Beat the Speed Cameras

[mburdge]

Did anyone see the article in The Sunday Times about Flashtec.
Just spray it on your number plate and the speed cameras can't get a picture. - Fantastic.

I don't drive much, but I have 6 points just to keep my wife on the road!!!!

I'm definitely buying some at £ 24.95 (which treats 6 plates and lasts a year.)

www.flashtec.co.uk if your interested.

 

[dsmodi]

pls anyone - if this is illegal - do let us know!

(i know on that website it say it is legal - bubt just in case)...

cheers

 

[bracke]

Did anyone see the article in The Sunday Times about Flashtec.
Just spray it on your number plate and the speed cameras can't get a picture. - Fantastic.

I don't drive much, but I have 6 points just to keep my wife on the road!!!!

I'm definitely buying some at £ 24.95 (which treats 6 plates and lasts a year.)

www.flashtec.co.uk if your interested.

Why not just drive within the speed limit ?

Regards

bracke

 

[mburdge]

I do. (ish) - But you try telling my wife to slow down or open her eyes!!!!!!!!!!

Of course DVLC will tell you it's illegal, but if they can't catch your numberplate, how will they come after you! - Catch 22 for them I fear and hope.

I love to beat the system.

 

[Directional]

this obviously wont work with the new generation of overhead SPECS camera's that read your front number plate, and then work out your average speed between this and the next camera a mile down the road - no flash, just infrared.

What does work however, is having a car that is registered to another european country. read in the Metro recently that they ran up speeding tickets, congestion charges and parking tickets with a foreign plated car none of which were pursued.

 

[mburdge]

I have been thinking about European registration. Could be a great business opportunity.
Hold customers registration at a PO address in Europe for a small admin fee.
I noted on my documents that the 'registered keeper is not necessarily the legal owner'.

So, could you change the registered keeper to Europe? (sounds too simple), or would the car need to be initially registered and plated abroad for this to work?

Hmmm.

 

[Directional]

i think they were talking about a car with a european style plate.

I dont know what the score is with submitting a non UK address for the keeper on the vehicle registration papers.

good idea though for a biz opp

 

[rossored]

One thing I know for sure -

mate of mine got nicked on a GATSO in Wales some time ago, and got the fine sent to his home address (in North London). He'd been told by a police friend of his to chuck it in the bin - so he did. And he got another reminder a few weeks later - and chucked that in the bin, too.

They never followed it up.

Apparently, if you get done miles away from home, 99% of the time those GATSOs fall under local jurisdiction, and so the local bobbies can't be bothered to send someone round to the house just for a £60 fine - so they don't bother, and write it off after three months or so.

Otherwise, make sure you're going fast enough that the camera doesn't get the second flash in in time - I hear its around 156mph. Alternatively, buy a motorbike. With no front plate, you're immune to a lot of cameras - and as a biker, I can attest to this

 

[bracke]

Dear Camera Shy Posters

Interesting to read the posts aimed at avoiding the cameras.

Do you think that speed limits are a good thing or a bad thing ?

Regards

bracke

 

[rossored]

Good question Bracke.

For most of the time, I think speed limits are a good thing.

However, the problem with our police in my view is that they do not exercise discretion.

For example - one Sunday morning at 5am (couple of years ago)I was stopped by an unmarked police car on a stretch of deserted dual carriageway (the A11, if you're interested). There were no other cars around (except him of course), the roads were dry, it was clear, straight stretch of road with visibility about 3 miles.

I was driving a bright red Ferrari F355, doing 90mph, and he nicked me and gave me 3 points and a £40 fine. Admittedly I was speeding, but some discretion would have been nice.

Personally, I thought it was a case of him being a bit of an a***, and not liking my car or the fact that I was a lot younger than him.

Now, if you go to, oh, I dont know, Canada for instance - they aren't allowed to have speed cameras in Ontario because its considered to be an infringment on their rights - which I happen to agree with.

I think the biggest problem with the so called "safety cameras" in the UK is that they are in fact nothing more than a big fat cash cow for our Police Force, and the majority of the public (including myself) resent the fact that they're littered all over the countryside in places that are not, and have never been, "blackspots".

So, yes I think speed limits are a good idea.

Speed cameras however I think are a bad idea.

 

[Directional]

“Mr Garvin explained: "I actually believe in casualty reduction and trying to make the roads safer but, having looked at the accident statistics in this area, we find that if you break down the 1,900 collisions we have each year only three per cent involve cars that are exceeding the speed limit. Just 60 accidents per year involve vehicles exceeding the speed limit.

"You then need to look at causes of these 60 accidents. Speed may be a factor in the background but the actual cause of the accident invariably is drink-driving or drug-driving. Drug-taking is becoming more of a problem. In 40 per cent of fatal road accidents in this area one or more of the people involved have drugs in their system."

Many accidents were caused by fatigue, although one of the most common causes of crashes was the failure of drivers to watch out for oncoming vehicles when turning right. "The cause of accidents is clearly something different than exceeding the speed limit and we ought to be looking at those other factors," Mr Garvin said.”

- Chief Constable of Durham, Paul Garvin, reported in The Daily Telegraph, 7th December 2003

 

[bracke]

Rossored

I understand your displeasure at being booked but as you know speed limits apply 24/7/365(366). One mans discretion is anothers accusation of acting as judge and jury.

I am also sceptical of cameras but for a different reason. How often do we see drivers slow for the camera and then speed up thereafter.If we are serious about applying speed limits should not the cameras be hidden.

