| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
richard345
Frequent Visitor
Joined: Mar 09, 2008
Posts: 463
Location: Rainhill, Lancashire Not Merseyside!
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 22, 2010 12:52 pm Post subject: Plymouth to get Spy Camera car? |
 |
|
From the BBC News website:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/8578797.stm
This could be deployed on the streets of the town after trials have been completed. The intention is that "The Aygo's cameras, operated by a police traffic officer, will also be looking out for drivers using mobile phones, jumping red lights, speeding, driving in bus lanes, wearing no seatbelts and parking illegally."
It shouldn't be difficult to see, although "The small car is unmarked apart from safety camera partnership stickers on the doors. "
Given the number of 'mooning' incidents that the Google camera car has attracted, one wonders if the same could occur, however, I guess the presence of a Police Office might just suggest caution?
_________________
Ric - TomTom 520 DEAD - Passed to the great traffic jam in the sky. Now using Maps & Waze on Samsung Galaxy S4 + CamerAlert of course! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
GerryC
Pocket GPS Moderator
Joined: Mar 01, 2005
Posts: 1513
Location: West Mids
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BBC article wrote: | | A report to the city council says the Toyota Aygo, fitted with a rooftop camera, would generate £50,000 a year in penalties. |
So it's primary use is not about driver education or safer roads then. 
Gerry |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BigPerk
Frequent Visitor
Joined: Sep 06, 2006
Posts: 1618
Location: East Hertfordshire
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 22, 2010 2:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I guess it depends on how much it costs to run the scheme. It seems reasonable for the revenue to cover cost. And if any 'excess profit' DID actually go to support other local services that wouldn't upset me personally either.
Someone's got to pay for the scheme if there is one (and no-one on here seems to be in favour of the mobile-user mafia, but nothing seems to get done about them until there's an accident). Should it be the tax payer then, rather than the illegal/unsafe driver, who pays? 
_________________
David
(Navigon 70 Live, Nuvi 360) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jennyalberd82
Spammer
Joined: Jun 15, 2013
Posts: 1
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 15, 2013 1:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, that’s good that traffic authorities are realizing the heat of the situation. I think that it will help us to reduce no. of accidents are false claims as I got victimized by one traffic guy for not having insurance renewal copy. These spy cameras will definitely be a big hype in traffic rules and clarity in protocols. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DennisN
Tired Old Man
Joined: Feb 27, 2006
Posts: 14889
Location: Keynsham
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 15, 2013 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BigPerk wrote: | | Well, I guess it depends on how much it costs to run the scheme. It seems reasonable for the revenue to cover cost. And if any 'excess profit' DID actually go to support other local services that wouldn't upset me personally either. |
Like the man said, "So it's primary use is not about driver education or safer roads then."
So to cover the costs (or make extra to buy a swimming pool or marina for the local community), the amount has to keep up year on year. If it did actually reduce speeding and all the other offences, it wouldn't earn enough to meet the targets.
_________________
Dennis
If it tastes good - it's fattening.
Two of them are obesiting!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
![]() Posted: Today Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising |
|
|
We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in for private messages
Log in
