Speed Camera Detectors to be Banned!

End of the road for motorists who use in-car technology to beat
speed cameras
By Ben Webster

DEVICES which detect or jam speed cameras are to be banned
because of concerns that drivers are exploiting them to drive
over the speed limit without fear of being caught.
More than 100,000 drivers have installed the devices and dozens
of companies supply them. The market is growing rapidly in
response to the huge rise in speed camera penalties.

Two million tickets were issued last year and police expect to
hand out three million this year.

The Government plans to include the ban in a forthcoming road
safety Bill. The penalty for carrying a device in a vehicle has
yet to be determined but the maximum fine is likely to be £1,000
and drivers will also have up to six points added to their
licences.

A Department for Transport document outlining the proposed ban
states that it will "prohibit the carriage of devices that either
actively inhibit the proper function of a speed camera or detect
the presence of functioning speed cameras (as opposed to dummy
housings)".

Devices that use satellite-positioning systems to give drivers
early warning of a speed camera will remain legal.

Ministers believe there is no problem with drivers simply being
reminded of an approaching camera, which should be highly visible
anyway under rules introduced two years ago.

The ban will instead focus on devices which tell drivers whether
or not a yellow speed camera housing contains a live camera.

Full story...
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1180717,00.html

So, how long before this new ban extends to all and any detection
equipment? Why oh why do we not support the Durham Chief
Constable nationally, and demand the death of the GATSO ?

Mike.

 

What equipment would that be then?

You've got two free camera detectors built into your head you know.

 

Following up to Mike

the only ones that are much use.

 

Does that include a spare tyre and some petrol?

 

Not true.. I've seen the one that detects "live" GATSO's and it
works. It also finds forward facing cameras in plenty of time to
save lives and needless accidents. ie:

"Accident casualties at 743 camera locations have increased
rather than decreased, a new study shows"

 

Following up to dwb

that will tell you about the tiny digital boxes in the Limehouse
tunnel, the green painted one in Reigate at night, the ones
behind road signs? The SPECS at M1/M25 junction?

 

I'm amazed at the following views expressed by the RAC. I thought they were a responsible body:-

"But the RAC Foundation said that detectors were a useful tool for high mileage drivers who would
risk being sacked if they lost their licences after getting four speed camera penalties."

"Edmund King, the foundation’s director, said: “Some fleet drivers fit these devices for quite
legitimate reasons. “When driving 40,000 miles per year it is relatively easy to stray above certain
speed limits, so these devices act as a reminder to slow down."

It doesn't seem to have occurred to the RAC that drivers (whether driving on business or otherwise)
should always be driving within the speed limits. Does the RAC think that drivers are incapable of
knowing how fast they are driving?

Perhaps what is really needed to solve the speed problem, is a GPS linked speed governor built into
the "brain" (ie. computer) in each modern car. This system would know the car's position at all
times, and from a database of which speed limits apply where would simply restrict the car's speed
(limiting engoing power, perhaps even applying brakes) to keep the car within the legal speed limit
at all times.

This device would have the added advantage of not being a "big brother" system. It wouldn't report
the car's position to anyone, merely use it to apply the correct speed limit.

 

They're multi-talented. As well as detecting speed cameras they can
also read road signs and check speedometers too.

Brian

 

Considered doing the speed limit through those bits?

 

Following up to dwb

I do, because I know the cameras are there, think about it.

If I didn't know I might come off the M25 at Reigate and not be
down to 40 for the camera behind the road sign or down to 30 for
the green painted one long before you get to the town centre.

 

Very good, however I think you've strayed slightly from the point.

 

lol.

 

And what happens if the car behind you isn't as quick as updating/driver is
asleep/whatever when this automatic system cleverly applies the brake at
entirely the wrong moment?

Any kind of automatic car control I object to.

Common sense applied by motorists, that would be far better.

 

But *extremely* fucking unlikely. People can't even stop using handheld
mobile phones.

 

That'd work well in tunnels.

You don't think that's big brother? I think that's an unneccesary
intrusion in our lives.

Maybe you disagree, but I see that as being a fundamental shift
in law enforcement in this country. You've taken away people's ability
to break the law, rather than punishing them for breaking it
after the fact. Can you not see that this is the start of a
slippery slope?

 

OK, imagine you're on a motorway, suddenly and without indicating a mini
pulls out from a slip road, and straight accross lane 1 in front of a
truck to your left, it's now about 20 feet in front of you..

It's doing 40mph, you're doing 65.

To the right the cars are doing 80 and there's a gap you can join but
you need to accelerate to match their speed.

Easy solution, move right whilst accelerating, avoid accident, however
break speed limit.

Alternative, hit the brakes hard, collide with the mini, fill in
insurance forms

This is based on a true situation, which despite the mini driver being
at fault was avoidable. This is due to the car entirely being under
driver control..

In summary, computers cannot effectively read hazards, or drive.

 

This thread is bound to attract sarcasm; you can either join in
that, or ignore it and discuss the real issue.

 

Bwaahaahaahaaa. Nice one.

Oh, hang on, you're serious, aren't you?

^^^^^ ^^^^^^^
Oxymoron alert.

 

Except - with every car duly "chipped" .... they'd only be doing 70!

More sensible, a speed limit warning device might do just that: warn with a light/buzzer etc., but
not physically limit the car's speed.

Ultimately, with fully computerised cars, they'll just drive themselves while we all relax in the
back.

Of course, computers have their limitations LOL! I remember a Paris taxi driver using one once to
take me to an address in a one way road .... guess what? His navigation computer took him to the
wrong end so he couldn't drive down it, and he had to work out how to drive round to the other end.

 

But if you were keeping alert to everything happening around you by using
your mirror(s) the "slow" mini would have been visible for long enough for
you to anticipate its dangerous move. Mind you, keeping up concentration at
that level for any length of time is not a trivial pursuit!