Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Thu Oct 09, 2025 00:43

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Apr 04, 2011 22:36 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7355
Location: Highlands
Scotsman here
Sctosman CHRIS MARSHALL wrote:
Anger at 'sneaky' camera changes
Published Date: 04 April 2011 By CHRIS MARSHALL Transport Reporter

POLICE have been accused of "sneaky" tactics after converting cameras intended to catch drivers jumping red lights into speed traps.
• Traffic light cameras like this one in Clerk Street can now catch speeders

It has emerged a number of red light cameras across the Capital have been upgraded to catch anyone speeding through a green light, but the change has never been announced.
Police today defended their decision not to tell drivers that the technology had been upgraded, but motoring groups have blasted the move.
Sergeant Allan Hoad, of the Lothian and Borders Safety Camera Partnership, said work to upgrade the cameras began some time ago.
He said: "We've been going through a phased upgrade for about 18 months now, moving with the times as new technology becomes available.
"We've gone digital and the company we've chosen to supply the product have offered it as a red light camera when the red light is on and as a safety camera when it's not.
"It's still a camera enforcing safety at a junction.
"We've not had any publicity because it's an enhancement of what's been there before. It's a red light junction so people should be aware anyway.
• Was it 'sneaky' of police to upgrade red light cameras to catch speeding drivers too? Vote here
"There's no rationale or guidance to have signage. There are a great many signs already advising drivers of safety cameras. If you're not speeding, there's nothing to worry about."
There are currently 18 red light cameras across the city including those on Leith Walk, London Road, Newington Road, Clerk Street and Gorgie Road.
Work is under way to convert all the cameras.
According to the law, all safety cameras must have a camera information sign warning drivers in advance, but police said there was no requirement to advertise the location of the speed cameras in this case because the technology was simply "an upgrade" of existing red light sites.

Roger Lawson, a spokesman for the Association of British Drivers, said the police had a duty to advertise the speed cameras, otherwise the technology was "pointless".
He said: "We object to all speed cameras because they're not effective, but clearly it's pointless having a device that just catches people if it's not deterring them. It's absolutely sneaky if it's not clear that there's a new deterrent."
It is not clear how many fines have been handed out as a result of the new cameras, but police confirmed anyone caught would face three penalty points and a £60 fine.

Raymond Davidson, secretary of the Edinburgh Taxi Association, said it was "grossly unfair" that police had not alerted motorists.
He said: "I think they need to be telling everyone where these cameras are. It looks fairly obvious what's behind it - because motorists are obeying the red light cameras."
To excuse no signage due to an 'upgrade' when it is clearly a new facility it awful. If they want to obtain any public respect then thi sis not the way to go about it.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 07:21 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
It isn't usual for the police to announce in advance what measures that they are taking to catch criminals. Why should motorists expect special treatment?

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 08:15 
Offline
Camera Partnership Staff
Camera Partnership Staff
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 19:48
Posts: 1995
dcbwhaley wrote:
It isn't usual for the police to announce in advance what measures that they are taking to catch criminals. Why should motorists expect special treatment?


you are wrong there all police drug busts are advertised in advance, all other intel is double checked with the suspect to confirm the facts are right before actioning,

but TBH the first time i saw a bright yellow box 25 ft up in the air monitoring a junction and looking at the freshly painted markers on the floor i was total and utterly confused

http://www.speedcam.co.uk/g311.jpg

_________________
now retired


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 12:02 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
Quote:
Roger Lawson, a spokesman for the Association of British Drivers, said the police had a duty to advertise the speed cameras, otherwise the technology was "pointless".


Eh, driver speeds past camera, get's three points on license, i.e. a punishment for breaking the law which hopefully makes them think twice about breaking that law again. If they do it too many times within a short space of time their license is revoked.

How is that "pointless" Mr Lawson?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 12:02 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6737
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
dcbwhaley wrote:
It isn't usual for the police to announce in advance what measures that they are taking to catch criminals. Why should motorists expect special treatment?

Depends whether the objective is deterrence or revenue maximisation, of course.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 12:50 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
I thought you needed two means of verification; the camera speed indication of course and either a picture of you showing the rate at which you pass the lines on the road or a police officer’s judgement?

I’m assuming there are no new speed lines across the road, or an officer perched in a nearby tree, so since when has a scamera on its own been enough to issue a NIP? :?

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 12:55 
Offline
Camera Partnership Staff
Camera Partnership Staff
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 19:48
Posts: 1995
Big Tone wrote:
I thought you needed two means of verification; the camera speed indication of course and either a picture of you showing the rate at which you pass the lines on the road or a police officer’s judgement?

