Someone please, please give me a sensible, coherent, policy-based explanation as to why a box in a car that flashes when there is a speed camera ahead is wrong if it does this by detecting the radar signal but absolutely fine if it does it by knowing where the things are in the first place.
Please. Then I can be just a little bit less cynical about the bunch we elected to run this country.
|
|
...but you have to admire the marketing of these radar detection devices. After all, these speed traps are not about raising revenue but increasing road safety - so why on Earth would they want to make it illegal to have a device in your car which warns you as you approach an accident blackspot?
|
|
Even Brunstrom said they were a good idea...
|
Eggzakly!
These devices are NOT repeat NOT about raising revenue they are ONLY repeat ONLY ever placed at double dangerous accident blackspots so a device that informs me that I am in the vicinity of an accident blackspot can only be a good thing.
The phrase 'hoist by their own petards' never entered my head.
|
|
|
|
If it was up to me, I'd ban both! I reckon all spdcams should be hidden, and all the warning gadgets banned -- drivers should be warned of speed limits, not of where they are being enforced.
But I can see why govt might want to make a distinction. Here is one possible explanation, though I don't agree with it!
-----------------------------
Fixed-location safety cameras are placed in accident blackspots, places where there have been a significant number of serious accidents. They help to enforcing the speed limit at these most critical points on our road network, and their effectiveness has been demonstrated in many studies.
The position of these fixed-location safety cameras is widely advertised. Websites list the locations, and the cameras themselves are painted in high-visibility colours and preceded by signs.
These locations have been widely publicised because the govt wants drivers to slow down: the aim is to encourage safe driving, not to levy fines.
Drivers may also be reminded of the location of these cameras by passengers in their vehicles, or by maps -- including electronic maps linked to satellite navigation systems, which may give audible or visible warnings.
All such warnings help drivers to obey speed limits at these danger points, and -- crucially -- can warn drivers far enough ahead of cameras to eliminate the need for dangerously sudden speed reductions.
However, devices which rely on detecting radar or other speed-monitoring technologies may not operate at a long enough range, and may therefore frighten drivers into braking suddenly or taking other last-minute evasive actions which would endanger their safety and that of other road users.
There is a further risk that such devices may not function accurately, causing drivers either to take preciptate action when belatedly alerted to the presence of speed monitoring equipment.
It is also important to remember that speed limits apply acros the whole of the road network, and should be obeyed at all times. Whilst current government policy prioritises overt detection of speeding, it is important that the police's ability to use covert detection is not undermined.
The government has therefore asked parliament to approve a ban on these dangerous detection devices.
|
Agree with NW - can't see how it's sensible to notify everyone of exactly where cameras are. It simply enables those who speed to do so with relative impunity, slowing down briefly only where they have to. It's a bit like telling burglars where all the alarms are. I think clearly identifiable cameras at known blackspots are a good idea however but would like to see more random speed traps.
As regards the ban, I heard a senior police officer on the radio yesterday saying that the devices to be banned are those which effectively jam speed cameras/ equipment NOT those which simply alert drivers as to where the cameras are.
|
>>Agree with NW - can't see how it's sensible to notify everyone of exactly where cameras are. It simply enables those who speed to do so with relative impunity, slowing down briefly only where they have to.<<
Surely people will go slow where the cameras are thus having the desired effect. After all, we should all slow down in...'accident blackspots'. Ban radar detectors and people will speed all the time and get flashed. Then speed again.
--
Adam
|
Just thought of this. How is a radar detector different to a car alarm. Go with me on this one.
A GPS device warns you you are comitting a crime (speed display) and beeps to warn you to lower your speed thus not committing a crime.
A car alarm (at least fancy ones anyway) warns you when you are about to commit a crime by beeping to warn you to stop breaking into the car - thus making a deterrent.
Alright a little shaky I'll grant you but surely a radar detector makes you slow down otherwise what would be the point?
In an ideal world we all wouldn't speed blah blah blah but that isn't going to happen. Let's be realistic. People will speed all the time and at least detectors will stop them speeding on some roads.
--
Adam
|
Colleague of mine drives like a bat out of hell and picked up two tickets (one was for 60 in a 30). Prompted by this, he's purchased a GPS-based detector. Still drives like a bat out of hell, apart from where he gets a warning from the GPS. I suspect that without the warning system he would be more inclined to stick to limits generally, rather than only where there's a warning.
Most countries I've driven in use covert enforement (US, Canada, France, Germany, NZ).
