Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Fri Jun 05, 2026 18:12

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 01:19 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Now this might be very interesting.

A Gatso camera flashed and photographed an oncoming vehicle (it flashed in my face, actually, which isn't very clever). But I reckon there's a good chance that I'm in the shot.

Remember the surveillance commissioner's warning about unauthorised surveillance and the RIP act? The RIP Act requires surveillance to be specifically authorised. It was said that it makes SPECS and ANPR illegal.

It was argued that this problem of unauthorised surveillance didn't catch speed cameras because they photographed 'crimes'. But I wasn't committing a crime.

Do we have them? Again? Another fudgement required?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 09:19 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 09:16
Posts: 3655
Are you going to ask for the photo?

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 09:41 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Gizmo wrote:
Are you going to ask for the photo?


I certainly will if we think it helps. But I'd love to get a better grip on the implications first.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 10:47 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:01
Posts: 4815
Location: Essex
I hope you weren't speeding... ;-)

Seriously - could it have thought you were an HGV as a result of your van size - and would that be what triggered it, or was there one coming toward you that fired it and you were in the wrong place at the wrong time..?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 10:51 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 09:01
Posts: 1548
Roger wrote:
I hope you weren't speeding... ;-)

Even if Paul were exceeding the posted limit, there wouldn't be any evidence to prove the distance travelled as the distance markers are placed after the Gatso, not before it.

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 12:02 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 18:41
Posts: 893
SafeSpeed wrote:
A Gatso camera flashed and photographed an oncoming vehicle (it flashed in my face, actually, which isn't very clever). But I reckon there's a good chance that I'm in the shot.

FWIW, I had the same problem after dark on the A38 at Exeter some years ago. The Gatso was mounted on the (narrow) central reservation and went off in response to a motorist travelling in the opposite direction. The problem was that I was close enough to get two flashes at eye level with the second from less than ten feet. I was blinded for several seconds and only good luck (and I suspect a helping hand from my fellow motorists who kept out of my way) prevented a crunch. When my sight returned, I was in the next lane over! Thankfully, they've relocated that camera to the nearside of the downhill carriageway.

Notwithstanding other considerations, it should be forbidden to install flash photography devices in central reservations and islands, or any other location where an oncoming driver might get a faceful. Those things are at exactly the right height to blind drivers of goods vehicles, buses, etc.

_________________
Will


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 12:11 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2005 00:45
Posts: 1016
Location: Mighty Tamworth
willcove wrote:
FWIW, I had the same problem after dark on the A38 at Exeter some years ago. The Gatso was mounted on the (narrow) central reservation and went off in response to a motorist travelling in the opposite direction. The problem was that I was close enough to get two flashes at eye level with the second from less than ten feet. I was blinded for several seconds and only good luck (and I suspect a helping hand from my fellow motorists who kept out of my way) prevented a crunch. When my sight returned, I was in the next lane over!


This is one of the many things that annoy me about Gatsos. How can they be considered safe when they can flash in motorists faces.I find it difficult to belive they did not consider this clearly dangerous side effect.

_________________
Oct 11 Birmingham Half Marathon. I am running for the British Heart Foundation.
http://www.justgiving.com/Rob-Taylor


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 12:18 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 09:01
Posts: 1548
ree.t wrote:
This is one of the many things that annoy me about Gatsos. How can they be considered safe when they can flash in motorists faces.I find it difficult to belive they did not consider this clearly dangerous side effect.

I'm surprised the insurance scammers haven't latched on to it TBH.

Why wait for a suitable 'victim' to rear end you when you can get one of your mates to trigger a Gatso in your face at night?

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 13:21 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 21:19
Posts: 1059
You should see those "Radar Automatiques" in France. All of them are forward facing and to make it worse, are at eye level. I'd imagine the flash from one of those is horrendous at night.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 15:06 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2004 23:02
Posts: 67
Slightly off-topic, but it should be possible to contrive a set of circumstances in which the whole speed camera process was discredited.

For example parking a vehicle precisely on the secondary check lines for a truvelo camera and waiting for a moving vehicle to trigger the flash. . . With the apparently lax checking procedures there would be a good chance of getting a NIP. Independent evidence, for example video evidence of the alleged offence would demonstrate the actual circumstances.

