies considerably & consequently what needs replacing from public funds.
Good news though, mobile enforcement ramped up to compensate = brilliantly shortsighted.
@XTee500 Hi, you aren't quite grasping the concept of varying costings here.
Some housings would need complete replacement, whilst others would simply need perhaps the front glass panel, hence the cost varies hugely. You can of course average it out, but this would not equate to actual replacement costs per site.
Yes, SERCO prices are very high & in it for profit, it is a business after all.
You are most welcome.
I am sorry to learn of the demise of your fish. Were you very close?
@lollygaggle Very close you see we used to live in the same bowl
I seem to remember you saying in another threads that police could easily work overtime with mobile enforcement to make up the lost revenue because of damaged cameras, so that means there were quotas to meet and a fiscal target to achieve, these operations must be highly proifable to make good revenue even whilst paying ovetime rates, do you what the fully encapsulated overhead recovery rate is for a policeman ?
@lollygaggle But the taxpayer doesn't pay for the repair - the motorist does through increased mobile enforcement.
Equally, GATSO makes more profit & becomes a more dominant force, SERCO who imports & installs the equipment makes huge profits & mobile enforcers get unlimited overtime at locations that rack up prosecutions that otherwise wouldn't have taken place.
The industry is only as successful as it BECAUSE cameras are routinely damaged.
@lollygaggle Its about a year ago on one of these videos really cant be bothered finding it again so just forget it you will just attempt to squirm out of it
The guy in this video is a worm - any idea of his name ?
@XTee500 Hey I will take the wifes iphone to the pub with us, if you want to continue. We are only 10 mins walk from the Jolly Toper so catch you in 15-20
@XTee500 Hi, I would also commend you on actually starting to do some research on the subject.
When you first voicing opinions, you clearly knew absolutely nothing on the subject. You are now proactively looking at the issues. You have a long way to go, but stick with it.
Like countless others before you, it is a steep learning curve. Any questions just ask.
@lollygaggle Reccomendation noted and totally ignored, I have freedom to do exactly as I please. As for asking you I would get a more sensible answer from my goldfish and its been dead for 10 years
On Tuesday at around 5am, a speed camera was set on fire in Ainsdale, England. The device on Liverpool Road So far in 2011, Lincolnshire expects to pay £300,000 (US $475,000) to repair speed cameras after being hit by vigilantes, BBC News reported. So far, seventeen cameras have been attacked in the area. On August 24, a camera on the A17 in Cranwell was set on fire just before midnight. Also on the A17 in Whaplode, an automated ticketing machine burned around 3:30am on September 4.
'..seventeen attacked cameras', could easily equal to ten sprayed front panels, which are only £100 a throw. There is nothing that states seventeen houses torched.
Please think things through before commenting in future.
Absolutely it is a proven fact that speed prevention causes more accidents than they attempt to prevent, add to that the inconvenience to relatively law abiding people etc etc makes it a foregone conclusion all safety partnerships should be shut down and all speed cameras should be removed
And before Amoeba boy can reply - shut it lollyspanner
However, this has been discussed many times, both here & in other forums. The primary objective of speed enforcement is not essentially to reduce the number of collisions, more the impact velocity & level of physical trauma when a crash takes place.
It is accepted that whilst human beings are in charge on motor vehicles, accidents will cannot be stopped.
Many SCP's have stopped operating, replaced by police only driven mobile detection.
Now I have just had lunch and am off whale spotting, I hope this is a quiet day or the new year could be a bit tedious for those of us involved in the speed entrapment debate
That prick looks so happy catching speeders ...87 miles per hour - whoopde doo - what a bunch of a-holes. I would like to see him smiling so widely in other company........ funny he looks familiar
@lollygaggle Why you are correct - he is a total and utter nonce though ? Dont you agree ? "It can zoom into the number plate" he is no more an officer than he is a camel
How he can sleep at night, mind you he probably does sleep as he almost definitely wont have a wife or if he does she is sleeping with the neighbour whilst he drones on about camera types and the law
@lollygaggle So why do the buggers use horseboxes then - wait a minute Dromedary or Bactrian ...... Bactrian is a good bit smaller and might be able to use the horsebox
I could explain but I wont - btw the neighbour is a big man - if you know what I mean
The orifice.....r is a total ass though and I am glad you agree, do you think he looks familiar ?
@lollygaggle Nonsense it was in a stupid place and it was there purely to generate revenue with an abolute idiot in control..... an absolute idiot, a buffoon, doesnt he remind you of someone ? he reminds me of someone and its not Michael Winner
As pointed out to the Commons Transport Select Committee despite all the Police and Safety camera groups claims there have been no fall in serious road injuries treated in hospitals. In June 2006 the British Medical Journal reported that falling reporting levels (by the police) had accounted for the whole of the observed fall, as there had been no such fall in serious road injuries treated in hospitals.......
Speed cameras are dangerous for exactly the reason you saw in this video. People go around a corner, unexpectedly see a bright camera van & naturally jam on their brakes even if they're not speeding. They need to be banned because they just cause crashes, as you saw.
@lollygaggle Traffic lights have an amber warning light. Vans purposely position themselves to catch people off-guard & surprise them. Where's my evidence? How about this video?
@uzijn I see, your evidence is a clip containing two motorists who lost control due to excessive speed.
Every road is a combination of straights & bends. Where do you suggest enforcement vehicles are positioned, on roads where there is no speeding problem? The UL1000 can detect your speed at 1000m, so you want them all placed on straight roads where you can equally be recorded before you have a clue what has happened?
@lollygaggle My alternatives are to not have portable speed vans that surprise motorists & not have cameras that cause people to slow down & then speed up again. Those average speed cameras that you have on the motorway are a lot more safe & effective because it keeps the traffic going at a constant speed & you don't have people randomly braking because they've seen a camera.
@lollygaggle They slow vehicles in a straight line but if these vans are parked to be hidden (around a corner, for example just like on this video) then people aren't travelling in a straight line when they see them. Plus it isn't just about losing control, it's about the people behind then crashing, etc..
@uzijn So what you are saying is that tailgaters are unable to stop because they are travelling too fast to stop safely within the distance they can see? That's odd, because there is zero evidence of that in the video you cite as evidence?
Hidden around bends? Operations are positioned to enforce where the speeding issue exists. So it's okay to detect a vehicle at 800m well before the driver has seen the enforcement van?
@lollygaggle I don't quite understand that second paragraph. No matter whether somebody is tailgating or not, these things cause collisions. There are other methods of slowing people down, assuming that speed is the problem just for the benefit of this argument.
Anyway, I respect everything you've said & I respect that you've chosen to discuss it maturely but I'm just going to agree to disagree with you & carry on. I hope you do too.
If you take issue with being pinged as you round a bend, then are you saying it is then acceptable to do the same on very long straight sections of carriageway from a kilometre distant, long before the enforcement vehicle can be recognised?
Motorists apply the brakes many times during a journey & for many reasons, however the choice to do so cannot be placed at the feet of third parties if the said driver is paying attention of their speed & surroundings.
@mikeco9090 No, drivers only lose control of the vehicle they are supposedly in control of when they exceed their capabilities & posted thresholds & then panic when they fear being detected doing so. Would you also blame a traffic light for changing to red, someone braking harshly & then colliding with something?
Such RTC's can only ever be the fault of the person behind the wheel.
@R33Racer Impact velocity is the single factor that determines the degree of physical trauma, you are confusing the cause of a collision with the cause of death.
@KrzychOlsztyn That's simple, both static & mobile speed enforcement kit do not work much above 200mph, plus there is no registration mark to follow up via DVLA.
i have been driving for 5 days with my first car but today i was going 28mph in 30mph and the camera flashed me I am getting really worried im i likely to get fine or something i passed my test this year and the max i can get is 6 points on my first two years getting really worried plesase help
@lollygaggle i was doing 25mph before the camera flashed i checked straight after the camera flashed i was doing 28mph there was a white van overtook me on the road way before the camera. the white van went passed the camera at 50mph he didnt get flashed but when i went past i got flashed but he was way in front of me so how did i get flashed. would you mind helping me thanks
@natman2k Static cameras have secondary check marks on the carriageway - there has to be two flashes 0.5 - 0.6 seconds apart, which enables your speed to be worked out by the viewing team.