I’m assuming there are no new speed lines across the road, or an officer perched in a nearby tree, so since when has a scamera on its own been enough to issue a NIP? :?


hi tone

speed on green have secondary check markers as per a traditional fixed camera and loops so it alternates with the traffic light sequence

_________________
now retired


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 15:44 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
camera operator wrote:
Big Tone wrote:
I thought you needed two means of verification; the camera speed indication of course and either a picture of you showing the rate at which you pass the lines on the road or a police officer’s judgement?

I’m assuming there are no new speed lines across the road, or an officer perched in a nearby tree, so since when has a scamera on its own been enough to issue a NIP? :?

hi tone

speed on green have secondary check markers as per a traditional fixed camera and loops so it alternates with the traffic light sequence
Maybe I’m being a bit thick here but I don’t understand; can you expand on that please CO? What is the second means of evidence if there’s no officer or calibrated lines across the road where two pictures have been taken?

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 16:31 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
PeterE wrote:
dcbwhaley wrote:
It isn't usual for the police to announce in advance what measures that they are taking to catch criminals. Why should motorists expect special treatment?

Depends whether the objective is deterrence or revenue maximisation, of course.



Good way to cut revenue to a big fat zero tomorrow PeterE, can you guess what it is?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 16:38 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
weepej wrote:
PeterE wrote:
dcbwhaley wrote:
It isn't usual for the police to announce in advance what measures that they are taking to catch criminals. Why should motorists expect special treatment?

Depends whether the objective is deterrence or revenue maximisation, of course.


Good way to cut revenue to a big fat zero tomorrow PeterE, can you guess what it is?
And I know a good way to raise revenue to an even bigger fat earner Weepej, can you guess what it is?

(Sorry to butt-in Peter).

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 16:45 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685
SafeSpeedv2 wrote:
Scotsman here
Sctosman CHRIS MARSHALL wrote:
Anger at 'sneaky' camera changes
Published Date: 04 April 2011 By CHRIS MARSHALL Transport Reporter

POLICE have been accused of "sneaky" tactics after converting cameras intended to catch drivers jumping red lights into speed traps.
• Traffic light cameras like this one in Clerk Street can now catch speeders

It has emerged a number of red light cameras across the Capital have been upgraded to catch anyone speeding through a green light, but the change has never been announced.
Police today defended their decision not to tell drivers that the technology had been upgraded, but motoring groups have blasted the move.
Sergeant Allan Hoad, of the Lothian and Borders Safety Camera Partnership, said work to upgrade the cameras began some time ago.
He said: "We've been going through a phased upgrade for about 18 months now, moving with the times as new technology becomes available.
"We've gone digital and the company we've chosen to supply the product have offered it as a red light camera when the red light is on and as a safety camera when it's not.
"It's still a camera enforcing safety at a junction.
"We've not had any publicity because it's an enhancement of what's been there before. It's a red light junction so people should be aware anyway.
• Was it 'sneaky' of police to upgrade red light cameras to catch speeding drivers too? Vote here
"There's no rationale or guidance to have signage. There are a great many signs already advising drivers of safety cameras. If you're not speeding, there's nothing to worry about."
There are currently 18 red light cameras across the city including those on Leith Walk, London Road, Newington Road, Clerk Street and Gorgie Road.
Work is under way to convert all the cameras.
According to the law, all safety cameras must have a camera information sign warning drivers in advance, but police said there was no requirement to advertise the location of the speed cameras in this case because the technology was simply "an upgrade" of existing red light sites.

Roger Lawson, a spokesman for the Association of British Drivers, said the police had a duty to advertise the speed cameras, otherwise the technology was "pointless".
He said: "We object to all speed cameras because they're not effective, but clearly it's pointless having a device that just catches people if it's not deterring them. It's absolutely sneaky if it's not clear that there's a new deterrent."
It is not clear how many fines have been handed out as a result of the new cameras, but police confirmed anyone caught would face three penalty points and a £60 fine.

Raymond Davidson, secretary of the Edinburgh Taxi Association, said it was "grossly unfair" that police had not alerted motorists.
He said: "I think they need to be telling everyone where these cameras are. It looks fairly obvious what's behind it - because motorists are obeying the red light cameras."
To excuse no signage due to an 'upgrade' when it is clearly a new facility it awful. If they want to obtain any public respect then thi sis not the way to go about it.


There is no law and never has been that requires drivers to be warned in advance of a camera.

The police have no duty to advertise that a speed camera is in use. if police advertised that speed cameras were in use in any place at any time that would make them far more effective that advertising when and where. What Mr. Lawson is campaigning for is to be told where cameras are in use and when so he knows exactly where cameras ARE NOT IN USE so he can nknow when he is safe to ignore any limits in the knowledge that they are not enforced.

Yes, it's very sneaky not telling him when he may be detected ignoring the law in the knowledge there is no enforcement.

No one is being fooled by the ABD, they are no longer relevant.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 50 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.089s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]