Quote:
|
Originally Posted by me283
Here's a gripe, let's see how you argue this one: I object to mobile camera vans being parked within 100 yards of GATSOs, on the basis that the GATSOs have been effective enough to make drivers slow down (which I thought was the purpose?), but the police still want to catch speeding motorists.
Why? Well, a GATSO costs how much? Let's say £20k. A mobile van costs how much? Say £30k including equipment. That works out at, say 2 Police officer salaries. Therefore we have effectively tied up 3 officers AND a GATSO, when the GATSO is doing the job perfectly well. And the biggest gripe of all is when you try to call the police to an incident, they are "too busy... under-staffed... engaged on more important crimes". Please evaluate and justify that one for me?
|
Please do listen. These points have already been dealt with. A driver slows down for a fixed camera then thinks, ha, ha I'm so clever, I'm going to speed again. Then mobile copper catches him and says ha, ha, you're not clever at all you muppet, please give me 60 notes in return for 3 points on your licence. The limit affects the entire road not just the bit with those white measurement lines and a camera.
A GATSO is a one-off capital cost and more than pays for itself. There is absolutely no resources argument to be had. None at all. Zilch. Nowt. Zip. And if we removed GATSOs we'd then need more coppers to enforce speed limits so we'd have less human resource to deal with other offences. Evaluated and justified.
__________________
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Russ D
I disagree - my speeding that day was not causing anyone a problem - it was soley my lack of concentration.
|
But if you are not concentrating and you are speeding you are more of a risk than if you are concentrating and speeding. If you couldn't concentrate on your speed how can you be trusted to be concentrating on other hazards?