Has any one seen the article in the Telegraph today about the police developing laser cameras that can detect the distance between cars and issue fines for tailgating?
Apparently these are cameras can measure distances between vehicles and record numberplates.
The only argument for opposition comes from the motoring groups saying that the camera won;t be able to differentiate between overtaking cars and tailgating cars.
What next? Undertaking cameras? underinflated tyre cameras? Bad haircut cameras?
Not supporting taligating by any means but when will the expentiture onn these mechanical devices overtake the cost of proper poicing?
|
|
poicing... that sounds a bit naughty... i mean, of course, policing...must dust this keyboard...
|
I've always been pretty astonished when travelling on the section of M6 which has the chevrons painted on the road and the message 'keep two chevrons apart from the car in front', and everyone still tailgates.
The only accidents I've been in have been the result of people hitting me in the rear. I'm especially wary of big 4x4s, having driven one myself, and knowing that they take much further than my little car to stop.
I'm all for enforcement to get people driving a safe distance from the car in front. But I'd much prefer us to concentrate on bringing driving standards and attitudes back to a decent level with more traffic police - I'd hate tailgating cameras to become a single-issue enforcement like exceeding the speed limit.
|
SO you're barrelling along the M3 at 65mph or so, keeping a safe distance from the car in front whilst overtaking those doing 55 in the middle lane when in comes Mr "I'm important and late" from the on-slip at Jn5. Straight across lanes 1 and 2 he goes, intent on his rightful place in lane 3. You apply the brakes and ease off to recover your safe distance.
Meanwhile, three cars back lurks an unmarked V70. It records the image of you braking whilst apparently tailgating "I'm importand and late".
Cut to the scene six weeks later where the magistrate is presented with this evidence and decides that it demonstrates poor driving with aggressive tendencies. You say "Hello 6 points, welcome to my licence" and spend the rest of your life with a hatred of the law enforcement agencies.
Yup, I can see how that will work in Tony's Britain. Another crime created and instantly solved. Won't the statistics be good?
|
Yup, I can see how that will work in Tony's Britain. Another crime created and instantly solved. Won't the statistics be good?
And the revenue will come in handy as well, ND.
I think this must be one of those stupid ideas dreamt up and then binned to make us think, "oh what a sensible government we have for not imposing that on us...." - A bit like Capital Gains Tax being levied on house sales.
CF
|
|
|
ND - I'd expect that any such system would involve a number of 'measurements' being recorded over a distance hence someone in your position who subsequently pulled back to a safe distance in a reasonable time wouldn't be prosecuted.
Mind you, I'd like to think the police driving the car might also take an 'interest' in the guy who pulled out in front of you.
|
In principle I have no problem with trying to stop tailgating but what is a legal definition of tailgating?
Just think of the problems of trying to put it into law.
Is it going to be a fixed distance defined as a 2 second gap at 70 = 34.22yds and applied to all moving vehicles?
Think how silly that's going to look with everyone crawling in the morning rush through town with 34yds between every vehicle.
Is it to be defined as a 2 second gap at the speed at which you are travelling, or which the vehicle you are closing on is travelling?
Just how good are you at judging distance at speed?
Two seconds @ 70 = 34.22yds, @ 50 = 24.44yds, @ 30 = 14.66yds.
So what leeway will be allowed?
Let's say for argument 10%, therefore at 70 offence will occur when gap drops below 30.798yds. Now, will you back your judgement of distance at 70 mph on a motorway, with all the associated distractions of traffic around you, to such effect that you will gamble 3-6 points and a fine on whether you can maintain a gap of 30.798 yds or not, remembering 30.79yds will get you a ticket? (0.008yds is about 1/4 inch)
Personally, I think the only sensible way it can be judged is by a human being taking all the criteria into account and applying it in the circumstances, i.e. a traffic policeman. A camera will only ever be able to apply a criteria of a triggered distance, as they now apply a triggering speed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
There's only one reason for the ever increasing number of cameras and other safety related measures on our roads - BAD DRIVERS. There's no point anyone whingeing about it. If so many drivers didn't tailgate, speed, etc. etc. there'd be no need for any of them and they'd generate no revenue at all.
At the weekend I was caught in a tailback of slow moving traffic on the QEII bridge. Not exactly extreme torture you understand, just a half mile long tailback of vechicles moving at up to 20 mph or so. Why then were so many people dangerously changing lanes without indicating and doing other silly things? You tell me.
Bring on tailgating cameras, I don't do it and I don't appreciate people doing it to me. Of course there's a simpler answer to ensure noobody suffers, just drive properly !
|
The only sensible way I could see this working is if they were in pairs.
Then, if I'm travelling at 70 in the outside lane and someone pulls out without warning in front of me, I am forced into tailgating him. One camera catches this.