If this were to happen a few times over a month, the national press would become very interested.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 21:02 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 14:00
Posts: 1271
Location: Near Telford, UK / Barcelona, Spain
mpaton2004 wrote:
You should see those "Radar Automatiques" in France. All of them are forward facing and to make it worse, are at eye level. I'd imagine the flash from one of those is horrendous at night.

It is, I triggered one that was sited in a good revenue-spot a couple of years ago... They're very bright and completely wreck your night-vision for some considerable while. It's been moved, so I guess it might have caused a lot more problems than it "prevented".

_________________
"Politicians are the same the world over... We build bridges where there aren't any rivers." - Nikita Kruschev


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 21:10 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9268
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
Again slightly O/T -but the West Mids area are a few quid short , on night pings - someone had "modified " one camera with card over the flash - gone now -thought it was an excellent modification.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 19:07 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 16:37
Posts: 265
botach wrote:
Again slightly O/T -but the West Mids area are a few quid short , on night pings - someone had "modified " one camera with card over the flash - gone now -thought it was an excellent modification.


Yep, because it puts the whole thing outside its type approval and therefore invalidates its use for enforcement.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 01:02 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 18:33
Posts: 24
SafeSpeed wrote:
Now this might be very interesting.

A Gatso camera flashed and photographed an oncoming vehicle (it flashed in my face, actually, which isn't very clever). But I reckon there's a good chance that I'm in the shot.

Remember the surveillance commissioner's warning about unauthorised surveillance and the RIP act? The RIP Act requires surveillance to be specifically authorised. It was said that it makes SPECS and ANPR illegal.

It was argued that this problem of unauthorised surveillance didn't catch speed cameras because they photographed 'crimes'. But I wasn't committing a crime.

Do we have them? Again? Another fudgement required?


The SPECS software is supposed to automatically delete data files of non-offenders as soon as the vehicle speed has been calculated. However I did say "supposed". ANPR is another story though.

Information Commissioner Richard Thomas certainly appears to speak for the people. Unfortunately as this article reveals, when push comes to shove, our mendacious shower of a government will pull out all the stops to protect its evil schemes.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2006 22:11 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9268
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
Again , O/T, but shows how things work - can't remember the source --aparently persons voluntary giving DNA samples for elimination have had their DNA added to a register despite assurances that once eliminated the sample /etc would be deleted .


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 02:33 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 23:56
Posts: 252
Location: Manchester
Theres a GATSO near me that I used to drive through in my Tiv at warp speed - the wrong way.

I always made it flash. It may be urban legend but I was always led to believe that such behaviour made it likely the camera was a cheap fake?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:24 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 21:19
Posts: 1059
Parrot of Doom wrote:
Theres a GATSO near me that I used to drive through in my Tiv at warp speed - the wrong way.

I always made it flash. It may be urban legend but I was always led to believe that such behaviour made it likely the camera was a cheap fake?


Are you even interested in road safety?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:58 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
mpaton2004 wrote:
Parrot of Doom wrote:
Theres a GATSO near me that I used to drive through in my Tiv at warp speed - the wrong way.

I always made it flash. It may be urban legend but I was always led to believe that such behaviour made it likely the camera was a cheap fake?


Are you even interested in road safety?


Do you think you can measure safe driving in miles per hour?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 16:22 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 01:51
Posts: 329
SafeSpeed wrote:
mpaton2004 wrote:
Parrot of Doom wrote:
Theres a GATSO near me that I used to drive through in my Tiv at warp speed - the wrong way.

I always made it flash. It may be urban legend but I was always led to believe that such behaviour made it likely the camera was a cheap fake?


Are you even interested in road safety?


Do you think you can measure safe driving in miles per hour?


Warp speed sounds excessive. Maybe "a safe speed at that time during the day" would sound right.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 17:18 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9268
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
[quote="SafeSpeed

Do you think you can measure safe driving in miles per hour?[/quote]


Is that why MPs are trying to change MPH to KPH - :roll:


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 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 : 0.050s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]