You cannot be sent a NIP for 28mph - just forget it.
I visited germany the other month and i was doing 139 mph and was legal. The road was safe and i felt safe, when i reduced speed to 70 it was like i had stopped. Our roads could have higher speed limits as 70 is to slow for the cars they make now. Its not always the fast drivers that cause the accidents. Take the idiots off the road and it will run smoother. Sometimes i think everyone should be retested at 60 years old.
The police say that the person or persons burning speed camera's in Lincs, are causing drivers to have accidents. Now thats the same as saying every driver caught speeding when the camera's were working must of had an accident. Who are these idiots that think up these bullshit stories. I praise the people who are destoying them well done. The only thing you have caused is lost revenue. Its the police on this film that caused those accidents by being there. You caused hard breaking. SO FUCKOFF.
Only running costs are returned to partnership run operations, meaning every time a camera housing is torched it costs the tax payer @ £35-40k. Speed enforcement has run at a loss since 2008, so the balance again is paid for by tax payers.
Hard braking is caused by those motorists who do not observe posted thresholds & collisions by those who do not maintain a distance where they can stop safely within the distance they can see.
@lilgreenfingerpuppet You've clearly given the matter a great deal of thought & your erurdite response highlights the dichotomy that speeding motorists face.
Watch at 2.17, witnss a motorcycle doing well over 100mph... but the defender behing him in a 4x4 looks to be going faster.... can defenders even go 130mph??
@CH1CKENQUIFF You are being fooled by the optical compression of lookibng at something recorded through a high magnification telephoto optic/lens. You cannot judge comparitive speed through magnifying optics.
@lollygaggle I agree with you on that.... but we are looking through the same lens on this video... yet the 4x4 is moving faster in the same place the motorcycle was.
Im a rider myself and there is no way that bike is going over 130mph, unless they messed with the footage.
@CH1CKENQUIFF The motorcycle is only seen on the straight after the bend, the 4x4 is seen rounding the bend - we never see them in the 'same place' moving at the same speed.
What you aren't taking into account is the motorcycle is pinged at 730m which is 3/4 of a km, yet it looks very close - when again pinged it is moving at 110mph yet looks only to be moving at 40mph & a few yards away.
Have you tried working out the bike's speed? You have two clear distances and speeds to work with.
@lollygaggle Oh dude seriously stop, you don't know what you are talking about man, this whole video is BS no way the bike was doing 130 and i can support that with evidence, first of all the biker came around a corner... that isn't a suitable place to take speed, second... the road has a dip where the biker falls lower to the camera, this means the camera readings are completely incorrect.
@SuicidalLooney The motorcycle isn't pinged anywhere near the bend, it is a good 150m on the straight section before the trigger is pulled.
The camera is mounted on a tripod at head height, not 10ft above the ground.
You will need to elaborate further on the aspects of the cosine effect which you are vaguely glossing over, which does not apply given the nature of the ping.
@lollygaggle I'm glad you understand what the cosine effect is, if so then you should know it doesn't matter what height the device is at... a different height from the biker gives needs for possible false results. so since i gave you facts i want some back, where is your evidence showing it was mounted on a tripod at head height? the hill that the bike goes down is atleast 1m by eye sight alone, that's 1m added to the height of your fictional head height tripod that you cannot back up
@SuicidalLooney What form would you accept the evidence of tripod mounting in?
Where is your evidence that the LTI may be mounted 10ft above the ground?
The cosine effect lowers the actual speed in favour of the motorist & the LTI then rouinds it down to the next whole number. The cosine in the above clip wouild be negligible because the biker is heading directly towards the scope. If there is any cosine differential, it would be less than 1mph given any variations in approach vectoring.
@lollygaggle I never said it was mounted 10ft above the ground, that was your claim. My evidence is the big fat error message shown on the display of the device as the biker goes downwards into the dip, and it briefly displayed 137mph before quickly displaying error again, it was clearly unable to display a consistent speed during the dip in the road and therefore invalidates the readings completely.
You typed & I quote 'because the height of the camera may be 3 meters high' = 3m = 9.9ft.
No, not my claim.
All error messages prove the scope is working correctly & as it should. Don't confuse error with fault - 'Error 3' simply means that the scope was steady enough & it proves the error-trapping software is working perfectly. I would be concerned if there were no error messages.
@lollygaggle Just so you know, an allowance of 9-11% are on speed cameras, this varies greatly between locations and 2mph is added the to total, This is why a speed camera isn't triggered at 35mph in a 30 zone, no matter what you say this video is flawed with lies, no evidence to support that claim of 137mph is valid, but i have given many to why it's invalid. 30mph zone examle, 9% of 30 = 2.7 = 32.7 + 2mph (speedo allowance) = 34.7 rounded 35mph, camera wont flash. FACT!
@SuicidalLooney The LTI Speedscope, all current operational variants, the LTI 20.20 TS/M & the Ultralytes 100/1000 do not 'flash' at all, ever. They emmit an infra-red laser at 904nm, invisible to the human eye.
The current ACPO Guidelines became obsolete in 2009 & were only ever an operational guide.
Constabularies who are in the nationbal scheme run to a strict 10% + 2, meaning in a 30mph zone you can expect to be NIP'ed at 35mph. This does not change between locations.
@lollygaggle You are running around in circles with no firm evidence or a real argument, i have proven constantly with firm evidence why the speed reading was inaccurate, the evidence i've used are real problems that effects speed reading devices.You call my logic nonsense yet you cannot proof me wrong, i call your argument bullshit.
@SuicidalLooney You also made a claim about where & how police can enforce speed restrictions which was complete nonsense. You did not reply to my response.
Your track record thus far is more than shaky, supply something, anything to prove you aren't just one these armchair experts who gets their info from websites penned by people who equally have no clue - please.
@lollygaggle legislation dot gov dot uk, now use that to proof me wrong or shut your mouth for good, this is a government website. You've successfully defended none of YOUR claims. You have NOTHING to back anything you've said so far. I guess your smarter than everyone else who've taken the time to gather legitimate information from official government websites. Tell your bullshit to someone who doesn't know better, because you are speaking to someone who does!
@SuicidalLooney You are the one claiming there is 'something' that governs speed enforcement operations. I have asked you what & you produced a DfT circular! There is NO legislation that deals with speed enforcement = none. If you believe there is all you have to do is name it - simply supplying mystical web addresses proves what?
You know better?
Ok, simply name the act/legislation & when it came into force, that governs speed enforcement operations?
@lollygaggle There is no specific names for what or who enforce speed here is how wiki describes it "the legislative bodies of nations or provincial governments and enforced by national or regional police and / or judicial bodies" Those bodies are refered to as the local council or highway agency dependant on who controls the road, speed enforcment can be summed up under the Road Traffic Act 1988 (You can find that on legislation site)
@lollygaggle What is wrong with you? i posted this comment on a completely different video, your argument carries no weight. that is like taking evidence from a rape crime to prosecute a murderer of a different trial. it's a totally different topic. You are plain stupid son. stick to the topic of THIS! video and do not take my comments from OTHER VIDEOS, posting it here. That comment was made from a different video period!
@lollygaggle I've also answered your silly question on another video already. " Depending upon the enforcement method used, speed camera housings (including
tripod-mounted cameras) or the camera operator or the mobile enforcement vehicle
should be clearly visible from the driver’s viewpoint at the following minimum visibility
distances:
• 60 metres where the speed limit is 40 mph or less;
The DfT do not pass legislation or anything remotely resembling law or statutes that the police enforce. That is only done by government - in other words, I have asked you for LEGISLATION & like many misinformed individuals youi have supplied GUIDELINES - NOT LEGISLATION.,
Such guidelines only existed when the hypothecation changes came into force in Feb 2007 - they have since simply been ignored.
@SuicidalLooney You've now done some quality research & realsing your faux pas, you unfortunately don't have the humility to admit your mistake.
There is no legislation, act, or statute that governs speed enforcement - police can enforce from any location and from any vehicle - I know it, you know it.
