Would you work on a 'traffic surveillance' project?

[Mich the Tester]

On the other hand the ANPR (Automatic Number Plate Recognition) system that has been installed in West Yorkshire (basically any car coming into the county on the M62, M1 or A1 is tagged) helped track down the movements of the 7/7 Bombers.

Indeed, although you do say 'helped', which means it obviously isn't the only method used to track them down. it didn't prevent the bombings either.

You can't justify all round surveillance of everything people do and everywhere people go by pointing to one case where some criminal was found after he'd blown himself to bits anyway. If you could use that as justification you could justify fitting everyone with a chip to make them easy to find after they've allegedly done something wrong.

I feel there's more than enough of 'government watching the people' and not enough of 'people watching the government'.

[Sysman]

WHS+1.

If the rate is right I'll do it, assuming it's not illeagal or immoral.

I worked on a traffic fines admin system once (not in the UK).

Yes, one of the project requirements was illegal, and our team refused to implement that. The customer could have added it after project delivery. I have no idea if they did.

[doodab]

If you could use that as justification you could justify fitting everyone with a chip to make them easy to find after they've allegedly done something wrong.

In the case of people who were going to blow themselves to bits, you would need several chips to keep track of all the pieces.

[ChrisPackit]

Yes I have broken the law, including speeding, I took a concious decision to speed and I would have accepted the punishment if caught. I could always not have chosen to speed, just like everyone else who gets caught by a speed camera, if they were obaying the law they would not be fined?!

I struggle to see the argument?!

The argument is, is that the primary objective of a speed camera is to make money, and the safety aspect is a distant second. If the cameras were used outside schools then I'd agree with you wholeheartedly, but look at the list of the most dangerous roads in the UK and see how many of them have speed cameras. Not far from where I live are Woodhead Pass, the Snake Pass and the Cat and Fiddle - probably 3 of the top 10 most dangerous driving roads in the UK and it would be money well spent to put one on here. But instead, they are cunningly hid on stretches of A roads or dual carriageways where it is perfectly safe to do that extra 10 mph when it's quiet, but when you do...you're fooked.

For the record, PLEASE don't put speed camers on the Cat and Fiddle.....

[SimonMac]

The argument is, is that the primary objective of a speed camera is to make money, and the safety aspect is a distant second. If the cameras were used outside schools then I'd agree with you wholeheartedly, but look at the list of the most dangerous roads in the UK and see how many of them have speed cameras. Not far from where I live are Woodhead Pass, the Snake Pass and the Cat and Fiddle - probably 3 of the top 10 most dangerous driving roads in the UK and it would be money well spent to put one on here. But instead, they are cunningly hid on stretches of A roads or dual carriageways where it is perfectly safe to do that extra 10 mph when it's quiet, but when you do...you're fooked.

For the record, PLEASE don't put speed camers on the Cat and Fiddle.....

I think the primary objective is to catch the people breaking the law?

So what if they are being used to raise money? People are shouting out that the police are underfunded as it is so why not penalise people who are breaking the law.

The thing I have most umbridge about is your last comment

where it is perfectly safe to do that extra 10 mph when it's quiet

This is where my earlier comment comes into play, if you object to the law fight it, not the speed cameras.

[ChrisPackit]

I think the primary objective is to catch the people breaking the law?

So what if they are being used to raise money? People are shouting out that the police are underfunded as it is so why not penalise people who are breaking the law.

The thing I have most umbridge about is your last comment



This is where my earlier comment comes into play, if you object to the law fight it, not the speed cameras.

My problem with the law is that it's outdated like everything else in this country, and based upon figures from the 1950's. I've had cars that would do 70mph IN FIRST GEAR, nevermind the national speed limit, with brakes the size of dustbin lids and can stop in less than half the recommeded distance in the highway code. I've had cars that would do nigh on 200mph and would defy anyone who said it was dangerous to travel at 80mph. How is it then that you can max your car out in Germany on most of the Autobahns yet they have lower accident rates per head than they do in the UK.

The law is outdated and the only reason it's not updated to 21st century ideals is that the government would lose money. End of.

[scooterscot]

On a similar theme

I've generally avoided defence work, it's taken me the best part of 3-4 years now but manage quite well with commercial employment.

I think the peak for me came when working with a short range missile manufacturer and seeing what I was helping them achieve.

No thanks.

[DaveB]

The argument is, is that the primary objective of a speed camera is to make money, and the safety aspect is a distant second. If the cameras were used outside schools then I'd agree with you wholeheartedly, but look at the list of the most dangerous roads in the UK and see how many of them have speed cameras. Not far from where I live are Woodhead Pass, the Snake Pass and the Cat and Fiddle - probably 3 of the top 10 most dangerous driving roads in the UK and it would be money well spent to put one on here. But instead, they are cunningly hid on stretches of A roads or dual carriageways where it is perfectly safe to do that extra 10 mph when it's quiet, but when you do...you're fooked.

For the record, PLEASE don't put speed camers on the Cat and Fiddle.....

Woodhead, Snake and C&F are dangerous roads largely because they are narrow, twisty and heavily, plusthey become ice rinks in the winter. You can kill yourself or someone else quite easily on any of them without breaking the speed limit. The plod regularly put mobile units out on all three as well.

The stretch of the A1 where I live was a black spot for years, averageing 3 fatalities a year.

Since they put in speed restrictions backed by camera's there have been 2 fatalities in 10 years.

Put in the right place, they work.

[d000hg]

My problem with the law is that it's outdated like everything else in this country, and based upon figures from the 1950's. I've had cars that would do 70mph IN FIRST GEAR, nevermind the national speed limit, with brakes the size of dustbin lids and can stop in less than half the recommeded distance in the highway code. I've had cars that would do nigh on 200mph and would defy anyone who said it was dangerous to travel at 80mph

Good for you until you're 'safely' doing 80 and someone runs out in front of you so close you haven't even had time to react.

The moron behind the wheel hasn't changed since 1950. I support some changes like on motorway limits though, or roads people can't get on to easily.

[EternalOptimist]

surely the whole point is that the cameras take the judgement out of the situation.
It becomes black and white, right or wrong.
I can cite a thousand ocasions when the law said '70 is ok' and my common sense said 'do 50'
and a thousand times when the law said 'no more than 70' and my common sense said 'do 90'


have you ever driven down a road where the law says 30, and you can see toddlers running around chasing a foot ball?

if you stuck to 30 and killed one, would the camera fans be happy ?

of course not. so we have to use our common sense at one end of the scale, but not at the money making end of the scale

mmmmmmm