big bollox is watching yous

[Yaka]

?Motorcycle detection system? on roads by Easter - Motorcycle News

i know a few peeps living in derby with bikes are miffed about this

 

[Wazzerphuk]

I don't understand.

If you don't ride like a cock it won't be a problem.

If you own a bike and want to ride fast, do it somewhere appropriate. Public roads are not the place.

 

[nath]

I gather from the article they're recording routes of motorcyclists regardless of whether they drive like fuckwits or not. That sounds like a pretty significant breach of privacy to me.

Data such as the routes taken by individual motorcyclists along with time and date will be collected and kept even if they have committed no offence.

 

[DaGaffer]

I don't understand.

If you don't ride like a cock it won't be a problem.

If you own a bike and want to ride fast, do it somewhere appropriate. Public roads are not the place.

All well and good, but is this (very expensive) system actually necessary? Strikes me that usually the only people bikers kill are themselves...

 

[Scouse]

I was going to call anyone who thought this was a good idea a word beginning with "C" but then realised it's BANNED

 

[Trem]

Fucks sake.

It really fucking annoys the government/councils that bikers pay less road tax and need less fuel. They are bending over backwards trying to wring more money out of us.

Also funny how they are setting these up in one of the countries most popular biking areas, Matlock, Cat and Fiddle etc.

Fucking wankers.

 

[Nate]

I am surprised it only cost £100,000 why not throw another 10mill in there to get people really riled up about it ;o

 

[Scouse]

It's cheap because they're using existing technology:

the eight routes had been chosen to target motorcyclists. “The data will be collected on all vehicles equally on those routes. However in terms of the analysis of that data we’re going to pay particular attention to motorcycles

But it's SHIT because of this:

We haven’t got a traffic management issue on those routes with any other vehicles that we’re aware of.

"Why they’ve gone there is because we know there’s a casualty problem with motorcycles on those routes

TARGETS.

They want to "reduce the number of casualties" but they haven't really got a problem. Because a fuckload of bikers go there casualty figures seem disproportionately higher.

So they'll make it officially "no fun anymore" - and the bikers will have to go elsewhere - denying them the culture that has been built up over years in these areas...

Britain sucks fat donkey balls.

 

[throdgrain]

it's cheap because they're using existing technology:



But it's shit because of this:



Targets.

They want to "reduce the number of casualties" but they haven't really got a problem. Because a fuckload of bikers go there casualty figures seem disproportionately higher.

So they'll make it officially "no fun anymore" - and the bikers will have to go elsewhere - denying them the culture that has been built up over years in these areas...

Britain sucks fat donkey balls.

100%.

 

[Tom]

Cue more bikers with sycamore leaves 'accidently' covering the licence plate.

There are a hell of a lot of good roads around the Peak District, they can't put cameras on all of them. Anyone who knows the cat and fiddle knows that exceeding the speed limit isn't really the issue, driving at an inappropriate speed is. Guess what a camera won't catch...

 

[Roo Stercogburn]

Aye this system sucks. Just let Bikers keep killing themselves off. Anything that kills bikers faster should not be discouraged.

Or did I miss the point of the thread?

 

[Trem]

Aye this system sucks. Just let Bikers keep killing themselves off. Anything that kills bikers faster should not be discouraged.

Idiot comment.

 

[kirennia]

I don't understand.

If you don't ride like a cock it won't be a problem.

If you own a bike and want to ride fast, do it somewhere appropriate. Public roads are not the place.

That's not really the point though is it; I'll put it into perspective.

Okay so if they turn around and say all vehicles will be fitted with a speed limiter, is that okay because then only the idiots will be caught. What if they make blood tests every 3 months mandatory to check for drug use? Again only those who take them will have a problem. What about putting cameras at the end of every street to make sure you aren't bunking off work and fraudulantly claiming illness... they're all illegal so why not?

Basically the list goes on. The point I'm trying to make is that slowly and surely more and more liberties are being taken away. Of course this isn't just going to start with something big, it'll be little by little with people turning around saying 'who really cares?' as it's only another small thing being added in.

I don't think I'm the only one noticing more and more of these things being introduced recently; this is slowly turning into a policy of guilty until proven innocent... that's the problem; try to look at the bigger picture.

<puts on his tin foil hat...>

 

[Tom]

No the real point is that this is being done in the name of safety, whereas anyone familiar with biking knows that the problem isn't exceeding the speed limit, its driving at an inappropriate speed for the conditions. Speed cameras will not address the latter. The only measure that can make a difference is training, and the only people who can enforce that are traffic police.