'The rules will be binding for every police force in and applying to join the netting-off scheme, ....'.
@lollygaggle Not true, i have come to understand you are an idiot, you cannot argue with an idiot. You have twisted the argument from what i have stated and that is the speed measured is incorrect and why. I no longer have any interest to argue anything else with you and will no longer reply to anything you say.
@SuicidalLooney We are not arguing, I have repeatedly asked you to support your claims with legislation that speed enforcement MUST be visible. You have supplied nothing more than a DfT guidelines which expired in 2007.
You've gone out, bought the paint & a brush, pushed back the carpets & now stand, dripping brush in hand with nowhere left to go. Your only option is to now play the name calling card & flounce off - you cannot reply as you have nothing left.
@SuicidalLooney In reply to you saying the bike recording is false, the crosshair is square on the biker and the camera moves to follow it, it's not pointing above the riders head or even at head height while the camera is pointing at the motor cyclist, you claims are false.
@RandyDarkshade2 The position of the crosshairs is only an approximation of the position of the laser, the red dot on the top of the speedscope is used to acquire the target not the crosshairs.
@lollygaggle I will explain why it is incorrect, the distance from the camera point to the biker is not the same. the distance of the biker on the road to the camera may be for example 100m but they camera may record 110m because the height of the camera may be 3 meters high, that height distance of the camera ads for example 1 cm for every 1m between the camera and the biker, this distance increases more when the bike goes into the dip, however the actual distance of the road doesn't change
I'm glad they don't have cameras here in California. How strict are they anyways? it would be ridiculous if you get a ticket for momentarily going 3mph in excess near a camera. It's not realistic to expect motorists to stare at the speedo
@lollygaggle Well I'm asking if it goes off at 66-68 mph in a 65 then of course you have to constantly watch the speedo, pretty much everyone drives at a speed that hovers around and is never always exactly equal to the speed limit. If it went of at 75 that would be more reasonable.
Now they have cameras that measure average speeds along a road. If those become widespread then the governments might as well build rails into the roads for cars to hook up to so they cant speed at all.
@Fenyx6 We don't have 65mph limits in the UK. the basic guidelines are 10% + 3 before prosecution.
Countless motorists still get 'done' by average speed cameras, plus it would be impractical to operate them on every section of carriageway due to the cost.
@lollygaggle the technology would obviously get cheaper over the years. When the government draws statistics detailing the efficiency of speed cameras in accident prevention, AND the technology comes within reasonable cost, they could certainly load up the highways with speed cameras because they see no reason not to, as there's no overall benefit of speeding.
@mmmbeachlover Hi, you clearly misunderstand that the above officers are part of the roads policing unit who only deal with traffic related matters. This is what they are paid to do. Can you elaborate how you think they benefit from speed enforcement as all fines go to central government?
Simple. Don't speed. That might sound smug but Law Abiding Drivers(tm) are often the worst. They will claim "driving to the conditions" or "with the flow" but really they're trying to justify breaking the law to themselves.
As much as I'd like to go faster, I would rather annoy a LAD(tm) by staying within the speed limit therefore eliminating the risk of triggering a speed camera and the consequential risk of a fine, endorsement points and a higher insurance premium.
that's why the english people desperately need that new average speed cameras to be fixed everywhere in england,and when this become a reality no matter what car you drive bugatti veyron or russian lada everybody gonna drive safe and responsible with the same speed like faking robot driver
@loweprofesional Then how do you explain the large numbers of speeding detections that take place daily in the UK on average speed check sections of carriageway?
@lollygaggle the explanation is simple because we are people not a robot drivers and second if everybody keep the rules from where the money for penalties gonna come sometimes the people are predictable like a sheep but even a sheep can learn it self .Today people's know how to avoid normal speed cameras that why we gonna see this average speed cameras more often in UK because there is no chance to avoid them
@lollygaggle for the new generation cars the best speed definitely is not a 70.I don't know statistics like you but what i see every day on a road is people drive with 70 only when they see speed cameras.
@loweprofesional But with laser scopes like the LTI, it takes 0.3 of a second to record the speed of a vehicle - it's all over before you've had a chance to move your foot to the brake.
@lollygaggle yes i am agree with you but the answer of everything is average speed cameras fixed everyware in UK and everybody gonna drive safe and responsible white 70 miles per hour.But what you gonna say to the people with a dream that got one of the best car like a porsche,ferrari,lamborghini,maserati,pagani zonda,Koenigsegg CCX,saleen s7,mclaren f1,Ultimate Aero,TVR and a lot more please don't drive this cars in UK because they are not safety
@loweprofesional The majority of UK roads have a lot lower speed threshold than 70mph, the urban road limit is 30mph . It isn't about the 'safety' of any specific vehicle, it is the person behind the wheel that determines how well a car is driven. We have to move to a different mental place due to the decline in the use of fossil fuels, performance cars have to be replaced by those that return 150mpg.
@lollygaggle my advice to you is live your life little bit more unsafety and irresponsible because you gonna way cup one day to realise that you live in a matrix
@SergeyKataev I would never remotely consider warning someone who was obviously speeding that they were about to be detected - they are screaming out for a hefty fine & points. Such motorists aren't my 'fellows', they are inconsiderate, selfish morons who get everything they deserve.
What next, flashing drunk drivers to watch out for the nasty policepersons in the marked police car?
it should be obvious that the the drivers are responsible for their vehicles velocity. But you can predict traffic lights, you dont expect a revenue gathering device. And now with the risk of loosing your car and maybe your livelyhood extreme reactions can be expected.
MC crashes in sweden has gone to a all time lowest record ever. Even if weve had one of the icesit winters in decades. Experts say its ABS on bikes that saves lives now.
@Maxen89 So you are saying that Swedish motorcyclists rode at speeds in excess of that which was safe on icy roads & only now have the numbers of crashes dropped because motorcycles are safer because of technical innovations?
@bigshow112 Ok, so no sources & all you have is 'wrong'.
The LTI is type approved only with Sony video cameras. This has a scene function precisely so it can be used when light levels drop - the polariser is removed, you switch to 'scene 4' & providing enough ambient light exists from sreet lighting, you can still record VRM's.
Who are the 'powers that be' & what are your sources?
Go to Pepipoo.com & look at the threads penned by motorists detected after dark.
@lollygaggle actually i am not mis informed i am very well informed in all aspects , and its not only sony cameras, the polariser makes little difference, the lti is multi approved across the board,
@bigshow112 No, only Sony video cameras with the Ultralyte 100/1000. The polariser makes a great deal of difference regarding reflections on the windscreen & removing it when light levels drop gives you two stops of light.
Explain what 'multi-approved across the board' means?
The recent weather has clearly indicated that mobile speed camera vehicles are cash generators, and aren’t about road safety at all.
I have been mobile camera spotting for the past year, and have seen at least one camera van per day Monday-Friday since January of this year. In the past week, since the snow downfall I haven’t seen one!!!
The road conditions are treacherous, and if speed enforcement was about road safety then they should be on our roads now!
@mattrehmhext Thanks mate. That lollygaggle bloke whoever he is has an argument for everything! He says the snow is why they aren't on our roads LOL.
More like because money won't be made, as not many people are going to speed in this weather. The facts stand, and i hate them with a passion! It's people that hardly speed that get caught for doing a few mph over.
And it's also very dangerous to keep looking at your speedo every 2 secs. And to do 20mph in a 30mph would be the only way! lol :0)
@viperz888 It isn't a case of 'liking' it, it is a case of following the rules of the road & the inherent legislation that you are taught when you take driving lessons.
Be patient, it takes time & concentration to assimilate what you need to know.
@lollygaggle they can work in heavy rain and also fog, and do have the capabality of working at night but the powers that be wont let them work at night
@bigshow112 Completely incorrect - fog reflects the laser back & 'Error 1' is displayed = target too close. Rain is exactly the same except using the Ultralyte 1000 which has weather filter gating the minimum distance at 62m. It doesn't work well, especially in anything heavier than a shower, the spray from receding vehicles creating an impenetrable wall.
