A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Sparrows are a protected species



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old July 11th 17, 03:54 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Rob Morley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,072
Default Sparrows are a protected species

On Sun, 09 Jul 2017 20:39:34 +0100
"Kerr Mudd-John" wrote:

Here's an earlier version:
http://www.itv.com/news/wales/2017-0...ts-in-swansea/


He said: "You think it's a camera and you naturally put your foot down
on the brakes. But when you get closer you can clearly see it's fake."

Why would you brake? Surely you're not routinely exceeding the speed
limit?

Ads
  #12  
Old July 11th 17, 04:13 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
MrCheerful
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,070
Default Sparrows are a protected species

On 11/07/2017 15:54, Rob Morley wrote:
On Sun, 09 Jul 2017 20:39:34 +0100
"Kerr Mudd-John" wrote:

Here's an earlier version:
http://www.itv.com/news/wales/2017-0...ts-in-swansea/


He said: "You think it's a camera and you naturally put your foot down
on the brakes. But when you get closer you can clearly see it's fake."

Why would you brake? Surely you're not routinely exceeding the speed
limit?


many people, even those travelling significantly below the limit, often
DO put the brakes on at a speed camera, out of some sort of habit. This
has become less frequent since the widespread adoption of spped limit
warnings in GPS navigation units, which are now very mainstream.
  #13  
Old July 12th 17, 02:00 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,917
Default Sparrows are a protected species

On 11/07/2017 15:54, Rob Morley wrote:
On Sun, 09 Jul 2017 20:39:34 +0100
"Kerr Mudd-John" wrote:

Here's an earlier version:
http://www.itv.com/news/wales/2017-0...ts-in-swansea/


He said: "You think it's a camera and you naturally put your foot down
on the brakes. But when you get closer you can clearly see it's fake."

Why would you brake? Surely you're not routinely exceeding the speed
limit?


One might well brake in order to be well under the speed limit for peace
of mind.

I remember my car being flashed at about 29mph in a 30mph limit in
Brighton (Preston Park on the A23, heading north out of the town).

Of course, nothing further happened, but it is completely irresponsible
of the relevant authorities to maintain a situation which can cause
unnecessary and even abusive anxiety to people who have done nothing wrong.

What if a notice had come though the door insisting that I was doing
38mph? There may well be ways to fight it, but why get into that sort of
hassle? Much easier to brake.
  #14  
Old July 12th 17, 02:02 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,917
Default Sparrows are a protected species

On 10/07/2017 09:31, TMS320 wrote:
On 10/07/17 06:11, Bret Cahill wrote:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ed-camera.html



Sometimes you need to _force_ an issue. He's done everything
exactly right.


Here's an earlier version:
http://www.itv.com/news/wales/2017-0...ts-in-swansea/



In many stores esp. in U. S. airports they have life size card board
cut outs of guys that look like federal agents. Everyone knows it's
a cardboard cutout but just reminding people that someone could be
watching reduces theft.

The bird box is at least as transparent and honest in that it's only
deceptive to those who are driving too fast. If you are a good alert
driver going the speed limit then you can read the sign.


It isn't just speed merchants. It is about all the not particularly
alert drivers going "just over" the limit that has caused all the hoo
haa about the "unfairness" of cameras.

Since the typical tolerance is 10% + 2mph and that speedometers over
read it means that when going "just over" a 30mph limit their needle
will be pointing to 40mph or more. That is an example of the level of
alertness required of drivers.


You do not need to be doing [(30mph x 1.1) + 2] mph in order for a
camera to flash.

  #15  
Old July 13th 17, 07:33 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,020
Default Sparrows are a protected species

On 12/07/17 14:02, JNugent wrote:
On 10/07/2017 09:31, TMS320 wrote:
On 10/07/17 06:11, Bret Cahill wrote:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ed-camera.html



Sometimes you need to _force_ an issue. He's done everything
exactly right.

Here's an earlier version:
http://www.itv.com/news/wales/2017-0...ts-in-swansea/



In many stores esp. in U. S. airports they have life size card board
cut outs of guys that look like federal agents. Everyone knows it's
a cardboard cutout but just reminding people that someone could be
watching reduces theft.

The bird box is at least as transparent and honest in that it's only
deceptive to those who are driving too fast. If you are a good alert
driver going the speed limit then you can read the sign.


It isn't just speed merchants. It is about all the not particularly
alert drivers going "just over" the limit that has caused all the hoo
haa about the "unfairness" of cameras.

