New speed cameras trap Southwark motorists from space

[HAL9000]

The Home Office is testing a new type of speed camera that uses satellites to measure average speed over long distances. One of the (apparently secret) test sites is in Southwark.

As far as I can see, this system has no other use except as a sophisticated speed trap.

Isn't this going too far! We already have more CCTV surveillance cameras per capita than any other country in the world - foisted upon us on the pretext of fighting crime but now serving as cash cows for local authorities quick to fine citizens at every opportunity.

Full Telegraph article: New speed cameras trap motorists from space

[Loz]

The 'from space' bit sounds like marketing bumpf. A few cameras + knowledge of their position = same average speed stuff you get on the motorway roadworks. Frankly, anyone that can speed on roads in London for the length of time to warrant average speed checking is probably travelling on roads I don't. Getting over an average 10mph for some trips is a minor success.

[RosieH]

Erm, don't speed. Then those big bad computer b@stards can't get you. Easy-peasy.

[SteveT]

Another piece of technology to harvest the motorist with.

They wont adjust the lights to change before you stop thus saving zillions of tons of fuel, plus the wear and tear on the driver and pedestrians, and yet they pursue this stuff, whoever is responsible for this madness should be relegated to the dole queue.

[matty]

So...You are angry that you might get caught speeding? Well I hope you do and have your licence taken away ; )

[HAL9000]

I'm not angry nor do I exceed the prevailing speed limits.

I am concerned about living in an environment in which every move is tracked and recorded by the state - Big Brother style.

As an aside, I started this thread at 08:05PM today. Later, over in the Drawing Room ...

General Election Debates - Announcement

Posted by: The Chair Today, 09:57PM

Questions have now been sent to all four candidates to answer. The questions are:

3) Do you accept that whilst the crime solving benefits of surveillance are considerable, there must surely be a level at which the costs to an individual's privacy and sense of freedom outweigh the potential benefits?

Proof, as if any were needed, of my dastardly psychic powers. So there!

[Ladymuck]

HAL9000 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Proof, as if any were needed, of my dastardly

> psychic powers. So there!

Innit!

[SteveT]

matty wrote:- So...You are angry that you might get caught speeding? Well I hope you do and have your licence taken away ; )

No not at all, I have a cruise control so it's easy to avoid speeding,

most of my fines are for unwittingly trespassing into the congestion zone.

My anger is due to the deliberate negligence of priorities, that could so easily be implemented by reconfiguring the traffic lights to match other world class cities.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Yes Steve, THAT'S why people in this country speed - the phasing of traffic lights. Give me strength. Even if your allegation were true, have you driven in other world class cities lately? One with over 6 million people? Have you seen the traffic problems there?

As for invasions of privacy, these aren't recording your conversations or x-raying through your clothes. You give away more personal information every single day just by using your oyster card, your credit card and carrying around a device which tells to within yards exactly where your location is. And yet I don't read threads from anyone complaining about the SCANDAL of satellite tracking in mobile phones

What is WITH drivers and the constant persecution-complex? Always moaning about being fleeced and yet never use public transport - in part because it's too f**ing expensive. Moaning bunch of beeatches

[????]

Drivers...never use public transport? Shhhesh.....Some people even drive, use public transport and cycle FOOOKING FREAKS

[Loz]

Careful now, quids. Don't you go interrupting one of Sean's anti-motorist tirades with facts or logic now...

[SeanMacGabhann]

yes yes yes I know quids. I'm not trying to suggest they don't. But you don't get nearly so much radio phone in angst from the public-transport-using perspective (regardless of how the split between modes breaks down)

Between road tax, petrol, and the other involuntary costs, driving is expensive. Add in the voluntary (ish) costs of numerous speeding and parking fines and it becomes more so

Similarly, public-transport is expensive - involuntary costs of season ticket increases, tracking via oyster etc. Then there are the fines from jumping barriers and risking the bendy bus not being inspected

So however an average person mixes their transport modes up, it costs. I get it. I just don't get why the motoring side bleats so much.