Using the Concept 1 & 2 at night in conjunction with the LTI is absolutely fine so long as there is enough street lighting.
@viperz888 of course it has'nt heard of 1984! its a copper. The police state is rolling out all over the country and these brain doners in luminous jackets are merely animating it and doing its bidding. They are a laughing stock.
@lollygaggle. I will never been found don't you worry about that my friend... I will get as ore money as I can from uk tax payers and then take it back to my country
@gymcredible Hi gym. Perhaps you are unaware that it is actually very simple to obtain your IP address & subsequent location from posting on YouTube? You claim you are an illegal according to recent posts? Is this a wise move?
I have to speed to stay concentrated. If I drive at the speed-limit I get bored as its too slow and easy, I lose concentration and start day-dreaming.
Although I do stick to the speed-limit when it makes sense, such as in pedestrian areas etc.
A legal cash cow, another form of tax!
darkman4468train 2 weeks ago
@darkman4468train Hi, you are clearly not aware of the funding arrangements, for since 2007, speed enforcement has cost more to keep running than it generated. The term 'cash cow' has been penned by those who have no clue how this works.
Whenever you see figures quoted for revenue generated, you never seen the running costs that cancel out the revenue.
Static camera numbers have dropped greatly in number because they are too expensive to run.
lollygaggle 2 weeks ago
@lollygaggle
OMG Thats even worse, now i'm realy miffed that my taxes are being spent on yet another white elephant.
darkman4468train 2 weeks ago
@darkman4468train Hi, the situation changed in April of last year, all funding was stopped meaning speed enforcement is now self-funding, so in effect the government has given constabularies the green light to approach enforcement how they choose to. Most are part of the national scheme, meaning it only carries on due to speed awareness course fees.
lollygaggle 2 weeks ago
@lollygaggle So how much do they pay government shills like you?
bigglyguy 1 week ago
@bigglyguy Hi, why would Gatso pay someone for commenting on YouTube?
lollygaggle 1 week ago
@lollygaggle Only because Gatso charged outright ransoms for "lease" fees.
bigglyguy 1 week ago
@bigglyguy Hi, thanks for responding.
Can you elaborate as to the Gatso leasing arrangements?
lollygaggle 1 week ago
money for old rope, taxing shitting and pissing soon
ripcurl010 4 weeks ago
That guy in the van looks more familiar every time I watch this, he looks like someone off neighbours or should that be one off my neighbours, Norfolkshires finest he is - what an asshole of the nth degree
XTee500 4 weeks ago
300,000 pounds divided by 17 gives you less than 20,000 each to replace what twaddle some spout about 30-40,000 pounds
XTee500 4 weeks ago
@XTee500 Hi, you misunderstand though.
The level of damage determines the cost. A complete Crown Pole, radar & flash unit, controller, camera & cassette is listed in the current SERCO price list as being just shy of £40k. Fires burn in different ways, depending on methodology used, weather etc, so the damage varies considerably & consequently what needs replacing from public funds.
Good news though, mobile enforcement ramped up to compensate = brilliantly shortsighted.
lollygaggle 4 weeks ago
@lollygaggle averaged out to less than 20K though and "ramped up to compensate" what exactly - profits of course
Thank you
XTee500 4 weeks ago
@XTee500 Hi, you aren't quite grasping the concept of varying costings here.
Some housings would need complete replacement, whilst others would simply need perhaps the front glass panel, hence the cost varies hugely. You can of course average it out, but this would not equate to actual replacement costs per site.
Yes, SERCO prices are very high & in it for profit, it is a business after all.
You are most welcome.
I am sorry to learn of the demise of your fish. Were you very close?
lollygaggle 4 weeks ago
@lollygaggle Very close you see we used to live in the same bowl
I seem to remember you saying in another threads that police could easily work overtime with mobile enforcement to make up the lost revenue because of damaged cameras, so that means there were quotas to meet and a fiscal target to achieve, these operations must be highly proifable to make good revenue even whilst paying ovetime rates, do you what the fully encapsulated overhead recovery rate is for a policeman ?
XTee500 4 weeks ago
@XTee500 Hi, can you please quote my exact wording please?
Don't forget that 99% of all manual speed enforcement is detected by civilians & not police.
lollygaggle 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lollygaggle But the taxpayer doesn't pay for the repair - the motorist does through increased mobile enforcement.
Equally, GATSO makes more profit & becomes a more dominant force, SERCO who imports & installs the equipment makes huge profits & mobile enforcers get unlimited overtime at locations that rack up prosecutions that otherwise wouldn't have taken place.
The industry is only as successful as it BECAUSE cameras are routinely damaged.
XTee500 4 weeks ago
@XTee500 This was your statement a year ago
XTee500 4 weeks ago
@XTee500 Hi, please supply the exact quote.
lollygaggle 4 weeks ago
@lollygaggle Its about a year ago on one of these videos really cant be bothered finding it again so just forget it you will just attempt to squirm out of it
The guy in this video is a worm - any idea of his name ?
XTee500 3 weeks ago
@XTee500 Hi, I believe his name is Mike Cartwright.
lollygaggle 3 weeks ago
@lollygaggle No not the reporter - the worm
XTee500 3 weeks ago
@XTee500 Hi, no sorry, he'd have to raise his visor to get a good look at his face.
lollygaggle 3 weeks ago
@lollygaggle Hahaha, no the worm that is using the laser with a uniform on
XTee500 3 weeks ago
@XTee500 Hi, having watched the entire clip, I am unable to spot a laser wearing a uniform.
lollygaggle 3 weeks ago
@lollygaggle Thought so you dont know a worm when you see one, its a bit like looking into a mirror for you !!!???!!!
XTee500 3 weeks ago
@XTee500 Hey I will take the wifes iphone to the pub with us, if you want to continue. We are only 10 mins walk from the Jolly Toper so catch you in 15-20
XTee500 3 weeks ago
@XTee500 Hi, assuming you are sober, you have trouble reading detail now, forget adding alcohol to the mix.
lollygaggle 3 weeks ago
@XTee500 Hi, I would also commend you on actually starting to do some research on the subject.
When you first voicing opinions, you clearly knew absolutely nothing on the subject. You are now proactively looking at the issues. You have a long way to go, but stick with it.
Like countless others before you, it is a steep learning curve. Any questions just ask.
lollygaggle 4 weeks ago
@lollygaggle Reccomendation noted and totally ignored, I have freedom to do exactly as I please. As for asking you I would get a more sensible answer from my goldfish and its been dead for 10 years
XTee500 4 weeks ago
2011 Update
On Tuesday at around 5am, a speed camera was set on fire in Ainsdale, England. The device on Liverpool Road So far in 2011, Lincolnshire expects to pay £300,000 (US $475,000) to repair speed cameras after being hit by vigilantes, BBC News reported. So far, seventeen cameras have been attacked in the area. On August 24, a camera on the A17 in Cranwell was set on fire just before midnight. Also on the A17 in Whaplode, an automated ticketing machine burned around 3:30am on September 4.
XTee500 4 weeks ago
@XTee500 Hi, just an extra note;
'..seventeen attacked cameras', could easily equal to ten sprayed front panels, which are only £100 a throw. There is nothing that states seventeen houses torched.
Please think things through before commenting in future.
lollygaggle 4 weeks ago
@lollygaggle averaged out to less than 20K though and dont bother argueing I know I am right !
XTee500 4 weeks ago
Absolutely it is a proven fact that speed prevention causes more accidents than they attempt to prevent, add to that the inconvenience to relatively law abiding people etc etc makes it a foregone conclusion all safety partnerships should be shut down and all speed cameras should be removed
And before Amoeba boy can reply - shut it lollyspanner
XTee500 4 weeks ago
@XTee500 Hi, thanks for offering an opinion.
However, this has been discussed many times, both here & in other forums. The primary objective of speed enforcement is not essentially to reduce the number of collisions, more the impact velocity & level of physical trauma when a crash takes place.
It is accepted that whilst human beings are in charge on motor vehicles, accidents will cannot be stopped.
