speed cameras on A149

[w44nty]

At least we have something in common Stowager

I worked for the GPO (Mail) which became Royal Mail,I can remember 1 of my early duties was messenger boy at the telephones in St Giles.

I am just a poor Royal Mail pensioner now so I have to watch my pennies

There were 240 to the £ then now its only 100

And also to keep the thread title going

No speed cameras either

[senator]

90% of wealth still resides with 10% of the population.

An £80 speeding fine means nothing to the bloke in the £100k Ferrari but a lot more to the bloke in his 10 year old Fiesta.

Make the speeding fine related to earnings then?

Great idea but then what about the loaf of bread, costs me a little, Alan Sugar next to nothing and the single Mom with 3 kids a fortune. Should that be priced earnings related too?

Things are the same now as they were then and will always be. Employers do not put everything they have on the line to set up their business, work 18 hour days 7 days a week, put up with the myriad of laws and red tape to employ people (who think they should enjoy the same privileges for clocking on at 8, off at 5 and then forgetting about the place till 8 the next day), purely to provide more money in the pockets of the people that work for them.

If people nowadays want the riches then they are there for the picking, 50 years ago that could not be said to be the case. Be careful though it is a dangerous tree to climb.

In the mean time the Government will continue to print more money than it has and as such will devalue the pound year on year, thanks to this wages will go up but so too will the cost of everything else.

Yes things get cheaper with economy's of scale in production but think back to what the average person had 50 years ago and you will see that there has been an awful lot of progress, making life's luxuries more affordable, whether that makes life better is debatable.

People will always live up to what they can afford (or borrow), the more things you can afford the more things you have to maintain and the more cost is involved.

Is petrol to expensive? too right it is.

Does speed kill? ask a pilot.

Sorry, funny mood this morning.

[Baz]

Hiya Senator,

Funny mood or not, I'm entirely in agreement with you, seems totally correct to me. All I can rely on now, is to win the lottery to become one of the 90%. Dreams eh.

Baz

[Brian]

Those Average Speed Cameras !!!!

I had to pop over to Richardsons today.

I had the "I had better drive at 40mph through the 50mph zone" driver infront of me.

very frustrating.

[Guest DAYTONA-BILL]

Now that`s just going back to page 1 of this thread Brian . But in truth, i had exactly the same thing on Sunday. It usually takes me 20 minutes to drive to my archery club shooting field, but this time, i got stuck behind somebody who had to drive at 20 in a 30, and 35 in a 60. Once he (or she?) turned off, i got going, and not only had to put up with someone pulling out in front of me, but once they were out, they had to almost stop at every bend, drive at less than 20 in a 40, and totally forgot what indicators are for. That is very inconsiderate driving, and in a test, they WOULD fail due to NOT making proper progress. And that is something speed cameras will NEVER pick up.

[Guest]

Call me argumentative ( ), but people that drive excessively slowly are a separate issue to average speed cameras, surely ?

Ok, so some people seem intimidated by them and drive with a "safety margin", but most "slow" drivers go slowly everywhere, not just past cameras.

Certainly, the new speed cameras will "NEVER pick them up", but that's a separate problem.

What those average speed cameras have already done, is stop any fatalities so far.

[Guest DAYTONA-BILL]

Hi Strowager, i DO agree that average speed cameras are a much better idea for restricting speed, and they DO slow traffic down. My pet hate is the static cameras, as they do NOTHING to improve road safety, and have even been proved to INCREASE the number of accidents due to people slamming on their brakes when there`s no need to do so. You will always have a safe margin of 10% over the limit, that is a requirement by law, so why do people slam on their breaks to go through at 5-10 mph below the limit?. All that sometimes does is cause accidents behind. As i said before, average speed cameras do their job well, but thy can NEVER pick up unroadworthy vehicals, and vehicals driven by people who are unlicensed, drunk, or under the influence of drugs etc etc, whereas regular ploice patrols would be able to do exactly that, and very effectively to.

[Guest]

I'd never disagree that more Police patrols would be the only way to deter the wider range of motoring offences.

It's not an option though, and never will be. The cost of manpower forces the use of automation wherever possible.

Realistically, there's nothing any of us can do that will change that now.

So the choice is speed cameras or nothing, not speed cameras or more police patrols.

[C.Ricko]

I noticed a sign near cats common today saying ..

SPEED CAMERAS NOW OPERATIONAL

is this new or already been said??

I have not seen it before

[Brian]

I saw those signs as well,