There was an amusing thread on here some while ago from someone who'd visited Germany and claimed they don't use speed cameras - they do - there's loads of them! They're well hidden. They also use tailgating cameras and cameras that photograph into cars to see if you're wearing a seatbelt (manually operated, of course). We don't actually do that badly in the UK, despite all the moans.
|
Its simple really. Its easy to ban radar detectors/jammers as they have no other use.
Its very very tricky to legislate against GPS devices
1/ you cant ban reception of GPS signals. To do so would cause choas.
2/ you cant ban the reception of GPS in cars under C&U regulations, Sat Nav, Vehicle tracking and possible future road pricing schemes go out the window.
3/ camera locations are in the public domain. you cant put them on the Official secrets act, everyone can see them.
4/Impossible to enforce, "My Palm/Ipaq only has maps on it officer, good day to you" "you wish to look at the contents of my PC? certainly where is your warrant"
The genie is out the bottle on this one and there is no stuffing it back in.
|
|
|
|
>How is a radar detector different to a car alarm. Go with me on this one.
> A GPS device warns you you are comitting a crime (speed display) and beeps to warn you to lower
> your speed thus not committing a crime.
Analogy doesn't hold at all, I'm afraid. The car theif knows he's comitting a crime, and he's comitting a crime even if he breaks into a car without an alarm. It's not there to remind the thief, but to alert others to his presence. But there's no point arguing the analogy so I'll stop :-)
The point is that this isn't what speed trap detectors do. They inform you that you are comitting a crime ONLY WHEN you are going to get caught.
I looked into this a while ago (it was a year or so ago so things could have changed since, but I haven't heard that that have) - there were NO devices available to tell you when you were breaking speed limits. A device to just sit there and beep at me when I'm doing 34 in a 30. I can ONLY buy devices to tell me when I'm about to be caught for it.
Such a device would be fair enough - anyone can inadvertently drift over the speed limit, and why not warn them? Helpful all round, and I can't see any moral object to this at all. But warning them ONLY when a speed camera is coming is just evading being caught for it.
The excuse that people have detectors to warn of accident blackspots is, be honest, just an excuse. It's to allow them to speed an not be caught.
-Mark
|
If all camera installations were live then we wouldn't have this argument as there would be no point in radar detectors. Their use has only come about because a lot of the camera installations aren't live. Some of those have been disabled as they don't meet the hypothecation guidelines (some are placed on non straight pieces of road). The boxes should be removed if not in use and all other boxes should have cameras in them. If they can't afford to have all the boxes with cameras in then they will have to reduce the number of boxes to the number they can. Then we'll see if they go in places of high accident risk or high revenue....
Radar detectors also have the added ability to detect traffic lights from a distance which can be a boon with unexpected roadworks. They also detect cameras from a distance greater than you would normally see so the last minute braking argument is false.
I also think that highways authorities and councils should make sure that speed limit signs are clearly visible especially where there are frequent limit changes. Road side vegetation makes knowing what the limit is tricky in some places especially when there is little consistency on limit making. Some huge wide roads are 30 mph so you can't tell until you get to the first repeater ( or not as the case with a 30 mph area).
teabelly
|
|
|
MarkSmith,
Unless I'm mistaken, GPS devices like the Origin B2 and Road Angel *can* be placed in a mode where they sound a warning whenever your speed exceeds the limit at your current location.
And isn't a radar detector just a radio receiver, albeit a slightly specialised one?
What if it just happened that my in-car stereo had a faulty component which meant that a Gatso's emitted frequency was translated-down to an audible whistle which drowned-out Johnny Walker or whoever?...
|
|
|
I looked into this a while ago (it was a year or so ago so things could have changed since, but I haven't heard that that have) - there were NO devices available to tell you when you were breaking speed limits.
There is - it's called a speedometer and all you have to do is look at it......
|
|
anyone caught driving round constantly looking at their speedo should be locked up for dangerous driving, its far more important to watch for pedestrians being suicial, taxi drivers doing U turns, strange obstacles put in the road by the council to slow you down, etc
|
anyone caught driving round constantly looking at their speedo should be locked up for dangerous driving
The old driver-can't-walk-and-chew-gum argument :)
If anyone can't mange both activities safely, try one of the cars with a speedo up in the line of sight, such as Toyota Prius or Renault Modus
|
|
the reason they have head up displays in planes is because even this doesnt make it safe to keep taking your eyes off the way ahead
|
Have you tried lifting your right leg and making your foot move in clockwise circles. Then with your right hand draw the figure 6 in the air?