Since the typical tolerance is 10% + 2mph and that speedometers over
read it means that when going "just over" a 30mph limit their needle
will be pointing to 40mph or more. That is an example of the level of
alertness required of drivers.


You do not need to be doing [(30mph x 1.1) + 2] mph in order for a
camera to flash.


I am sure I didn't mention a flash. Looking back at my last post... Yep,
nothing about that.

FYI, the camera (hence the flash) is triggered by radar. I understand
that enforcement is done by comparing two photos taken with an
accurately defined interval, not the fact that the radar triggered the
camera.

That is assuming a camera is fitted - I have seen boxes fitted with
flash but no camera. No harm if the threshold is lowered, should they do
that.

  #16  
Old July 14th 17, 02:03 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,917
Default Sparrows are a protected species

On 13/07/2017 19:33, TMS320 wrote:
On 12/07/17 14:02, JNugent wrote:
On 10/07/2017 09:31, TMS320 wrote:
On 10/07/17 06:11, Bret Cahill wrote:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ed-camera.html



Sometimes you need to _force_ an issue. He's done everything
exactly right.

Here's an earlier version:
http://www.itv.com/news/wales/2017-0...ts-in-swansea/



In many stores esp. in U. S. airports they have life size card board
cut outs of guys that look like federal agents. Everyone knows it's
a cardboard cutout but just reminding people that someone could be
watching reduces theft.

The bird box is at least as transparent and honest in that it's only
deceptive to those who are driving too fast. If you are a good alert
driver going the speed limit then you can read the sign.

It isn't just speed merchants. It is about all the not particularly
alert drivers going "just over" the limit that has caused all the hoo
haa about the "unfairness" of cameras.

Since the typical tolerance is 10% + 2mph and that speedometers over
read it means that when going "just over" a 30mph limit their needle
will be pointing to 40mph or more. That is an example of the level of
alertness required of drivers.


You do not need to be doing [(30mph x 1.1) + 2] mph in order for a
camera to flash.


I am sure I didn't mention a flash. Looking back at my last post... Yep,
nothing about that.


Did you need to?

They do work by flashing.

Have you never seen one go off? It's a regular sight on the M25 in the
controlled areas. And on the A23 at Brighton. I've even seen a
forward-facing Truvelo flash when I was travelling towards it (not that
it did the Swiss authorities any good, since the motorbike that
triggered it on N2 at Lucerne didn't have a forward-facing numbr-plate).

FYI, the camera (hence the flash) is triggered by radar. I understand
that enforcement is done by comparing two photos taken with an
accurately defined interval, not the fact that the radar triggered the
camera.


Yes... yes... is there anything else, of which we are not all already
aware, by any chance?

That is assuming a camera is fitted - I have seen boxes fitted with
flash but no camera. No harm if the threshold is lowered, should they do
that.


Causing unnecessary anxiety to people obeying the law is acceptable on
your planet, is it?

Well, OK... I wonder what you'd say if more pedestriuans started
carrying sledge hammers and similar implements.
  #17  
Old July 14th 17, 08:10 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,020
Default Sparrows are a protected species

On 14/07/17 02:03, JNugent wrote:
On 13/07/2017 19:33, TMS320 wrote:
On 12/07/17 14:02, JNugent wrote:
On 10/07/2017 09:31, TMS320 wrote:
On 10/07/17 06:11, Bret Cahill wrote:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ed-camera.html



Sometimes you need to _force_ an issue. He's done everything
exactly right.

Here's an earlier version:
http://www.itv.com/news/wales/2017-0...ts-in-swansea/



In many stores esp. in U. S. airports they have life size card board
cut outs of guys that look like federal agents. Everyone knows it's
a cardboard cutout but just reminding people that someone could be
watching reduces theft.

The bird box is at least as transparent and honest in that it's only
deceptive to those who are driving too fast. If you are a good alert
driver going the speed limit then you can read the sign.

It isn't just speed merchants. It is about all the not particularly
alert drivers going "just over" the limit that has caused all the
hoo haa about the "unfairness" of cameras.

Since the typical tolerance is 10% + 2mph and that speedometers over
read it means that when going "just over" a 30mph limit their needle
will be pointing to 40mph or more. That is an example of the level
of alertness required of drivers.

You do not need to be doing [(30mph x 1.1) + 2] mph in order for a
camera to flash.


I am sure I didn't mention a flash. Looking back at my last post...
Yep, nothing about that.


Did you need to?


No. So why did you?

They do work by flashing.