Many SCP's have stopped operating, replaced by police only driven mobile detection.
lollygaggle 4 weeks ago
Despite the whole "safety camera" thing, the aformentioned "safety cameras" cause more accidents than they prevent.
djzee1000 1 month ago
@djzee1000 Can you supply figures to support that?
lollygaggle 1 month ago
Now I have just had lunch and am off whale spotting, I hope this is a quiet day or the new year could be a bit tedious for those of us involved in the speed entrapment debate
XTee500 1 month ago
Tumbleweed
XTee500 1 month ago
That prick looks so happy catching speeders ...87 miles per hour - whoopde doo - what a bunch of a-holes. I would like to see him smiling so widely in other company........ funny he looks familiar
XTee500 1 month ago
@XTee500 Hi, I note you have returned to name calling once again.
lollygaggle 1 month ago
@lollygaggle Why you are correct - he is a total and utter nonce though ? Dont you agree ? "It can zoom into the number plate" he is no more an officer than he is a camel
How he can sleep at night, mind you he probably does sleep as he almost definitely wont have a wife or if he does she is sleeping with the neighbour whilst he drones on about camera types and the law
XTee500 1 month ago
@XTee500 Yes, the amount of camels now employed in speed enforcement has increased to the point of daftness.
Why do you believe a neighbour would engage the officer's wife in a discussion about speed enforcement whilst she was asleep?
lollygaggle 1 month ago
@lollygaggle So why do the buggers use horseboxes then - wait a minute Dromedary or Bactrian ...... Bactrian is a good bit smaller and might be able to use the horsebox
I could explain but I wont - btw the neighbour is a big man - if you know what I mean
The orifice.....r is a total ass though and I am glad you agree, do you think he looks familiar ?
XTee500 1 month ago
@XTee500 The enforcement vehicle in the above clip couldn't be more clearly signed & positioned.
lollygaggle 1 month ago
@lollygaggle Nonsense it was in a stupid place and it was there purely to generate revenue with an abolute idiot in control..... an absolute idiot, a buffoon, doesnt he remind you of someone ? he reminds me of someone and its not Michael Winner
XTee500 1 month ago
@XTee500 I see, so you'd prefer it was sited on a bend behind some trees?
Such operations are positioned where the speeding issues exist.
Revenue is not an issue in any way. What evidence do you base that belief on?
lollygaggle 1 month ago
@lollygaggle No I would prefer it sited in another country - North Korea ?
Remember we discussed the beanstalk the other night Jack said his son did plant the beans now what was his name - I think it started with a P
XTee500 1 month ago
Speed dose not kill. Stopping suddenly dose!
THENELLYXPRESS 1 month ago
@THENELLYXPRESS Not quite - it is the velocity you are travelling at the point of collision that essentially determines the depth of physical trauma.
You can test this easily;
Find a nice solid concrete support. Drive into it at 2mph - make notes about the level of damage to both you & the vehicle.
Do the same again, only this time, increase your speed to 70mph. Make notes & compare the differences.
lollygaggle 1 month ago
hmm interesting reporting is that Nick Clegg?
SpeedingSolicitor 1 month ago
@SpeedingSolicitor Sorry if you were asking me
Google BMJ 10.1136/bmj.38883.593831.4F
I am really starting to like LOL - he is soooo stupid
XTee500 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
As pointed out to the Commons Transport Select Committee despite all the Police and Safety camera groups claims there have been no fall in serious road injuries treated in hospitals. In June 2006 the British Medical Journal reported that falling reporting levels (by the police) had accounted for the whole of the observed fall, as there had been no such fall in serious road injuries treated in hospitals.......
XTee500 1 month ago
Speed cameras are dangerous for exactly the reason you saw in this video. People go around a corner, unexpectedly see a bright camera van & naturally jam on their brakes even if they're not speeding. They need to be banned because they just cause crashes, as you saw.
uzijn 1 month ago
@uzijn There are many thousands of speed enforcement operations every week - where is the evidence to support your claim?
If a traffic light turned to red, someone braked, skidded & crashed - you'd blame the traffic lights?
lollygaggle 1 month ago
@lollygaggle Traffic lights have an amber warning light. Vans purposely position themselves to catch people off-guard & surprise them. Where's my evidence? How about this video?
uzijn 1 month ago
@uzijn I see, your evidence is a clip containing two motorists who lost control due to excessive speed.
Every road is a combination of straights & bends. Where do you suggest enforcement vehicles are positioned, on roads where there is no speeding problem? The UL1000 can detect your speed at 1000m, so you want them all placed on straight roads where you can equally be recorded before you have a clue what has happened?
Explain your alternatives.
lollygaggle 1 month ago
@lollygaggle My alternatives are to not have portable speed vans that surprise motorists & not have cameras that cause people to slow down & then speed up again. Those average speed cameras that you have on the motorway are a lot more safe & effective because it keeps the traffic going at a constant speed & you don't have people randomly braking because they've seen a camera.
uzijn 1 month ago
@uzijn Why do thousands of people get NIP's from average speed camera detections?
Why does braking make people lose control? Modern braking systems simply slow vehicles in a straight line.
lollygaggle 1 month ago
@lollygaggle They slow vehicles in a straight line but if these vans are parked to be hidden (around a corner, for example just like on this video) then people aren't travelling in a straight line when they see them. Plus it isn't just about losing control, it's about the people behind then crashing, etc..
uzijn 1 month ago
@uzijn So what you are saying is that tailgaters are unable to stop because they are travelling too fast to stop safely within the distance they can see? That's odd, because there is zero evidence of that in the video you cite as evidence?
Hidden around bends? Operations are positioned to enforce where the speeding issue exists. So it's okay to detect a vehicle at 800m well before the driver has seen the enforcement van?
lollygaggle 1 month ago
@lollygaggle I don't quite understand that second paragraph. No matter whether somebody is tailgating or not, these things cause collisions. There are other methods of slowing people down, assuming that speed is the problem just for the benefit of this argument.
Anyway, I respect everything you've said & I respect that you've chosen to discuss it maturely but I'm just going to agree to disagree with you & carry on. I hope you do too.
uzijn 1 month ago
@uzijn The second paragraph;
If you take issue with being pinged as you round a bend, then are you saying it is then acceptable to do the same on very long straight sections of carriageway from a kilometre distant, long before the enforcement vehicle can be recognised?
Motorists apply the brakes many times during a journey & for many reasons, however the choice to do so cannot be placed at the feet of third parties if the said driver is paying attention of their speed & surroundings.
lollygaggle 1 month ago
two crashes because of a camera van.. surely this isnt safe? why dont they just hide fully rather than being on show.
mikeco9090 3 months ago
@mikeco9090 No, drivers only lose control of the vehicle they are supposedly in control of when they exceed their capabilities & posted thresholds & then panic when they fear being detected doing so. Would you also blame a traffic light for changing to red, someone braking harshly & then colliding with something?
Such RTC's can only ever be the fault of the person behind the wheel.
lollygaggle 3 months ago
Police , leave people alone !!!!!!!!!!!!
jyvaskylanpoika 4 months ago
@jyvaskylanpoika Fuck you. Don;t like the police? Don't break the fucking law, simple.
RandyDarkshade2 1 month ago
In Norfolk you only see these on the A47 betwean Lynn of Norwich.
It's the Only place you they Realistically reach their quota.
YuJays 4 months ago
speedingsolicitor.co.uk
SpeedingSolicitor 4 months ago
my fucking hero
LOPEZdJUNGLIST 4 months ago
Most common cause? Bollocks is it, it's driving without due care an attention. Speed doesn't kill, careless drivers do.
