This will be with some campaign for England & Wales i take it.

 

Well done, keep up the good work,  but please you represent some, those that agree with you, & not 'we'.

Of course he was. I did not take up arms for Queen and country to let little petty minded politically motivated "little Hitlers" ruin our hard fought for democracy. If you must know, I was instrumental in getting rid of wheel clamping on private land too because I was the one that got both issues raised in the House.

My hero

 

The OP was about Stealth Tax on Hidden Cameras on Motorways, and they are going ahead, breeding and multiplying.

 

As for the 'Invisible' Cameras now, still in place & that people that might exceed the Speed Limit might not spot.  well that was Tough Titty really IMHO.

 

The cameras are not "invisible"! There are plenty of signs in advance stating that there are cameras approaching. If people are too stupid not to be able to see those signs, to then ignore the posted speed limit signs, and to continue breaking the Law then they deserve every fine or ban that is given to them.

 

 

 

Of course he was.  I did not take up arms for Queen and country to let little petty minded politically motivated "little Hitlers" ruin our hard fought for democracy.   If you must know, I was instrumental in getting rid of wheel clamping on private land too because I was the one that got both issues raised in the House.

 

Really?

Do please provide the evidence for that grand statement.

Graham.   'Invisible',   the use of  '  '  is because they are not Invisible,  it is only somebody said they were,  usually those not so bright.

There are a few of these already installed outside of Kent. M1 near Hemel Hempstead has a few

I sill maintain by previous point...

 

IF, as they say, there will be no road markings...  How do I contest a ticket if I believe it is incorrect?

I sill maintain by previous point...

IF, as they say, there will be no road markings... How do I contest a ticket if I believe it is incorrect?

I'm sure the devices will be type-approved to be allowed to be used in the first place

It's little different to challenging an officer holding a hand-held device really, there will be no markings on the road there (I don't think)

Really?

Do please provide the evidence for that grand statement.

 

It's up to you whether you disbelieve or not - it doen't matter to me either way.

 

Just wtch the next reforms coming up for discussion after the General Election:

 

Getting rid of Bus Mounted cameras to prosecute for bus lane use.   (This follows a member having been fined after electing to go in front of magistrates because he got out of the way of a police car on emergency call.   The magistrate took the view he should still have stayed clear of the bus lane and impeded the progress of the police car if necessary)

 

Getting rid of Parking Enforcement cameras following local authorities parking decoy vehicles in no parking zones to entrap mostorists.

 

Reforming Magistrates Courts to ensure that motoring offences can only be heard by a legally qualified person.

This must be about England & Wales again i take it.

 

Do we know what the UK Government are going to be talking about or making changes to after the General Election?

Reforming Magistrates Courts to ensure that motoring offences can only be heard by a legally qualified person.

Good luck with that one

You've got more chance of spotting a flying pig

And it won't count if the lay magistracy is done away with, as that, by definition, would mean that there are only legally qualified judges left to deal with them

Edited 2 February, 201511 yr by Brimma

I sill maintain by previous point...

 

IF, as they say, there will be no road markings...  How do I contest a ticket if I believe it is incorrect?

 

Probably the same way you'd contest any other camera based fine where there are no markings - by asking for the calibration certificate and checking whether it is within date or not (I beleive they need to be re-calibrated at regulart intervals).  If it is then you have no case unless you can prove it is inaccurate and can get it checked - if it isn't in-date then the ticket gets thrown out.

It's up to you whether you disbelieve or not - it doen't matter to me either way.

 

Just wtch the next reforms coming up for discussion after the General Election:

 

Getting rid of Bus Mounted cameras to prosecute for bus lane use.   (This follows a member having been fined after electing to go in front of magistrates because he got out of the way of a police car on emergency call.   The magistrate took the view he should still have stayed clear of the bus lane and impeded the progress of the police car if necessary)

 

Getting rid of Parking Enforcement cameras following local authorities parking decoy vehicles in no parking zones to entrap mostorists.

 

Reforming Magistrates Courts to ensure that motoring offences can only be heard by a legally qualified person.

 

Oh dear!

What a naive person you are.

 

Lets be honest, you have no evidence for anything you say, but are willing to make totally unsupported comments and treat them as facts, Arguments are won on facts not fiction!