Have you never seen one go off? It's a regular sight on the M25 in the
controlled areas. And on the A23 at Brighton. I've even seen a
forward-facing Truvelo flash when I was travelling towards it (not that
it did the Swiss authorities any good, since the motorbike that
triggered it on N2 at Lucerne didn't have a forward-facing numbr-plate).

FYI, the camera (hence the flash) is triggered by radar. I understand
that enforcement is done by comparing two photos taken with an
accurately defined interval, not the fact that the radar triggered the
camera.


Yes... yes... is there anything else, of which we are not all already
aware, by any chance?


Replying to my post proves you have no clue about the workings.

That is assuming a camera is fitted - I have seen boxes fitted with
flash but no camera. No harm if the threshold is lowered, should they
do that.


Causing unnecessary anxiety to people obeying the law is acceptable on
your planet, is it?


Getting people to think about their behaviour on the roads is a very
good idea.

Well, OK... I wonder what you'd say if more pedestriuans started
carrying sledge hammers and similar implements.


Eh?
  #18  
Old July 14th 17, 11:32 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Kerr Mudd-John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 489
Default Sparrows are a protected species

On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 02:03:54 +0100, JNugent wrote:
[]

Causing unnecessary anxiety to people obeying the law is acceptable on
your planet, is it?


I prefer to see it as causing people to be careful to obey the law. YMMV.

Well, OK... I wonder what you'd say if more pedestriuans started
carrying sledge hammers and similar implements.


Non-seq

--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug
  #19  
Old July 14th 17, 12:04 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Ian Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,584
Default Sparrows are a protected species

On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 02:03:54 +0100, JNugent wrote:
On 13/07/2017 19:33, TMS320 wrote:

That is assuming a camera is fitted - I have seen boxes fitted
with flash but no camera. No harm if the threshold is lowered,
should they do that.


Causing unnecessary anxiety to people obeying the law is acceptable
on your planet, is it?


What possible anxiety would be caused to someone obeying the law?

On my planet it is perfectly acceptable (to me at least) to cause no
anxiety to people obeying the law while causing all sorts of negative
emotions in those that are disregarding it.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
  #20  
Old July 28th 17, 04:37 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,917
Default Sparrows are a protected species

On 14/07/2017 12:04, Ian Smith wrote:

JNugent wrote:
On 13/07/2017 19:33, TMS320 wrote:


That is assuming a camera is fitted - I have seen boxes fitted
with flash but no camera. No harm if the threshold is lowered,
should they do that.


Causing unnecessary anxiety to people obeying the law is acceptable
on your planet, is it?


What possible anxiety would be caused to someone obeying the law?


That's easy to understand if you are in "understand" mode.

It goes like this... you drive along a road at 29 or 30mph.

A Gatso camera flashes the rear of your vehicle even though you are
travelling within the 30mph speed limit.

Even bearing in mind that the photographs are allegedly scrutinised by a
suppposed human before decisions are taken, you don't know what the
local authority staff will try to "prove" with the image, especially in
an area (eg, Brighton) run by half-lunatics determined to do as much
harm to visiting drivers as they can get away with.

Try to imagine trying to defend yourself in court when faced by a
po-faced apparatchik who insists that the details within the image
"prove" that your vehicle was doing 29mph (or some simnilar speed), with
the bench (some of whose members may be local councillors) siding with
the bureaucracy as a matter of misplaced principle.

The answer is to adjust the cameras so that they may not "flash" unless
the speed limit had been breached (and by more than the locally-decided
tolerance level at that).

On my planet it is perfectly acceptable (to me at least) to cause no
anxiety to people obeying the law while causing all sorts of negative
emotions in those that are disregarding it.


At a guess, your vehicle has never been "flashed" by a malfunctioning
Gatso whilst you were proceeding lawfully, so you have never had to
spend the next two weeks or so wondering whether the loonies in charge
of the place are going to try to fleece you out of money and get your
licence endorsed.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Riding a Bicycle Isnąt Protected Expression for First Amendment Purposes John White Techniques 39 August 21st 13 03:35 AM
Off Topic - Protected Bike Lanes JR Namida Techniques 24 January 25th 13 07:55 AM
Cervelo et al. not to be protected by Canada Sandy Techniques 4 August 14th 06 01:11 AM
Eggs protected from breakage by the use of 'polystyrene helmet'. Just zis Guy, you know? UK 60 July 13th 04 01:59 PM
New Sub-species of Stealth Cyclist Mark Thompson UK 64 December 8th 03 10:02 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2017 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.