R33Racer 4 months ago 2
@R33Racer Impact velocity is the single factor that determines the degree of physical trauma, you are confusing the cause of a collision with the cause of death.
lollygaggle 4 months ago
UFO's going 30 000 km/h without speeding ticket. How is that possible if speed camera technology is so advanced ? :) Please reply! :)
KrzychOlsztyn 5 months ago
@KrzychOlsztyn That's simple, both static & mobile speed enforcement kit do not work much above 200mph, plus there is no registration mark to follow up via DVLA.
lollygaggle 4 months ago
i have been driving for 5 days with my first car but today i was going 28mph in 30mph and the camera flashed me I am getting really worried im i likely to get fine or something i passed my test this year and the max i can get is 6 points on my first two years getting really worried plesase help
natman2k 5 months ago
@natman2k If you were doing 28mph - then no, no fine - are you sure you didn't simply check your speedo after slowing down?
lollygaggle 5 months ago
@lollygaggle i was doing 25mph before the camera flashed i checked straight after the camera flashed i was doing 28mph there was a white van overtook me on the road way before the camera. the white van went passed the camera at 50mph he didnt get flashed but when i went past i got flashed but he was way in front of me so how did i get flashed. would you mind helping me thanks
natman2k 5 months ago
@natman2k Static cameras have secondary check marks on the carriageway - there has to be two flashes 0.5 - 0.6 seconds apart, which enables your speed to be worked out by the viewing team.
You cannot be sent a NIP for 28mph - just forget it.
lollygaggle 5 months ago
BMW driver at 126mph and on the phone! Did i hear that correctly?
schwantz037 5 months ago
I visited germany the other month and i was doing 139 mph and was legal. The road was safe and i felt safe, when i reduced speed to 70 it was like i had stopped. Our roads could have higher speed limits as 70 is to slow for the cars they make now. Its not always the fast drivers that cause the accidents. Take the idiots off the road and it will run smoother. Sometimes i think everyone should be retested at 60 years old.
edwina22 6 months ago
The police say that the person or persons burning speed camera's in Lincs, are causing drivers to have accidents. Now thats the same as saying every driver caught speeding when the camera's were working must of had an accident. Who are these idiots that think up these bullshit stories. I praise the people who are destoying them well done. The only thing you have caused is lost revenue. Its the police on this film that caused those accidents by being there. You caused hard breaking. SO FUCKOFF.
edwina22 6 months ago
@edwina22 You are simply misinformed.
Only running costs are returned to partnership run operations, meaning every time a camera housing is torched it costs the tax payer @ £35-40k. Speed enforcement has run at a loss since 2008, so the balance again is paid for by tax payers.
Hard braking is caused by those motorists who do not observe posted thresholds & collisions by those who do not maintain a distance where they can stop safely within the distance they can see.
Please do research.
lollygaggle 6 months ago
Police can't catch me..... Still got no insurance lol
gymcredible 7 months ago
@gymcredible What financial provisions have you made should you injure or kill the breadwinner of a family by your bad driving habits?
lollygaggle 6 months ago
wanker
lilgreenfingerpuppet 8 months ago
@lilgreenfingerpuppet You've clearly given the matter a great deal of thought & your erurdite response highlights the dichotomy that speeding motorists face.
lollygaggle 8 months ago
What a load of shit.
Watch at 2.17, witnss a motorcycle doing well over 100mph... but the defender behing him in a 4x4 looks to be going faster.... can defenders even go 130mph??
CH1CKENQUIFF 8 months ago
@CH1CKENQUIFF You are being fooled by the optical compression of lookibng at something recorded through a high magnification telephoto optic/lens. You cannot judge comparitive speed through magnifying optics.
lollygaggle 8 months ago
@lollygaggle I agree with you on that.... but we are looking through the same lens on this video... yet the 4x4 is moving faster in the same place the motorcycle was.
Im a rider myself and there is no way that bike is going over 130mph, unless they messed with the footage.
CH1CKENQUIFF 8 months ago
@CH1CKENQUIFF The motorcycle is only seen on the straight after the bend, the 4x4 is seen rounding the bend - we never see them in the 'same place' moving at the same speed.
What you aren't taking into account is the motorcycle is pinged at 730m which is 3/4 of a km, yet it looks very close - when again pinged it is moving at 110mph yet looks only to be moving at 40mph & a few yards away.
Have you tried working out the bike's speed? You have two clear distances and speeds to work with.
lollygaggle 8 months ago
@lollygaggle Oh dude seriously stop, you don't know what you are talking about man, this whole video is BS no way the bike was doing 130 and i can support that with evidence, first of all the biker came around a corner... that isn't a suitable place to take speed, second... the road has a dip where the biker falls lower to the camera, this means the camera readings are completely incorrect.
SuicidalLooney 7 months ago
@SuicidalLooney The motorcycle isn't pinged anywhere near the bend, it is a good 150m on the straight section before the trigger is pulled.
The camera is mounted on a tripod at head height, not 10ft above the ground.
You will need to elaborate further on the aspects of the cosine effect which you are vaguely glossing over, which does not apply given the nature of the ping.
Be more detail rich & try again..
lollygaggle 7 months ago
@lollygaggle I'm glad you understand what the cosine effect is, if so then you should know it doesn't matter what height the device is at... a different height from the biker gives needs for possible false results. so since i gave you facts i want some back, where is your evidence showing it was mounted on a tripod at head height? the hill that the bike goes down is atleast 1m by eye sight alone, that's 1m added to the height of your fictional head height tripod that you cannot back up
SuicidalLooney 7 months ago
@SuicidalLooney What form would you accept the evidence of tripod mounting in?
Where is your evidence that the LTI may be mounted 10ft above the ground?
The cosine effect lowers the actual speed in favour of the motorist & the LTI then rouinds it down to the next whole number. The cosine in the above clip wouild be negligible because the biker is heading directly towards the scope. If there is any cosine differential, it would be less than 1mph given any variations in approach vectoring.
lollygaggle 7 months ago
@lollygaggle I never said it was mounted 10ft above the ground, that was your claim. My evidence is the big fat error message shown on the display of the device as the biker goes downwards into the dip, and it briefly displayed 137mph before quickly displaying error again, it was clearly unable to display a consistent speed during the dip in the road and therefore invalidates the readings completely.
SuicidalLooney 7 months ago
@SuicidalLooney My claim?
You typed & I quote 'because the height of the camera may be 3 meters high' = 3m = 9.9ft.
No, not my claim.
All error messages prove the scope is working correctly & as it should. Don't confuse error with fault - 'Error 3' simply means that the scope was steady enough & it proves the error-trapping software is working perfectly. I would be concerned if there were no error messages.
Please do some research before typing nonsense.
lollygaggle 7 months ago
@lollygaggle Just so you know, an allowance of 9-11% are on speed cameras, this varies greatly between locations and 2mph is added the to total, This is why a speed camera isn't triggered at 35mph in a 30 zone, no matter what you say this video is flawed with lies, no evidence to support that claim of 137mph is valid, but i have given many to why it's invalid. 30mph zone examle, 9% of 30 = 2.7 = 32.7 + 2mph (speedo allowance) = 34.7 rounded 35mph, camera wont flash. FACT!
SuicidalLooney 7 months ago
@SuicidalLooney The LTI Speedscope, all current operational variants, the LTI 20.20 TS/M & the Ultralytes 100/1000 do not 'flash' at all, ever. They emmit an infra-red laser at 904nm, invisible to the human eye.
The current ACPO Guidelines became obsolete in 2009 & were only ever an operational guide.
Constabularies who are in the nationbal scheme run to a strict 10% + 2, meaning in a 30mph zone you can expect to be NIP'ed at 35mph. This does not change between locations.
lollygaggle 7 months ago
@SuicidalLooney If you have any operational questions, just ask.
You could however just do some research yourself before typing nonsense.
lollygaggle 7 months ago
@lollygaggle You are running around in circles with no firm evidence or a real argument, i have proven constantly with firm evidence why the speed reading was inaccurate, the evidence i've used are real problems that effects speed reading devices.You call my logic nonsense yet you cannot proof me wrong, i call your argument bullshit.
SuicidalLooney 7 months ago
@SuicidalLooney Thanks for replying. Proven constantly? Firm evidence? Running in circles?
As you appear to believe what you typing, perhaps you can cite your sources?
What operational experience do you have of speedmeters?
lollygaggle 7 months ago
@SuicidalLooney You also made a claim about where & how police can enforce speed restrictions which was complete nonsense. You did not reply to my response.
