Tiggs

Its quite funny....people are not protesting about the speed limit...they are protesting about being caught........chance of this being a success? slim and none (and slim's been nicked doing 36mph)

Petem95

If half as many people turn up to this as have said they will then this protest will be HUGE!!! Im going to go, and a fair few mates are also planning on attending.

If the protest is big enough its bound to make national news - Wiltshire "safety" camera partnership must be worried as usually the British public are a pushover!

Tiggs

i'm not being a pessimist. My view on speed cameras is "dont really care", i certainly would protest against them (i would protest against the speed limit if i thought it was wrong but you cant protest against being caught!)

no, i was just interested in what they hope to achive? The only news this will create is "drivers screw up the M4 in protest against cameras"......those that agree will agree anyway......and those that dont care will jsut think idiots (a bit like the negative response the fathers for justice blokey got on here when he mucked up the M4)

Sprint Chief

I see the usual scoobynet anti speed brigade (pslewis and tiggs) really want this to be a failure - why post otherwise?

Tiggs claim that he knows why people are protesting is a classic straw man argument - impose a point of view on your opponent and then criticise that, rather than addressing the real reasons. The current 70mph speed limit on motorways serve no useful purpose, either safety or any moral purpose. While there is no enforcement, the protest would not generate any interest. Add enforcement, and there is a reason to spend the time and effort protesting. This does not make the protest just about enforcement, the protest is still about the law - and, in my opinion, on this point, the law is an ***.

What does "success" here mean? Will it change government policy overnight? Of course not! Will it be a flop with no-one attending? Perhaps. Will it generate crowds, a bit of media attention and raise the profile of this issue - just maybe. And perhaps that is all that is needed at this stage. The numbers that turn out tell us a lot - if more than expected turn out, it tells us the issue is wider than we thought. If fewer turn out, then it is not as wide as we thought. We learn from this. Judging from Pete's post, if more than 30 turn out it will show he underestimated the level of public opinion against this!

Jerome

This protest is now gettting some publicity on the BBC

powerman1

what about the police van thats blocking the pavement oh i suppose thats ok it will only be a pedestrian that get knocked down as he he walks in the road to pass ..no money to be had there safety my 4rse
powerman

pmarch

If you go between Junctions 14-17 on M4, watch out for those mobile speed cameras set up on bridges. Also - I have been told (by someone who knows the installers) that the speed cameras that log your average speed between two points are set to as low as 73MPH.

I'm not arguing against the situation, but on the other hand I would never argue for it.

Dracoro

PUTTING CAMERAS ON MOTORWAYS IS A GOOD THING

Listen and read why I think this is the case.

Currently the motorway limit is 70mph.
Pretty much everyone exceeds this on a daily basis.
The limit is currently not enforced to any significant degree.
Therefore most people don't care that the limit is 70mph as they are 'allowed' to drive at up to around 80/90mph without getting 'done' so no point in prostesting about speed limits. People don't mind people getting done for driving over 90mph. They wouldn't have this attitude if the current 70mph limits are rigorously enforced. i.e. they WILL mind getting done.
Now the limits start getting enforced. People have to drive under 70mph on the motorways.
Most people will NOT like this at all. Businesses across the country will lose money as delivery/movement times are longer.
People will get frustrated, start paying less attention as they feel like they're going slowly and don't need to concentrate as much. More accidents will happen.
The protests to raise the limits will gain MUCH more support and it'll become a political hot potato ultimately ending up with higher speed limits on the motorways. In an ideal world they'll start looking into the whole road safety issue and standards of driving on our roads.

pslewis

Drive legally through the cameras and you have nothing to fear ....... if its a protest that the Motorway speed limit is too low then I agree with you TOTALLY!! Count me IN!!!

I do NOT agree that we should be able to pick and choose when we speed and then to object to getting caught!?

The Max Power boys will be out in force and the law abiding of the country will just roll their eyes and tut!!

Pete

Diesel

I will SO be there - looking forward to MPG in the 40's already!

Do nothing and regret it even more in 5 yrs...

pslewis

I drove along this stretch of the M4 over Easter and could barely get above 75MPH - too much traffic!

Keeping to 70MPH would be easy!!

Congestion will slow us all down ...... then it won't matter what you drive!

Pete

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

Good grief, we actually agree on something

Now, if I were to suggest that peaceful non-compliance were a valid, respectable, tried and tested way of protesting against an unjust law...

scoobynutta555

See this follows on what we were discussing in another thread about peaceful protests against cameras.

IMHO it is a good idea and shouldn't be limited to just one protest. More protests are what's needed, and any van spotted should have a crowd of people engaging the operator in discussion as to the merits of what they are acheiving.

Its totally wrong that these mobile cash registars should be operating on motorways now. Sensible lane usage/awareness and acceptable distance between vehicles are much more important than whether somebody goes over 70 mph on a clear dry motorway in a roadworthy vehicle.

people have had enough now. the real culprits of road deaths arent being pursued, just the average law abiding individual that bothers with road tax, insurance MOTs and even DRIVING LICENCES etc. About time the w@nkers in sh1tty old bangers that have the driving awareness of a 6 year old kid in a dodgem were pulled over and properly dealt with by the courts.

JayPSC

I'm up for this as I drive between J16 & J18 every day to work. Slightly off-topic but has anyone actually seen any of these camera vans on the M4 so far, haven't seen any so far????

Iain Young

I drive junctions 14-15 every day and have seen the camera vans several times.

Interestingly, since this was announced, this bit of motorway has had half the traffic on it as usual, and my drive into / from work every day has become much more pleasant

powerman1

Radio 2 today had a debate on the M4 cameras and Jeremy Vine posed the question why not put them on every street corner especially near schools and possibly hospitals and the reply from this MP was it isnt economic and would cost too much money.....safety at a cost.. no way. safety at a profit.. yes please powerman

Diesel

Powerman, can you please write to youir local paper the same rhetorical question? Answer it by saying that placing speed cameras by schools would cause more deaths.

However this is what THEY already TRULY know - cameras cause distraction, change of focus and hazard where previously there may have been none. This is why they are NEVER by schools where we would all 'seemingly' accept and tolearte them [according to the duff spin and guff espoused].

Take it further than Scoobynet...please.

Luminous

iTrader: (3)

I think the main reason that you do not see any at schools is becuase the vast majority of motorists do not exceed the speed limit by a margin at that point. There is something along those lines that has to be met before a speed camera can be placed there.

Although I do agree with you that cameras cause a distraction, and will not help prevent accidents. I can see the above, with appropriate spin, as their answer though.

hedgehog

Say they put a camera outside a school and a child was killed there the following week, how would the press react to that? The first story that would appear would be along the lines of "Cameras present unnecessary distraction..."

The fact is that cameras have the potential to cause accidents, accidents INCREASED at 743 camera sites in the last year that we have figures for, so they can't be positioned in a location where this increase would be very obvious or would cause a lot of negative press.

If they put a camera outside a school and in the following week your child was killed by a motorist who claimed that he or she was distracted by the camera how might you react? My money says the press would give this reaction a lot of coverage and it would, literally, be the end of the camera partnerships.

So, outside a school is dangerous for you and me because the camera will distract motorists but it is also dangerous for the camera partnerships because it might put an end to their highly paid jobs.