 

[Trem]

No the real point is that this is being done in the name of safety, whereas anyone familiar with biking knows that the problem isn't exceeding the speed limit, its driving at an inappropriate speed for the conditions. Speed cameras will not address the latter. The only measure that can make a difference is training, and the only people who can enforce that are traffic police.

Spot on, well you both are but yeah spot on.

I got stopped pretty much every day when I was on a bike when I was younger. I don't even see any traffic police anymore, they cost too much you see. Speed cameras cost less, don't need pensions or sick pay and they rake in the money. 100% its about money and absolutely nothing else and anyone who says "the money goes to road safety courses" (as someone said on the motorbike forum I am on) is blind/lying/wrong.

 

[rynnor]

No the real point is that this is being done in the name of safety, whereas anyone familiar with biking knows that the problem isn't exceeding the speed limit, its driving at an inappropriate speed for the conditions.

Not just speed - we need more traffic police and less cameras so that general bad driving/bad riders are picked up before they cause accidents.

Theres a busy narrow country road near me that has a no overtaking line down the middle due to the narrowness.

When they had some roadworks on it they had one side closed with lights regulating the traffic.

As a result queue's built up - despite the no overtaking strip a number of motorcycles decided they wouldnt queue - eventually one gets hit - ambulance comes n scrapes him up - within an hour I saw more idiots doing the same thing lol.

Too many people on our roads believe they are 'special' and above the laws and with the chances of seeing a traffic cop about the same as winning the lottery it can only get worse.

 

[Wazzerphuk]

I still don't understand why people think breaking the speed limit (whether safe or unsafe) is a civil liberty.

It isn't.

 

[Scouse]

I still don't understand why people think breaking the speed limit (whether safe or unsafe) is a civil liberty.

It isn't.

No - but the freedom to choose whether or not to obey the speed limit is.


Nottingham is full of SPECS cameras. I can't overstate this, but I feel like I'm driving in a mind control zone. It genuinely affects my mood for the worse and I detest going about my law-abiding business feeling nothing but hate for being treated like a criminal when I'm not one.

Regardless of whether you feel like that or not, I do. It's oppression, pure and simple. They may as well line the streets with jackbooted coppers with loads of speed cameras constantly watching you. It's exactly the same effect.

 

[Roo Stercogburn]

No - but the freedom to choose whether or not to obey the speed limit is.


Nottingham is full of SPECS cameras. I can't overstate this, but I feel like I'm driving in a mind control zone. It genuinely affects my mood for the worse and I detest going about my law-abiding business feeling nothing but hate for being treated like a criminal when I'm not one.

Regardless of whether you feel like that or not, I do. It's oppression, pure and simple. They may as well line the streets with jackbooted coppers with loads of speed cameras constantly watching you. It's exactly the same effect.

Funniest post of the year so far. Is it ripped from Spaced or something?

 

[Zenith.UK]

All I read that report as was "wah wah wah the police thugs can zap us speeding now wah wah". So it means that SPECS cameras have been upgraded to catch motorcyclists as well as regular traffic. Big deal. Welcome to the motoring world that the rest of us drive in. Just because you ride a bike doesn't make it any more or less illegal to break speed limits.

If you think I'm being puritanical about it, I'm no angel myself. I had 2 speeding fines within 8 days of each other in 2004 so they've now lapsed. I live in North Wales which has MORE of a nazi attitude to driving than most other police force areas. My satnav is CONSTANTLY warning me about possible mobile camera sites because that's the preferred method of "enforcement" here.

It sounds to me like cyclists in Derbyshire are finally unable to get away with speeding any more and they're acting like children about it. Get over it. Everybody else has to suffer it, don't think you're special.


As to the poster who said it's a breach of privacy, you have no assumed privacy driving on the roads. You register yourself and your vehicle with the DVLA. The MOT garages all submit MOT reports electronically to DVLA and all the insurance companies subscribe to a centralised database of insured vehicles. To drive without all of those is illegal and police vehicles with ANPR cameras frequently stop people without those documents. That makes the roads safer and brings premiums down for me because if they can't be bothered to insure their car, chances are they can't be bothered to MOT it either (and that IS a safety risk).

There are ANPR cameras over a large number of bridges and gantries on the major UK roads and CCTV cameras to supplement those ANPR cameras. It is ostensibly to assist the police with recovering stolen cars but it only takes a software rewrite to retask those same cameras to become SPECS time/distance cameras. It is only because ANY Govt knows it is a vote killer that it hasn't happened yet.

Don't get me wrong, I HATE ALL CASH AND SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS!
The problem is that without a concerted effort on the part of the public, we'll end up like Will Smith's "I Robot" where cars are driven automatically and driving manually is considered suspicious.

