Radar Cameras
- Thread starter fivestring
- Start date
- Views: 2725
At work we have some consultants from the UK. One was telling us of these cameras.
They are used for speeding and according to the consultant are set to only 2 mph or so above the speed limit. They are so prevalent that people have lost their licenses on just a single trip. they drive through 3 of these speed cameras in a single morning and accrue enough points to revoke their license.
The consultant says there is a legal issue that is being hashed out as well. The fine will get mailed to the owner of the vehicle based on the license. If you claim you were not the driver during that particular offense you are supposed to supply the relevant info so they can fine the appropriate party.
Often this would be your spouse. But the UK has a law where a spouse is not require to supply testimony that can incriminate the other partner. Sort of like the 5th amendmant extended to your wife. A definite Catch-22.
Phil
They are used for speeding and according to the consultant are set to only 2 mph or so above the speed limit. They are so prevalent that people have lost their licenses on just a single trip. they drive through 3 of these speed cameras in a single morning and accrue enough points to revoke their license.
The consultant says there is a legal issue that is being hashed out as well. The fine will get mailed to the owner of the vehicle based on the license. If you claim you were not the driver during that particular offense you are supposed to supply the relevant info so they can fine the appropriate party.
Often this would be your spouse. But the UK has a law where a spouse is not require to supply testimony that can incriminate the other partner. Sort of like the 5th amendmant extended to your wife. A definite Catch-22.
Phil
daedong
Veteran Member
Here in South Australia we have radar camera boxes on most major intersection and they share a handfull off cameras between these boxes, so you never kwow were they are operating. They are dual purpose, red light and speeding.
They most definately save lives because without the revenue we would probably have no hospitals. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
They most definately save lives because without the revenue we would probably have no hospitals. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
daedong
Veteran Member
In our local Sunday paper this morning there was this article This takes the Cake. /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif
25 April 2004 Home
NEWS SECTIONS
Breaking news
Adelaide
STATE NEWS
Noise, camera, fine
25apr04
REVOLUTIONARY cameras will be used to catch noisy vehicles on South Australia roads and fine their drivers. The cameras, which have been trialled on two Stobie poles on Portrush Rd in the eastern suburbs, will initially be used to detect and photograph the numberplates of trucks with noisy engine air brakes. Cars and motorcyles are eventually expected to be targeted.
"There are (noise) standards and anything we can do to get people to comply with those standards is a good thing," Transport SA chief executive officer Tim O'Loughlin told the Sunday Mail. "It's about getting environmental outcomes for the community." The cameras – made by Sydney-based company Acoustic Tecnologies – are mounted on electricity poles and monitor the decibel count of passing vehicles. Those that exceed acceptable levels are photographed and expiation notices are sent to their owners. The level of fines and whether there will be a loss of demerit points are yet to be determined. Acoustic Technologies managing director Dr Dean Gillies said the cameras were a world first. "I'm not aware of any such system in the world," he said. Environment groups and the SA Road Transport Association have called for the technology to be used on all noisy vehicles, not just trucks.
National Transport Commission safety and environment program manager Tim Eaton said trials of the camera in SA were designed to detect "thumping" truck engines, particularly on major arterial roads through the suburbs. He said it was "certainly possible" for the technology to target all vehicle noise pollution. "The software can be adapted to do whatever you want it to do," he said, referring to motorcycles and cars with noisy exhausts. Mr Eaton said the cameras would initially be used on heavily-used roads such as Portrush Rd and the South-Eastern Freeway. Excessive traffic noise on Salisbury Hwy had also drawn many complaints. "It's a big community concern and a big source of complaint," Mr Eaton said.
The maximum legal noise level for cars built after 1982 is 90 decibels and 96 decibels for cars built before then. That figure also applies to all motorcycles. The maximum level for trucks ranges from 88 decibels to 95 decibels, depending on the size of the truck. Police can issue defect notices for noisy vehicles and fines of $163. It is understood, however, that Transport SA has some concerns about the current detection method.
People's Environment Protection Alliance chairman Gary Goland said the technology should also be applied to industry. "You can really see the potential to combine the picture with the noise that identifies an activity that is not appropriate," he said. Environmental Defenders Office SA Inc solicitor Mark Parnell also applauded the move. "Anything that keeps noise pollution levels down in the urban environment is a good thing," he said. SA Road Transport Association executive director Steve Shearer said, that provided the cameras were accurate, they would be welcomed by many residents. "We know in the (trucking) industry that, as far as the community is concerned, the most complaints we get is about noise," he said. Mr Shearer said the cameras should also be used to catch hoon drivers in noisy cars, adding "the people who wake me up most are idiots in cars". The National Transport Commission said it expected the cameras to be introduced before the end of the year.
25 April 2004 Home
NEWS SECTIONS
Breaking news
Adelaide
STATE NEWS
Noise, camera, fine
25apr04
REVOLUTIONARY cameras will be used to catch noisy vehicles on South Australia roads and fine their drivers. The cameras, which have been trialled on two Stobie poles on Portrush Rd in the eastern suburbs, will initially be used to detect and photograph the numberplates of trucks with noisy engine air brakes. Cars and motorcyles are eventually expected to be targeted.