Those can't be done together either, not without some practice anyway :-)
|
anyone caught driving round constantly looking at their speedo should be locked up for dangerous driving,
The occasional glance at the speedometer to confirm estimated speed is no more dangerous than checking the mirrors and equally as necessary.
|
>>anyone caught driving round constantly looking at their speedo should be locked up for dangerous driving
I totally agree. They should also be compelled to understand that if they are sad, inadequate and incapable of driving safely at the speed limit, then they should either drive slower or not at all.
|
|
|
> MarkSmith. I had a Snooper Neo 6 nearly two years ago. There was a setting where you putin a speed, and it warned you if you exceeded that speed.
As well as GPS location and laser and radar detection, of course :-)
|
|
|
|
A GPS device warns you you are comitting a crime (speed display) and beeps to warn you to lower your speed thus not committing a crime. A car alarm (at least fancy ones anyway) warns you when you are about to commit a crime by beeping to warn you to stop breaking into the car - thus making a deterrent.
Adam, I think you've got your analogy back-to-front :)
I suggest that a car alarm is not the equivalent of a camera-warning device, it's actually the opposite if it.
A car alarm fulfils the same function as the spdcamra: both detect an offence being committed.
A camera-warning device would the equivalent of a gadget in the hands of the would-be car-thief to allow them to detect which cars had an alarm set, so that he could avoid breaking into the cars where he'd be caught.
|
|
|
|
|
However, devices which rely on detecting radar or other speed-monitoring technologies may not operate at a long enough range, and may therefore frighten drivers into braking suddenly or taking other last-minute evasive actions which would endanger their safety and that of other road users.
So, logically, we should ban all devices that cause drivers to suddenly panic and apply the brakes sharply.
I'd vote for those yellow boxes on sticks that flash if you go past them too fast. No end of drivers panic brake when these things come into view from behind the roadsign, tree, foliage or whatever, regardless of their speed. In fact, I'd say that its mainly the ones who tootle at 10-15 below that seem to yell in panic and brake down to 10mph or so. The ones who have been tailgating you aggressively for the last x miles seem to know in advance and go past at the limit-1.
Sadly, this is unlikely to happen, so the policy explanation is not logically consistent. :-)
Me, I want a GPS speed camera detector, because I want to be warned of the blackspots and I (personally) want to be going LESS THAN the speed limit in those areas. I used to use the aforementioned yellow boxes as warnings, but (oddly) I have found that they do not seem to correlate with the dangerous sections of road.
|
Having had a radar/laser/gps system I would verify the following:
The radar goes off everywhere so you tend to ignore it.
The laser is too late as it generally triggers when they lock the laser on your car.
GPS does exactly what it says on the tin.
So I got rid and have only a GPS system now.
Laser diffusers work well, a friend of mine has one on his R1. Guess what he does for a living...
|
Delivers pizza to police stations?
Couriers visa applications across town?
Sells pegs and heather door to door?
Oh no, wait, he'd never *get* prosecuted for those...
...I dunno, he's a vicar?
|
You don't think he might actually be a Police Officer do you?
To bring things back on topic, Kane CarGear has an overspeed warning built in. Sadly you can't configure it to ignore motorways (71mph - "Warning! Over limit!") but it will remind you incessantly if you go over the posted limit as recorded on their database on any suburban road.
Unfortunately there is no regular update to this package so you wouldn't want to rely on it 100% (nor should you for that matter) given the local government urge to reduce limits all over th place. The best you can hope for is a new map set every 18 months or so at around £140.
Personally I don't use it, relying instead on a combination of the nice big round dial just in front of my steering wheel, observation of the big red and white circles with numbers in them at the roadside and 17 years of driving experience. Still, if you're not confident in your driving skills.........
;o)
|
3 questions about GPS systems (& Road Angel)
1) Am I right in believing that it looks like Road Angel is likely to remain legal?
2) Is Road Angel (or "Are GPS systems) currently legal in France?
3) Should someone (or has HJ?) suggested Road Angel or some GPS system to Mr & Mrs Brickley?
|
|
|
Personally I don't use it, relying instead on a combination of the nice big round dial just in front of my steering wheel, observation of the big red and white circles with numbers in them at the roadside
Anyone reading these threads could be forgiven for thinking that you are onto something new here :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