Your track record thus far is more than shaky, supply something, anything to prove you aren't just one these armchair experts who gets their info from websites penned by people who equally have no clue - please.
lollygaggle 7 months ago
@lollygaggle legislation dot gov dot uk, now use that to proof me wrong or shut your mouth for good, this is a government website. You've successfully defended none of YOUR claims. You have NOTHING to back anything you've said so far. I guess your smarter than everyone else who've taken the time to gather legitimate information from official government websites. Tell your bullshit to someone who doesn't know better, because you are speaking to someone who does!
SuicidalLooney 7 months ago
@SuicidalLooney You are the one claiming there is 'something' that governs speed enforcement operations. I have asked you what & you produced a DfT circular! There is NO legislation that deals with speed enforcement = none. If you believe there is all you have to do is name it - simply supplying mystical web addresses proves what?
You know better?
Ok, simply name the act/legislation & when it came into force, that governs speed enforcement operations?
lollygaggle 7 months ago
@lollygaggle There is no specific names for what or who enforce speed here is how wiki describes it "the legislative bodies of nations or provincial governments and enforced by national or regional police and / or judicial bodies" Those bodies are refered to as the local council or highway agency dependant on who controls the road, speed enforcment can be summed up under the Road Traffic Act 1988 (You can find that on legislation site)
SuicidalLooney 7 months ago
@SuicidalLooney You typed ; 'This is a thing of the past, coppers aren't allowed to hide..'.
I asked you to back that up & you supplied a DfT circular?
You then challenged my reply & got all shirty.
I asked you for legislation that states police cannot enforce covertly? Speeding hasn't been decriminalised - police or police staff only.
You now supply some aimless waffle from Wiki? Final chance to redeem yourself;
Why aren't police allowed to 'hide'? State why & your sources???
lollygaggle 7 months ago
@lollygaggle What is wrong with you? i posted this comment on a completely different video, your argument carries no weight. that is like taking evidence from a rape crime to prosecute a murderer of a different trial. it's a totally different topic. You are plain stupid son. stick to the topic of THIS! video and do not take my comments from OTHER VIDEOS, posting it here. That comment was made from a different video period!
SuicidalLooney 7 months ago
@lollygaggle I've also answered your silly question on another video already. " Depending upon the enforcement method used, speed camera housings (including
tripod-mounted cameras) or the camera operator or the mobile enforcement vehicle
should be clearly visible from the driver’s viewpoint at the following minimum visibility
distances:
• 60 metres where the speed limit is 40 mph or less;
• 100 metres at all other speed limits"
Source: DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT
SuicidalLooney 7 months ago
@SuicidalLooney Again I understand your confusion;
The DfT do not pass legislation or anything remotely resembling law or statutes that the police enforce. That is only done by government - in other words, I have asked you for LEGISLATION & like many misinformed individuals youi have supplied GUIDELINES - NOT LEGISLATION.,
Such guidelines only existed when the hypothecation changes came into force in Feb 2007 - they have since simply been ignored.
I ask again - name the LEGISLATION?
lollygaggle 7 months ago
@SuicidalLooney If you had actually read the entire document you would have seen the date of Dec 2001 & this paragraph.
'The rules will be binding for every police force in and applying to join the netting-off scheme, ....'.
Netting-off finished over four years ago. You are quoting ancient history that was only ever a guideline anyway.
Now, unless you have anything else?
lollygaggle 7 months ago
@lollygaggle Call what you must, it's still valid
SuicidalLooney 7 months ago
@SuicidalLooney You've now done some quality research & realsing your faux pas, you unfortunately don't have the humility to admit your mistake.
There is no legislation, act, or statute that governs speed enforcement - police can enforce from any location and from any vehicle - I know it, you know it.
'The rules will be binding for every police force in and applying to join the netting-off scheme, ....'.
Netting-off finished over four years ago.
lollygaggle 7 months ago
@lollygaggle Not true, i have come to understand you are an idiot, you cannot argue with an idiot. You have twisted the argument from what i have stated and that is the speed measured is incorrect and why. I no longer have any interest to argue anything else with you and will no longer reply to anything you say.
SuicidalLooney 7 months ago
@SuicidalLooney We are not arguing, I have repeatedly asked you to support your claims with legislation that speed enforcement MUST be visible. You have supplied nothing more than a DfT guidelines which expired in 2007.
You've gone out, bought the paint & a brush, pushed back the carpets & now stand, dripping brush in hand with nowhere left to go. Your only option is to now play the name calling card & flounce off - you cannot reply as you have nothing left.
Bye bye.
lollygaggle 7 months ago
@SuicidalLooney In reply to you saying the bike recording is false, the crosshair is square on the biker and the camera moves to follow it, it's not pointing above the riders head or even at head height while the camera is pointing at the motor cyclist, you claims are false.
RandyDarkshade2 1 month ago
@RandyDarkshade2 I don't even remember what the fuck i said...
SuicidalLooney 1 month ago
@RandyDarkshade2 The position of the crosshairs is only an approximation of the position of the laser, the red dot on the top of the speedscope is used to acquire the target not the crosshairs.
lollygaggle 1 month ago
@lollygaggle I will explain why it is incorrect, the distance from the camera point to the biker is not the same. the distance of the biker on the road to the camera may be for example 100m but they camera may record 110m because the height of the camera may be 3 meters high, that height distance of the camera ads for example 1 cm for every 1m between the camera and the biker, this distance increases more when the bike goes into the dip, however the actual distance of the road doesn't change
SuicidalLooney 7 months ago
I'm glad they don't have cameras here in California. How strict are they anyways? it would be ridiculous if you get a ticket for momentarily going 3mph in excess near a camera. It's not realistic to expect motorists to stare at the speedo
Fenyx6 9 months ago
@Fenyx6 Why would you need to stare at a speedo? A glance is all that is required.
lollygaggle 9 months ago
@lollygaggle Well I'm asking if it goes off at 66-68 mph in a 65 then of course you have to constantly watch the speedo, pretty much everyone drives at a speed that hovers around and is never always exactly equal to the speed limit. If it went of at 75 that would be more reasonable.
Now they have cameras that measure average speeds along a road. If those become widespread then the governments might as well build rails into the roads for cars to hook up to so they cant speed at all.
Fenyx6 9 months ago
@Fenyx6 We don't have 65mph limits in the UK. the basic guidelines are 10% + 3 before prosecution.
Countless motorists still get 'done' by average speed cameras, plus it would be impractical to operate them on every section of carriageway due to the cost.
lollygaggle 9 months ago
@lollygaggle the technology would obviously get cheaper over the years. When the government draws statistics detailing the efficiency of speed cameras in accident prevention, AND the technology comes within reasonable cost, they could certainly load up the highways with speed cameras because they see no reason not to, as there's no overall benefit of speeding.
Fenyx6 9 months ago
fuck off, the motorists are just a soft touch and it's far easier than doing the police work the public want them to do!
mmmbeachlover 10 months ago
@mmmbeachlover Hi, you clearly misunderstand that the above officers are part of the roads policing unit who only deal with traffic related matters. This is what they are paid to do. Can you elaborate how you think they benefit from speed enforcement as all fines go to central government?
lollygaggle 9 months ago
Simple. Don't speed. That might sound smug but Law Abiding Drivers(tm) are often the worst. They will claim "driving to the conditions" or "with the flow" but really they're trying to justify breaking the law to themselves.
As much as I'd like to go faster, I would rather annoy a LAD(tm) by staying within the speed limit therefore eliminating the risk of triggering a speed camera and the consequential risk of a fine, endorsement points and a higher insurance premium.