If you think speed limits a good idea but cameras bad, then currently the only method of enforcement is a policeman/authorised civilian in a following car or with a portable camera which is a less efficient method.

Good question Bracke.

For most of the time, I think speed limits are a good thing.

However, the problem with our police in my view is that they do not exercise discretion.

For example - one Sunday morning at 5am (couple of years ago)I was stopped by an unmarked police car on a stretch of deserted dual carriageway (the A11, if you're interested). There were no other cars around (except him of course), the roads were dry, it was clear, straight stretch of road with visibility about 3 miles.

I was driving a bright red Ferrari F355, doing 90mph, and he nicked me and gave me 3 points and a £40 fine. Admittedly I was speeding, but some discretion would have been nice.

Personally, I thought it was a case of him being a bit of an a***, and not liking my car or the fact that I was a lot younger than him.

Now, if you go to, oh, I dont know, Canada for instance - they aren't allowed to have speed cameras in Ontario because its considered to be an infringment on their rights - which I happen to agree with.

I think the biggest problem with the so called "safety cameras" in the UK is that they are in fact nothing more than a big fat cash cow for our Police Force, and the majority of the public (including myself) resent the fact that they're littered all over the countryside in places that are not, and have never been, "blackspots".

So, yes I think speed limits are a good idea.

Speed cameras however I think are a bad idea.

 

[bracke]

“Mr Garvin explained: "I actually believe in casualty reduction and trying to make the roads safer but, having looked at the accident statistics in this area, we find that if you break down the 1,900 collisions we have each year only three per cent involve cars that are exceeding the speed limit. Just 60 accidents per year involve vehicles exceeding the speed limit.

"You then need to look at causes of these 60 accidents. Speed may be a factor in the background but the actual cause of the accident invariably is drink-driving or drug-driving. Drug-taking is becoming more of a problem. In 40 per cent of fatal road accidents in this area one or more of the people involved have drugs in their system."

Many accidents were caused by fatigue, although one of the most common causes of crashes was the failure of drivers to watch out for oncoming vehicles when turning right. "The cause of accidents is clearly something different than exceeding the speed limit and we ought to be looking at those other factors," Mr Garvin said.”

- Chief Constable of Durham, Paul Garvin, reported in The Daily Telegraph, 7th December 2003

Arbitrageur

It would be interesting to hear from other Chief Constables on this point. Just a thought that the primary cause of the accident may not have been due to breaking the speed limit but was it a secondary cause.

I do agree that speeding is the tip of the iceberg and that lack of driving skills, drink, drugs and poor health are the main cause of accidents.

Regards

bracke

 

[mburdge]

Interesting responses everyone.(I'm still going to get some spray as protection!)

I know of a few accident blacksopts where cameras have made the road really safe, and I support these wholeheartedly.

What I object to is the widespread use of them purely as money generating machines on open clear roads.

 

[sunny2005]

U think it'll work on those market makers from seeing my position - when I've put a wrong trade..!!!!!!!!!!

 

[G-Man]

Interesting discussion on driving habits.

I wonder what you guys and people in general would drive like if there were no limits. Personally I don't think it would make any difference to me.

The big question of the conspiracy theorists is that the man Darling wanting to change the petrol tax and VED to a road charge scheme would mean trackers placed in every vehicle, and if they know where you went to and from they also know how fast you travelled to get there.

G-Man

 

[mburdge]

Why do politicians have to complicate everything.
The fuel tax is a progressive tax on road usage (you don't buy petrol unless you use it!). But no, they want to add billions to the cost of collecting tax by road charging!!!

It would be nice to think though, that your average speed over an entire journey could exceed the speed limit.

Re/ Blanking out poor trades; What you need is a 'retrospective trade entry device'. This allows you to trade fom the left hand side of the chart! (much easier!)
I can sell you one for £ 100 million, but you will get your investment back in about 2 weeks!!!!!!

Let me know if you want to buy one.

 

[thepoliteone]

Interesting discussion on driving habits.

I wonder what you guys and people in general would drive like if there were no limits. Personally I don't think it would make any difference to me.

The big question of the conspiracy theorists is that the man Darling wanting to change the petrol tax and VED to a road charge scheme would mean trackers placed in every vehicle, and if they know where you went to and from they also know how fast you travelled to get there.

G-Man

Good point G-Man - although you'll find that the sheeple who read the red-tops will end up being told it's a good idea regardless...

-TPO.

 

[zigglewigler]

An experiment was recently done on the continent where all road furniture, signs, lines and speed limits were removed, and guess what, the accident rate dropped!

Governments don't generally trust their subjects, so need to control. If people were given back responsibility for all aspects of their lives, the world would be a far better place, and we could all drive fast on dry empty roads, slow down in the wet during rush hour and kick the 'nanny' out.

But maybe that way of life is too scary for most.

 

[DaveJB]

It's a tax, pure and simple. Cameras MAY be placed at potential troublespots, but they're far more often found where they'll catch those unaware of the local area, and any motorist is well aware of all sorts of ways safety might be improved - Jeremy Clarkson once opined that police marksmen would be better employed manning motorway flyovers and shooting slow drivers, and there's more than a grain of truth in that <g>

So it's a handy way to boost police coffers - I'd much prefer a small sticker for my license plates, whereby I pay a couple of hundred a year and they ignore anything up to 50% over the limit... fair's fair.