Every journey monitored

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/transport/article334686.ece

**** this.

 

Indeed - your average criminal will of course always have the correct (and
legible) number plate on their vehicle won't they. Not.

Still, bit of handily placed mud and you'll be anonymous - what are the odds
of being pulled after all.

 

mostly forward facing camera's so whats your problem?

 

It may come as a shock to you, but some of us on here have a car as
well as a bike.

 

but we only misbehave on our bikes surely?

 

Well, yes. Obviously. However, when I pick up my new (to me)
car tomorrow, I'm going to want to do a "what'll it do mister" run[1]

What then, eh?

[1] As I've done with every vehicle I've ever owned.

 

Dont see many cctv cameras around my neck of the woods, until I get to
the motorway..
If it stops terorists then maybe it not a bad idea, I reckon we will
all have GPS / ( or the new 'galileo' ) systems in our cars before too
many years.. when we pay per mile

S

 

get it done before the roll out of this system, or go find a runway

 

Post at the bottom, nobber.

It won't stop terrorists though, will it? They'll either a) change the
plates, b) use legit, cheap cars or c) won't care as they're on their
way to blow themselves up anyway.

a) renders the whole anti-crime thing pointless as if you've not got a
plate it can read you're anonymous.
b) means they'll hide among the law-abiding
c) means that short of searching every vehicle on every journey they'll
never be caught.

It's another tracking/logging system that'll soon be used to catch the
otherwise law-abiding into minor criminals. I forsee automatic
speeding fines for exceeding an average 70mph on the motorways between
two cameras.

 

there no need to be like that, google just posts where ever it wants
unfortunatly

SImon

 

I'm not sure what the 'official' top speed is for mine, but I'm fairly
sure
it's only about that anyway (

How is it? I guess having had a Saab previously you've settled down
with it fairly quickly?

 

Click "Show Options" above the post and then click the "Reply"
that gets displayed, rather than the "Reply" below the post.

Then you can snip-a-roo where necessary and post away.

You still have to position the cursor which, I admit, might
be a bit tricky for some.....

 

Yeah, me too and I can't put my finger on why either. Common
sense would seem to point the other way.

Good, good. It ticks all the right boxes, then.

 

unsymetrical perceived body image. In a single seater car you probably
wouldn't find it as scary.

 

By jove, I think you might have it! For me, at least.
With the bike, one minute you're pootling along, next, a bit
of nice road opens up ahead and a few seconds later you're
at eeek! mph. I tend not to do silly speeds for long periods
anyway.

In the car, it's
80.......90.......100.......110.......120.......130.......
so you appear to be going "quite fast" for longer, both in distance
and time.

 

<posts from Google>

Works fine here. But thanks for taking to the convention so quickly
without a "I'll post where I want strop".

 

I've always found it the other way round... although maybe that's not
true. Going flat out on the gixxer is certainly more scary than going
flat out in any car I've driven, but that's prolly just because it's
at ~180mph instead of ~140.

I reckon it's more to do with the vehicle's capability. Doing 140 on a
bike built for >180 is a doddle - doing it on a bike built for 130 is
as scary as ****.

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ GSX-R1000K3
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2
`\|/`
`

 

We need new, fast cars!
Why?
If we have them, the terrorists won't!

 

Yep. They won't be happy until they've crimilised such a large
percentage that policing by consent is seriously undermined, at least
as far as the roads are concerned. Ultimately they risk creating a
bigger problem the the one they claim to be trying to solve.

Jim

 

How many drinks are we allowed to buy a terrorist?