If however, there's another camera half a mile up the road, it will be possible to see if I've backed off and thus prevent me being fined incorrectly.
The true aggressive tailgater will be caught by both.
Complex? Yes. Possible? Yes. Likely to be considered by Parliament's rubber-stampers? No.
An alternative solution might just be to have more Police on the roads. Wild and Wacky, I admit, but it might just work.
V
|
Wouldn't it be easier to bring about a situation where tailgating and the like are condemned and as socially unacceptable as drink driving is?
Sure, you'll never rid the roads of all the idiots but the 'don't drink & drive' and 'clunk click' campaigns were highly successful AFAIK so why not have some campaigns highlighting the stupidity and apalling consequences of dangerous driving?
|
|
Many people already deem tailgating to be unacceptable, myself included and would support the actions of traffic officers in reducing this but to use a camera that doesn't discriminate between a tailgater and someone that's just been cut up is not IMHO a good idea. If it's a tool for to enable an actual police officer to prove in court that a driver he was following was tailgating then thats okay. If it's a fixed camera that causes innocent drivers to recive fines and points then it can only worsen the already poor attitude of many on the roads.
|
|
I think they already have these cameras in Germany.
|
|
|
"If it's a tool for to enable an actual police officer to prove in court that a driver he was following was tailgating then thats okay"
But existing traffic ossifers, that is the few that are left and not applying to other sections, already have a couple of tools to deal with this.
1) Mark one eyeballs
plus
2) In car video systems.
Why the need for some specialist kit?
Appreciated that neither options one or two can be deployed if not enough units out on patrol so the offence is never observed.
This latter situation seems even more likely as has been posted on another forum "educating road users and catching bad and dangerous drivers including the use of unmarked vehicles is no longer a core activity for road policing units" Or something similar. Strewth give me strength!
Not much longer before plod comprises 15% proper bobbies and 85% civilians.
Phrases involving peanuts and monkeys come to mind.
|
|
|
|
|
What next? Undertaking cameras? underinflated tyre cameras? Bad haircutcameras?
it's funny you should say that but I'm sure I read somewhere just recently about a camera designed to go inside a catseye that could indeed check tyre pressure and distance form the car in front...
:s I don't recall weher tho' :( does anyone else recall it?
or am I going mad?
JaB
|
Although the cameras are portable they are used whilst static, not mobile in a vehicle, and have been tested in Alpine tunnels.
So I learned from www.channel4.com/4car/news/news-story.jsp?news_id=...6
|
|
Thanks to political correctness and liberalism, they can no longer catch the criminals, so they criminalise those they can catch.
|
Amen to that ST - you've got my vote.
The revolution starts at closing time!
|
|
|
"..they can no longer catch the criminals, so they criminalise those they can catch"
That's very good, ST. Is it original?
|
|
|
|
I thought that true liberals would rely on themselves or vigilantes to deal with criminals? Anyway, its all the damn do-gooders like Peel who are to blame:)
|
|
|
|
Although the cameras are portable they are used whilst static, not mobile in a vehicle, and have been tested in Alpine tunnels. So I learned from www.channel4.com/4car/news/news-story.jsp?news_id=...6
For a long time now, if you get too close to the car infront in any of the alpine tunnels a warning sign has been displayed... in much the same way as the smiley/sad face signs that light up after testing speed. So linking a camera to them wouldn't prove too hard.
FWIW I think in tunnels something like this is a good idea.
|
|
I think messrs Schumacher & Montoya would probably agree with that
|
Ha, ha, commerdriver! :-)
I got within a gnat's whisker of poking similar fun out of S&M's (no, not that!) antics last weekend!
|
|
|
|
|
|
What next? Undertaking cameras? underinflated tyre cameras? Bad haircut cameras?
>>
Or even, ugly cameras, I'd be pulled for that every day.
Whilst we're at it, let's go the whole hog and put speed humps on the motorway ;-)
You could overtake on the left, the right and over the top then.
Anyone got a good design for a 70 mph speed hump ?
Or we could even have chicanes, oh! I forgot, we have them already, they're called roadworks.
|
|
How about two parallel dips in the motorway around 2 inches deep and spaced slightly further apart than the axle length of the average car, that should have the desired effect;)
|
How about two parallel dips in the motorway around 2 inches deep and spaced slightly further apart than the axle length of the average car, that should have the desired effect;)
Most motorways already have those along the left hand lane from the lorries....
|
>> How about two parallel dips in the motorway around 2 inches >> deep and spaced slightly further apart than the axle length of >> the average car, that should have the desired effect;) >> Most motorways already have those along the left hand lane from the lorries....
I think that's what the " ;) " was trying to suggest.
|
I think that's what the " ;) " was trying to suggest.
Oh! :0 sorry
|
|
|
|