I'm also using less fuel.
metalrhubarb 10 months ago
These bastards shouldn't be there in their camera vans, causing accidents
SergeyKataev 10 months ago
that's why the english people desperately need that new average speed cameras to be fixed everywhere in england,and when this become a reality no matter what car you drive bugatti veyron or russian lada everybody gonna drive safe and responsible with the same speed like faking robot driver
loweprofesional 10 months ago
@loweprofesional Then how do you explain the large numbers of speeding detections that take place daily in the UK on average speed check sections of carriageway?
lollygaggle 10 months ago
@lollygaggle the explanation is simple because we are people not a robot drivers and second if everybody keep the rules from where the money for penalties gonna come sometimes the people are predictable like a sheep but even a sheep can learn it self .Today people's know how to avoid normal speed cameras that why we gonna see this average speed cameras more often in UK because there is no chance to avoid them
loweprofesional 10 months ago
@loweprofesional How do people avoid 'normal' speed cameras? The average partnership still processes 10,000 detections every month = no avoidance.
lollygaggle 10 months ago
@lollygaggle for the new generation cars the best speed definitely is not a 70.I don't know statistics like you but what i see every day on a road is people drive with 70 only when they see speed cameras.
loweprofesional 10 months ago
@loweprofesional But with laser scopes like the LTI, it takes 0.3 of a second to record the speed of a vehicle - it's all over before you've had a chance to move your foot to the brake.
lollygaggle 10 months ago
@lollygaggle yes i am agree with you but the answer of everything is average speed cameras fixed everyware in UK and everybody gonna drive safe and responsible white 70 miles per hour.But what you gonna say to the people with a dream that got one of the best car like a porsche,ferrari,lamborghini,maserati,pagani zonda,Koenigsegg CCX,saleen s7,mclaren f1,Ultimate Aero,TVR and a lot more please don't drive this cars in UK because they are not safety
loweprofesional 10 months ago
@loweprofesional The majority of UK roads have a lot lower speed threshold than 70mph, the urban road limit is 30mph . It isn't about the 'safety' of any specific vehicle, it is the person behind the wheel that determines how well a car is driven. We have to move to a different mental place due to the decline in the use of fossil fuels, performance cars have to be replaced by those that return 150mpg.
lollygaggle 10 months ago
@lollygaggle my advice to you is live your life little bit more unsafety and irresponsible because you gonna way cup one day to realise that you live in a matrix
loweprofesional 10 months ago
@loweprofesional I disagree, no two realities are the same, everyone has a completely unique perspective upon what they perceive to be tangible.
lollygaggle 10 months ago
@lollygaggle so you rely on fellow drivers to warn you, and those who don't are BASTARDS
SergeyKataev 10 months ago
@SergeyKataev I would never remotely consider warning someone who was obviously speeding that they were about to be detected - they are screaming out for a hefty fine & points. Such motorists aren't my 'fellows', they are inconsiderate, selfish morons who get everything they deserve.
What next, flashing drunk drivers to watch out for the nasty policepersons in the marked police car?
lollygaggle 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
so fucking what?
MANTLEBERG 10 months ago
Do people not read 1984 any more?
JamesMangle 10 months ago
@JamesMangle You shouldn't use a mobile phone whilst driving , let alone read a book.
lollygaggle 10 months ago
it should be obvious that the the drivers are responsible for their vehicles velocity. But you can predict traffic lights, you dont expect a revenue gathering device. And now with the risk of loosing your car and maybe your livelyhood extreme reactions can be expected.
peri525 11 months ago
looks like those cameras were causing more accedents
peri525 11 months ago
@peri525 Why are the drivers behind the wheel not responsible for their vehicle's velocity & their own actions?
You'd blame a traffic light if it turned red & a motorist lost control upon approach?
lollygaggle 11 months ago
MC crashes in sweden has gone to a all time lowest record ever. Even if weve had one of the icesit winters in decades. Experts say its ABS on bikes that saves lives now.
Maxen89 1 year ago
@Maxen89 So you are saying that Swedish motorcyclists rode at speeds in excess of that which was safe on icy roads & only now have the numbers of crashes dropped because motorcycles are safer because of technical innovations?
lollygaggle 1 year ago
my research and source is undeniable work it out
bigshow112 1 year ago
@bigshow112 Ok, so no sources & all you have is 'wrong'.
The LTI is type approved only with Sony video cameras. This has a scene function precisely so it can be used when light levels drop - the polariser is removed, you switch to 'scene 4' & providing enough ambient light exists from sreet lighting, you can still record VRM's.
Who are the 'powers that be' & what are your sources?
Go to Pepipoo.com & look at the threads penned by motorists detected after dark.
You are misinformed.
lollygaggle 1 year ago
@lollygaggle actually i am not mis informed i am very well informed in all aspects , and its not only sony cameras, the polariser makes little difference, the lti is multi approved across the board,
bigshow112 11 months ago
@bigshow112 No, only Sony video cameras with the Ultralyte 100/1000. The polariser makes a great deal of difference regarding reflections on the windscreen & removing it when light levels drop gives you two stops of light.
Explain what 'multi-approved across the board' means?
lollygaggle 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1:57 Nice example of speed trap causing an accident :-)
Tzimnewman3 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Whoever keeps marking m4553y's post's as spam, is a childish idiot.
mattrehmhext 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The recent weather has clearly indicated that mobile speed camera vehicles are cash generators, and aren’t about road safety at all.
I have been mobile camera spotting for the past year, and have seen at least one camera van per day Monday-Friday since January of this year. In the past week, since the snow downfall I haven’t seen one!!!
The road conditions are treacherous, and if speed enforcement was about road safety then they should be on our roads now!
m4553y 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@m4553y Well said. It's just another tax on any road user, a simple revenue generator, and in bad cases, the cause of a lot of ridiculous hassle.
mattrehmhext 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mattrehmhext Thanks mate. That lollygaggle bloke whoever he is has an argument for everything! He says the snow is why they aren't on our roads LOL.
More like because money won't be made, as not many people are going to speed in this weather. The facts stand, and i hate them with a passion! It's people that hardly speed that get caught for doing a few mph over.
And it's also very dangerous to keep looking at your speedo every 2 secs. And to do 20mph in a 30mph would be the only way! lol :0)
m4553y 1 year ago
how would you like it if I pointed a gun in your face? stupid pigs
viperz888 1 year ago
@viperz888 It isn't a case of 'liking' it, it is a case of following the rules of the road & the inherent legislation that you are taught when you take driving lessons.
Be patient, it takes time & concentration to assimilate what you need to know.
lollygaggle 1 year ago
@lollygaggle you don't think its slightly offputting, those things all over the place? ever heard of 1984?
viperz888 1 year ago
@viperz888 All over the place? They aren't, it's just your imagination creating such a scenario;
1) They will only be positioned on roads.
2) There are only a handful in each constabulary.
3) They only work in the dark where there is street lighting to illuminate the VRM's.
4) They don't/can't work in fog.
5) They can't work in anything heavier than a light rain shower.
6) The resulting footage is simply used to get the details, then stored.
1984? Nah, just speeding.
lollygaggle 1 year ago 5
@lollygaggle they can work in heavy rain and also fog, and do have the capabality of working at night but the powers that be wont let them work at night
bigshow112 1 year ago
@bigshow112 Completely incorrect - fog reflects the laser back & 'Error 1' is displayed = target too close. Rain is exactly the same except using the Ultralyte 1000 which has weather filter gating the minimum distance at 62m. It doesn't work well, especially in anything heavier than a shower, the spray from receding vehicles creating an impenetrable wall.
Using the Concept 1 & 2 at night in conjunction with the LTI is absolutely fine so long as there is enough street lighting.
lollygaggle 1 year ago
@lollygaggle wrong get some time in
bigshow112 1 year ago
@bigshow112 You might benefit from a bit more research.
State your sources about night usage.
lollygaggle 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@viperz888 of course it has'nt heard of 1984! its a copper. The police state is rolling out all over the country and these brain doners in luminous jackets are merely animating it and doing its bidding. They are a laughing stock.
rodjames98 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lollygaggle. I will never been found don't you worry about that my friend... I will get as ore money as I can from uk tax payers and then take it back to my country
gymcredible 1 year ago
Comment removed
Sidowse 1 year ago
England laws are fuck-in crap, I drive in this country for 3 years with no license or insurance lol lol lol firkin police can't catch me
gymcredible 1 year ago
@gymcredible Hi gym. Perhaps you are unaware that it is actually very simple to obtain your IP address & subsequent location from posting on YouTube? You claim you are an illegal according to recent posts? Is this a wise move?
lollygaggle 1 year ago
I have to speed to stay concentrated. If I drive at the speed-limit I get bored as its too slow and easy, I lose concentration and start day-dreaming.
Although I do stick to the speed-limit when it makes sense, such as in pedestrian areas etc.
Sidowse 1 year ago