We all know how to tell when a politician is lying: their lips are moving.
Here's one labial movement that caught my eye, this morning . . .
The Government is considering new point-to-point cameras in its battle to reduce the road toll.
13 May 2018
Anyone who believes that is naive, stupid or a gummint stooge.
Speed cameras are about government revenue, plain and simple.
Speed cameras are activated by vehicles exceeding a speed that's set inside the speed camera box. 50 or 100 kph being the most common settings.
I'm asking other forumites to contribute to and expand the list I've started. My intention is to demonstrate that speed cameras can only be revenue generating tools by virtue of the number of dangerous aspects of vehicle usage which speed cameras cannot detect.
Now, imagine a motor car travelling along a suburban road @ 50kph, past one of the said cash cameras. At that speed, it will not be 'snapped' by the speed camera. Below are a list of law-breaking things - all of which can lead to fatalities - that could be occurring that the speed camera cannot detect:
It was being driven by an unlicenced driver
It was being driven by an drunk driver
It was being driven by an driver whose licence is suspended
It was being driven by an driver whose licence has expired
It was being driven by a driver under the influence of drugs
The driver was a learner who had 1 mg of alcohol in her blood (not sure about that one)
It was a vehicle that was being driven dangerously
It was a vehicle that was being driven by a driver using a cell phone
It was a vehicle that was being driven without due care and attention
It was a vehicle that did not have a current warrant of fitness
It was a vehicle that did not have a current vehicle licence
It was a vehicle that had bald tyres
It was a vehicle that had more occupants than seat belts
It was a vehicle that had a driver or passenger[s] not wearing seat belts
It was a vehicle towing a trailer that did not have a current warrant of fitness
It was a vehicle towing a trailer that was not currently registered
It was a vehicle towing a trailer that had an over-weight, unsecured, over-length or unsafe load
I suspect there is a speeding limit at which point the police would (there and then) either detain the driver and impound the vehicle, or both. Say, 50kph over the posted speed limit. Anyone know about that?
Later, I'll consider a further list (or extension) that covers cameras set to 100kph on the open road.
Here's one labial movement that caught my eye, this morning . . .
The Government is considering new point-to-point cameras in its battle to reduce the road toll.
13 May 2018
Originally posted by Stuff
Speed cameras are about government revenue, plain and simple.
Speed cameras are activated by vehicles exceeding a speed that's set inside the speed camera box. 50 or 100 kph being the most common settings.
I'm asking other forumites to contribute to and expand the list I've started. My intention is to demonstrate that speed cameras can only be revenue generating tools by virtue of the number of dangerous aspects of vehicle usage which speed cameras cannot detect.
Now, imagine a motor car travelling along a suburban road @ 50kph, past one of the said cash cameras. At that speed, it will not be 'snapped' by the speed camera. Below are a list of law-breaking things - all of which can lead to fatalities - that could be occurring that the speed camera cannot detect:
It was being driven by an unlicenced driver
It was being driven by an drunk driver
It was being driven by an driver whose licence is suspended
It was being driven by an driver whose licence has expired
It was being driven by a driver under the influence of drugs
The driver was a learner who had 1 mg of alcohol in her blood (not sure about that one)
It was a vehicle that was being driven dangerously
It was a vehicle that was being driven by a driver using a cell phone
It was a vehicle that was being driven without due care and attention
It was a vehicle that did not have a current warrant of fitness
It was a vehicle that did not have a current vehicle licence
It was a vehicle that had bald tyres
It was a vehicle that had more occupants than seat belts
It was a vehicle that had a driver or passenger[s] not wearing seat belts
It was a vehicle towing a trailer that did not have a current warrant of fitness
It was a vehicle towing a trailer that was not currently registered
It was a vehicle towing a trailer that had an over-weight, unsecured, over-length or unsafe load
I suspect there is a speeding limit at which point the police would (there and then) either detain the driver and impound the vehicle, or both. Say, 50kph over the posted speed limit. Anyone know about that?
Later, I'll consider a further list (or extension) that covers cameras set to 100kph on the open road.
Comment