speedcam.co.uk — Got a speed camera in your neighborhood?. Apparently, Britons are fed up with the government spying on them and raising revenue by snapping their picture speeding down the highway. So a large number of these devices have been destroyed and the pictures tell the whole story...
Jun 9, 2006 View in Crawl 4
bestenemyJun 9, 2006
How many diggs does it take to destroy a camera? So far digging's been good for nothing but taking websites offline.
noozehoundJun 9, 2006
A lot of this discussion is short of more up to date information. In the UK the Police take the payments directly, no third party. Last tax year, a number of forces or services as there are now known, made obscene amounts from speed cameras and even that didn't embarrass them.The developments in the cameras has been switches to average speed cameras, which don't even flash to warn you you've been busted. Spaced apart they clock you passing, calculate the average speed and if it's above the posted, they fine you and put points on your license. 12 and your banned, 3 points per ticket.Due to the cameras taking pictures of the car from the rear, some drivers have denied being in the vehicle and passed the points and fine off onto a willing recipient, e,g partner or friend with no or fewer points. To combat this, the authorities are 'doubling-up' the cameras so one will snap the back and the other will snap the driver to avoid the possible avoidance.We don't just have static gatsos. The b*stards set portable cameras up, hidden by bushes - usually where a faster road drops down to a slower road. Rarely, if ever, are these at hazards or black-spots, generally it is an easy method of increasing conviction rates or to cover overtime bills for the police. They also hide them in the back of vans parked alongside the road. A red triangular sign will warn of cameras in the area all year round. Naturally, as you don't see any cameras you ignore it after a while - this is what they rely on to catch a good number when they send out the van to bust as many as possible - No flash, no idea, 'til a letter form a constabulary drops onto the mat.This week one organization (WHO) have announced that 500 children a day throughout the world are killed on the roads. Wherever you are, I would suggest you will get the chance to burn one of your very own before very long. Incidentally, this things generate so much cash, that the cost of replacing them is more than covered. One camera that the bottom was hidden in a dip at the bottom of a hill on the very edge of the Thames Valley (major-league b*st*rds) police jurisdiction. It was repeatedly burnt out, say five or six times, but repaired every time. After the last time, they stopped repairing it - they now station a camera-equipped police van with operator next to the burnt out gatso - every single day.We accept that in London we are on security cameras at least seven times a day. That's 'big brother' - speed cameras are just revenue generation devices.We're generally ten years behind the US in most things. Sorry guys, but I think you'll only be seeing more of the wretched devices.
mydiggnameJun 9, 2006
That youtube video was AWESOME. I love the whole concept. Way to go. We need more of this kind of civil action to get the people who just talk about problems to actually get up and do something. Way to go guys.
jessecrouchJun 9, 2006
"Destroying them solves nothing."I wholeheartedly and respectfully disagree. Destroying these is a form of protest, one that these citizens believe is the most effective way of dealing with the situation. It can hardly be argued that they are not being effective - not only are they spreading a message, but they're remedying the situation at the same time.Yes sure government can fight back, install more cameras, do this and that.. whether or not taxpayers are paying for their replacement is irrelevant - these folks are fighting against an oppressive government in the best way they know possible. They've certainly been more successful than the damn petition drives we have every minute for every cause in this country.One could liken this to alcohol prohibition in the United States. We had an amendment for it.. organized crime evolved as a result of prohibition.. government saw that no matter what they did it couldn't work unless they instituted a complete police state. Prohibition repealed.
skater2968Jun 9, 2006
I see no mention of 40%. I will concede that they do cause more accidents though how many more vs. the unfigurable number of how many they present is undetermined.
lexisnexisJun 10, 2006
Fine, you can have the guns, but I'll need the bullets please. If all you want is to defend your home and your family from crackheads, you should either move or invest in some air tasers, pepper spray, or rubber bullets. There is no reason why you should have to use lethal force on some kid jacking your TV. You are far more likely to kill an innocent than a terrorist.We have to pick and chose our freedoms. Obviously some people want the freedom to make love to young boys, or drive on the wrong side of the road, or the freedom to carry inherently dangerous killing tools.Don't hide behind the second amendment either, that was written 200 years ago when circumstances were VERY different. The amendment should not be looked at as set in stone, that's why it's called an AMENDMENT, we can alter them for the better.You are the kind of whackjob that you're defending yourself from. I don't trust you with a gun, because with a gun you have the power to end peoples lives. Don't bring cars into the subject, cars are designed for transportation, guns are MEANT for killing.So you want to keep your gun because criminals won't turn theirs in? That makes as much sense as not voting because your vote "wont make a difference". The fact is that if guns were illegal they would be much harder to obtain, their prices would skyrocket, and penalties for carrying would be harsher, resulting in a lot more thugs in jail before they have a chance to kill any more people.I parroted you because you don't understand the left wing's point of view. You admitted that guns are powerless against our government but you still want them. I know you don't want to take back our country, but the left does, and here is where you are fuzzy in your thoughts. The left-wing doesn't want guns, we would rather use words and the judicial system to renovate our inefficient and awkward government. Our forefathers set up our government to be adaptable, but somewhere along the lines the constitution became as unchangeable as the 10 commandments.I hope that clarified my point of view for you.
williamdyerJun 14, 2006
Think flashboca might be a mall cop? Those green lightbars on an economy car just scream "dickless."
williamdyerJun 16, 2006
Show me where the government is permitted to confer the priviledge of driving. Are there any other privileges the government can confer?You have it backward: In the U.S., any power not explicitly granted to the government is reserved to the states or to the people. That whole "driving is a priviledge" thing is a lie, and any government official spouting such a line has no idea of the basics of the Constitution. They out to be fired for massive stupidity.