 

And I suggest you do some research on the British legal system, especially about Magistrates Courts. They work, and have worked very well for many hundreds of years, because they use Lay people. You give evidence to your peers, they consider the facts, and provide a result. They do not need legal training because the "legal" bits are done before it comes to Court.

........................

Edited 5 February, 201511 yr by bealine

Yawn!!

 

The naivety of youth.

And you use the Daily Fail as a source.

The Independent a bit more to your liking?   Or do you want to wait for the official cover-up - sorry public enquiry?   

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-files-reveal-endemic-corruption-at-the-met-9644667.html

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/more-than-20-people-charged-in-corruption-investigation-at-barkingside-magistrates-court-9053247.html

 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/267626/Scandal-of-the-judges-who-shame-justice

 

The legal system in the UK is fatally flawed and must be reformed urgently.

Edited 6 February, 201511 yr by bealine

Thread title - 'Warning, new stealth tax on motorists'

Wasn't that about speed cameras?

FFS!

Thread title - 'Warning, new stealth tax on motorists'

Wasn't that about speed cameras?

FFS!

 

It was until someone tried to make the discussion personal and paint the police, magistrates and judiciary as squeaky clean.

 

Turns out you only have to say one word this morning - "Rotherham"

Bryan, 
What's the point?

What ever is said Bealine will always be right! (NOT)

As Kevin Costner said to Robert de Niro in court at the end of 'The Untouchables'....

"Never give up the fight"

I thought this had gone to bed now...  I'll go to bed instead

I probably won't be thanked for reigniting this one, but here goes:

 

I do a MAXIMUM of 70 on a normal motorway, although I think that SOME drivers may be safe at much higher speeds, because:

 

- It's the law

- I don't want a fine, and it's within my control not to get one. I don't want points either. I NEED my driving licence and IMHO bleating that you need it after you've been banned is stupid and childish.

- Fuel consumption goes up disproportionately to time saved as you get above 60mph ish

- I recognise that the faster you go, your vision narrows and shortens as you concentrate harder to stay in lane. This means that your hazard perception is reduced just as your stopping distances increase, and the damage occurring from an accident goes up with the square of the increase in speed.

- As I go faster, I also have to compensate for the other idiots on the road, who may or may not be concentrating.

- If I'm going faster than the limit, I'm going to be busy looking for cameras, cops etc - instead of hazards.

- Whether or not I am safe at a speed above 70mph is immaterial. You might as well argue that you are a safe driver after four pints.

 

Unfortunately, speed limits have to account for the lowest common denominator on our roads - the utter muppets who are clueless as well as the salesman in his Audi A4 who thinks 5 feet is a perfectly acceptable stopping distance at 80mph. And - I accept that this is controversial - the most dangerous people are the ones who really do think they are safe at 90-100+

 

The assertion that a great number of the motoring public are not very bright is supported by the fact that I still see people braking for the camera in average speed zones.

 

And as Brimma has said, traffic cops are at their lowest numbers in years. From 2012 to 2013, Devon and Cornwall had NO, NONE, ZILCH, full time traffic officers. Nottinghamshire are down 70-something percent in traffic officers.

 

My only concern with motorway cameras is the proving that the camera is set to trigger at the posted limit. In other words, if the posted limit due to conditions is 60mph, and you get flashed at 55mph, how would you prove that the posted limit at the time was 60 and not 50?

My only concern with motorway cameras is the proving that the camera is set to trigger at the posted limit. In other words, if the posted limit due to conditions is 60mph, and you get flashed at 55mph, how would you prove that the posted limit at the time was 60 and not 50?

The above gantry ones on the M42 have the signage linked to the camera, so the speed limit shown at that moment is superimposed on the corner of the images taken.

I would assume the same is the case for other variable limit cameras.

The above gantry ones on the M42 have the signage linked to the camera, so the speed limit shown at that moment is superimposed on the corner of the images taken.

I would assume the same is the case for other variable limit cameras.

I understand there's also a delay when they change to prevent people getting unfairly hit with a fine. 15 seconds rings a bell

I think it might even be 60 seconds, but yes there is indeed a delay.