"There are (noise) standards and anything we can do to get people to comply with those standards is a good thing," Transport SA chief executive officer Tim O'Loughlin told the Sunday Mail. "It's about getting environmental outcomes for the community." The cameras – made by Sydney-based company Acoustic Tecnologies – are mounted on electricity poles and monitor the decibel count of passing vehicles. Those that exceed acceptable levels are photographed and expiation notices are sent to their owners. The level of fines and whether there will be a loss of demerit points are yet to be determined. Acoustic Technologies managing director Dr Dean Gillies said the cameras were a world first. "I'm not aware of any such system in the world," he said. Environment groups and the SA Road Transport Association have called for the technology to be used on all noisy vehicles, not just trucks.
National Transport Commission safety and environment program manager Tim Eaton said trials of the camera in SA were designed to detect "thumping" truck engines, particularly on major arterial roads through the suburbs. He said it was "certainly possible" for the technology to target all vehicle noise pollution. "The software can be adapted to do whatever you want it to do," he said, referring to motorcycles and cars with noisy exhausts. Mr Eaton said the cameras would initially be used on heavily-used roads such as Portrush Rd and the South-Eastern Freeway. Excessive traffic noise on Salisbury Hwy had also drawn many complaints. "It's a big community concern and a big source of complaint," Mr Eaton said.
The maximum legal noise level for cars built after 1982 is 90 decibels and 96 decibels for cars built before then. That figure also applies to all motorcycles. The maximum level for trucks ranges from 88 decibels to 95 decibels, depending on the size of the truck. Police can issue defect notices for noisy vehicles and fines of $163. It is understood, however, that Transport SA has some concerns about the current detection method.
People's Environment Protection Alliance chairman Gary Goland said the technology should also be applied to industry. "You can really see the potential to combine the picture with the noise that identifies an activity that is not appropriate," he said. Environmental Defenders Office SA Inc solicitor Mark Parnell also applauded the move. "Anything that keeps noise pollution levels down in the urban environment is a good thing," he said. SA Road Transport Association executive director Steve Shearer said, that provided the cameras were accurate, they would be welcomed by many residents. "We know in the (trucking) industry that, as far as the community is concerned, the most complaints we get is about noise," he said. Mr Shearer said the cameras should also be used to catch hoon drivers in noisy cars, adding "the people who wake me up most are idiots in cars". The National Transport Commission said it expected the cameras to be introduced before the end of the year.
EastTexFrank
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2003
- Messages
- 1,426
- Location
- East Texas, USA
- Tractor
- Kubota Grand L4740, B2400 and F2680
I knew about the situation in the UK and unlike here when they revoke your license, it's GONE ... there's no bargaining or pleading hardship. If they catch you again, it's a huge fine or jail and try getting insurance after that, it's impossible. Even the rental companies won't rent you a car.
I wonder what the situation is here if you claim that you weren't driving the car? I think I remember reading years ago that they stopped using radar cameras in Houston because they were catching so many people driving around in party masks with their plates covered that they couldn't make a positive ID.
I wonder what the situation is here if you claim that you weren't driving the car? I think I remember reading years ago that they stopped using radar cameras in Houston because they were catching so many people driving around in party masks with their plates covered that they couldn't make a positive ID.
Currmudgeon
Gold Member
The solution is to cover your plate with a mixture of dirt and grease, two substances most of us are all too familiar with. If stopped, the rag comes out from under the seat, and you can clean it off while blaming the mess on your brother-in-law who borrowed the truck.
Of course, it looks a bit more natural on my pickemup than it would on the Lady's Expedition.
Of course, it looks a bit more natural on my pickemup than it would on the Lady's Expedition.
Egon
Epic Contributor
The dirty plate idea has merits but some minons of the force have no sense of humor and do not appreciate improvision.
Egon
Egon
BB_TX
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2002
- Messages
- 1,939
- Tractor
- JD 950
I may be alone on this one, but I am all for it and anything else to stop the red light runners. It has become a very real problem with wrecks every day because of it. I am not just talking about when the light turns red as they go thru. Some enter the intersection 2-3 seconds or more after the light is red. You best look both ways after your light turns green before going.
OP
fivestring
Veteran Member
This, although still illegal, is a little less obvious.
http://www.phantomplate.com/
http://www.phantomplate.com/
slowrev
Elite Member
BB,
Yeah, I used to live in Tampa, FL. One day I asked a cop how many cars were allowed to go thru a light after it had turned red. I said it must be at least 3 from what I had seen. He got all angry ?? I read an article in the paper that 1 intersection on Dale Mabry highway could keep 4 cops busy round the clock just pulling over people running red lights. Something like 200 tickets written in 8 hours.
I am glad to be out of that mess and back out in the sticks.
Yeah, I used to live in Tampa, FL. One day I asked a cop how many cars were allowed to go thru a light after it had turned red. I said it must be at least 3 from what I had seen. He got all angry ?? I read an article in the paper that 1 intersection on Dale Mabry highway could keep 4 cops busy round the clock just pulling over people running red lights. Something like 200 tickets written in 8 hours.
I am glad to be out of that mess and back out in the sticks.