Safe Speed Forums

Pages 26 and 27 apparently. Experiences of people fighting LTI2020 problems.

I need a scan quick. Anyone?

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

No-one?

It's lunchtime, so I'll get a copy now

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Paul,

Do you have these yet. They are A3 size so not easy to scan. I've taken a photo of both pages and they are quite readable. If you want them I can email them. Only thing is there 4mb.

Edited: I've sent them anyway.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

Thanks coming in right now.

I do still need a good quality scan, because this is a permanent and important item that will be published to the main web site.

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

It’s an interesting read.

Two people have picked up on the aspect of emitted power, but I can tell you that is not a problem. These units have been accepted to be eye safe by several orders of magnitude, even when viewed close up or through a telescope. It makes sense considering the short duration of the pulses.

Brian Rigg (‘Rigg’ who happens to be a lorry driver!) is wrong about the 10% over-speed being acceptable in law. Any speed above the indicated limit is illegal (absolute offence). If it can be proven that a vehicle was at 30.1 in a 30 limit, the driver can be prosecuted as normal.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Smeggy

Did you read about our Mr Brunstrom on page 33 he’s been wasting public money again. He don’t seem to be having a good time at the moment.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

A colleague has the Mail and has bequeathed it to me. I will happily scan the article and drop it here, but it will be later tonight I'm afraid.

Paul,

Will these do? I don't have any image enhancing software on this machine

http://www.geocities.com/supraman2954/1.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/supraman2954/2.jpg

right click and save as

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

In an emergency only. Thanks for the effort. If I resized those (as I need to for web publication) there's not enough resolution in the text for it to remain readable in web page sizes.

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

I see.
One could split the pictures up into more sizable chunks, or convert them to one (or two) continuous columns. I could do that if needed, but not right now.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Unless he's the guy suffering from diabetes, I can't see it.
The only article on that page is about John Travolta. I saw nothing else related when I quickly scanned the paper (apart from the new sentencing structure for DbCD)

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

It's really a question of starting with sufficient resolution. I run 200 dpi scans with a dot screen filter, adjust brightness and contrast to saturate out the background to white, and then resize to fit web pages. Scans at 200dpi are always good enough in the real world I think. It's also far better to avoid JPGing before adjustments because JPGing causes artifacts.

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

Mr Brunstrom.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

The Brunstrom story is old news....

BBC Link, Jan. 2005

Daily Post

Obviously someone in the media is making sure we don't forget why it is that loonie Brunstrom is 'stepping down'.

How strange - my paper has the same two adverts on the same page, but a completely different story

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

BBC Link, Jan. 2005

Cheers for that, didn't know until I seen it in today’s paper.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

It must depend on what area you purchase from, this was in a paper purchased in Oxfordshire.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

I had a brief look in Sainsbury's earlier. There didn't seem to be anything of immediate interest, apart from the lorry driver given a ticket instead of the van, but if he accepted it and paid up then it's his own fault. Also a letter from someboy complaining on the basis of being ticketed at 57mph, that is *at* the threshold for the ACPO as far as I am aware, not below it!

Gareth

Home - and scanning. Mine doesn't have Brunstrom in it either.

You realise that no matter how many newspaper articles are written or TV programs are made on this subject the Government CANNOT back down on speed guns and admit there is reasonable doubt and thus the previously guilty are innocent. They will do everything they can to rubbish the evidence, discredit people etc. as the cost and difficulty of the claims they would receive would be beyond comprehension.

They will argue that all the 172s completed are admissions of guilt instead of a sigh of resignation as you send your £60 to avoid further trouble.

Only people who go to court will have any chance of redress.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.