[SeanMacGabhann]

or is my response not logical loz?

Another fact for you loz is that I am a driver. I tend not to in London and have given up my car, but as I've said many times I'm not anti-motorist. Or is that an inconvenient fact as well?

[????]

Sean you've been listening to too many phone ins and watching Jeremy Clarkson toooo much. Motorists are not a single voice.....

[SeanMacGabhann]

True, but a minor side-point. The point is when people start a thread or ring in to complain about some "money grabbing" scheme an it's to do with transport, it tends to be a motorist, doesn't it?

When petrol prices went up a few years back, it wasn't pedestrians or bus users who blockaded the motorways and petrol-stations, putting lives at risk. It was motorists, wasn't it?

Am I wrong?

I'm not against driving* or motorists, I'm against people crying "victim" when they ain't.

* with the proviso that even disregarding petrol shortages, there isn't enough room on the streets for teh amount of cars now, much less ten years time. That's logic, not a rant at driving

[????]

I thought the Blockade was disgraceful and so did many other motorists...it was also mainly the Hauliers too not that many car drivers holding the country to ransom. Personally I think motoring's too cheap and would like to see petrol prices increased to price many motorists off the road and cars over a certain age highly road taxed but that's regressive and elitist. I don't have any problems with speeding restrictions either.

As you know, my only consistent car driving moan is the use of Parking Restrictions in a non-logical, profiteering, revenue driven way by local authorities.

[skidmarks]

There have been lots of threads started and comments posted recently concerned about the speed of vehicles in ?their? residential street, with posters advocating all kinds of restrictions and enforcement strategies. This seems the perfect system for this but it seems when someone else comes up with a system in ?someone else?s? street there is a problem.

[Brendan]

So quids you think that how much of a necessity to someone?s life a car is should be measured by how much money they have?

And you?re having a crisis of conscience over supporting the tories?

[SCSB79]

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> When petrol prices went up a few years back, it

> wasn't pedestrians or bus users who blockaded the

> motorways and petrol-stations, putting lives at

> risk. It was motorists, wasn't it?

>

Why would they?????

[????]

Well Brendan are there too many cars or not? We can't have it all ways can we? I explicitly said my idea was regressive and elitist, as indeed is rhe concept of the congestion charge too. Or let's ban public transport and give everyone a car.

Motoring is too cheap and convenient so if we want to reduce it we need to make it more expensive, persuading people to switch to Public Transport when they have a choice is very very difficult. Last time I looked at the National Travel Survey something like 95% of our travveled miles were done in the car...you could treble real spending on Public Transport and it'd still be p1ssing in the wind.

Er, I'm on record all over this Forum as saying I'm voting for media superstar Nick Clegg* and am deeply unimpressed with the Tories over the last year.

*Ex thingy

[SeanMacGabhann]

exactly my point. Bus fares go up by 30-50% regularly. Partly because of rising petrol costs. But there is less "outrage"

I just wish, whatever you chosen mode of transport, people didn't get so het-up and victimised

[Brendan]

Record shmecord.

[Loz]

Motoring is too cheap and convenient

I disagree that motoring is cheap. Depreciation + car tax + servicing + insurance means that, even before you put petrol in the damn thing you've probably forked out at least a grand. On top of that, many people in London then payout for daily public transport on top of that. On lower wages, that means an incredibly large percentage on take home pay goes to transport.

But people still have them. Lots of them. Why? Because they don't sit down and understand the costs and, even if they did, would probably try and justify them anyway.

It's a bit like smoking. You can keep putting the price up and up, but people will still find the money.

[Loz]

Another fact for you loz is that I am a driver. I tend not to in London and have given up my car, but as I've said many times I'm not anti-motorist. Or is that an inconvenient fact as well?

Hmmm. Your posting record says otherwise. And, as they say, if it looks like a duck, and sounds like a duck...

[SeanMacGabhann]

Go on then. Pull up my posting history and debunk me