</Rant over>

 

[Scouse]

Everybody else has to suffer it, don't think you're special.

suf⋅fer
   /ˈsʌfər/ –verb
..to undergo, be subjected to, or endure (pain, distress, injury, loss, or anything unpleasant)

Really? Everyone has to suffer do they? There are no alternatives?

Fuck that. Blighty is no longer a pleasant place to drive. The suffering is real. It sucks fucking donkey dick. Orwell was right, etc. etc. etc.



Oh, and as for Roo's post above. You lack empathy and the intellect to digest an ideological argument.

 

[Tom]

I still don't understand why people think breaking the speed limit (whether safe or unsafe) is a civil liberty.

It isn't.

Well actually it is, we're at liberty to break the law and suffer the consequences. My gripe is that this is done in the name of safety - exceeding the limit is a cause of less than 5% of road traffic accidents.

There is no substitute for traffic police. None. Note that the only county in the country not to rely on speed cameras, Durham, also has statistically the safest roads.

 

[nath]

Note that the only county in the country not to rely on speed cameras, Durham, also has statistically the safest roads.

But without more information than that statement one could argue chicken or egg. Safest because they don't rely on cameras, or no cameras because it's safe.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think cameras do anything to improve road safety but you can't make a judgement on such things without more information (which you may well have and just didn't put here ).

 

[DaGaffer]

But without more information than that statement one could argue chicken or egg. Safest because they don't rely on cameras, or no cameras because it's safe.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think cameras do anything to improve road safety but you can't make a judgement on such things without more information (which you may well have and just didn't put here ).

I think you can make a judgement but you'd have to know what the stats were by county before cameras became widespread. I do seem to recall stats that said cameras made a strong initial impact in most counties but that the figures have been flat for a long time and that Durham was one of the places that bucked the trend. I also seem to remember something that said there was no correlation between the number of cameras in a county and road deaths.

Personally I think SPECS is the work of the devil purely because of the amount of time you spend speedo-watching to keep on or under the limit; I find it incredibly stressful. On a bike I'd say that would be positively dangerous.

 

[Tom]

For that you'd need the deaths per million km figures for County Durham, which I don't have on me. I was quoting from memory from things I've read.

 

[Roo Stercogburn]

Oh, and as for Roo's post above. You lack empathy and the intellect to digest an ideological argument.

There was nothing idealogical in that bout of foaming dog fever you posted, just fury at "I want, I'm denied, I'm angry" as a petulant child would.

 

[Tom]

I do seem to recall stats that said cameras made a strong initial impact in most counties but that the figures have been flat for a long time and that Durham was one of the places that bucked the trend.

You'll probably find that the only areas in which cameras have made a difference are the areas immediately surrounding a camera site (ie a few hundred yards), and they only make a difference due to regression-to-the-mean. The figures never seem to include accident migration, which is people choosing to adjust their driving habits around cameras, but nowhere else.

The only route - the only route - is training.

 

[Wazzerphuk]

Well actually it is, we're at liberty to break the law and suffer the consequences. My gripe is that this is done in the name of safety - exceeding the limit is a cause of less than 5% of road traffic accidents.

There is no substitute for traffic police. None. Note that the only county in the country not to rely on speed cameras, Durham, also has statistically the safest roads.

No, counting yourself as breaking the speed limit by choice is not a "liberty." Civil liberties are things like freedom of movement, freedom of speech, equal opportunities.

Breaking the speed limit is nothing more than a personal risk, not a civil liberty.

By getting a driving license by passing theory and practical tests and getting insurance and road tax, you are agreeing to abide by the rules of the road. It is not a civil liberty to break these rules, it is a personal decision based on risk.

I'm not saying anything about being for or against speed cameras (I think they're a little shitty), but no-one has the given right to speed whenever they want. You have the right to use the roads, and to move about them freely, but when you start breaking the rules that you have already agreed to follow, that is not a right you have.

 

[Scouse]

when you start breaking the rules that you have already agreed to follow, that is not a right you have.

So you'd support 24/7 surveillance on each and every one of us just in case we might decide to break the law and rape someone?

I agree that the law says I shouldn't rape women and I abide by these rules. But, fuck me, wouldn't it be better if they had CCTV everywhere and, maybe, some sort of electronic registration tag in my skin so they could identify me. They could keep records of wherever I went, just "in case" eh?

I mean, I couldn't argue with that. Rape's bad eh?

 

[Bodhi]

Fucking hell, since when did this place become sanctimony central?



Anyway folks just remember, the penalty for being caught speeding by a specs camera is at least £60 fine and 3 points. Yet the penalty for driving without a front numberplate is £30. Not that I'd in any way want to stop the governmental program of revenue generation (which is all speed cameras are for, anyone who says otherwise is clueless), but hey, just an idea y'know.