average speed cameras in UK

the big dog wrote:
> On Jan 2, 9:05 pm, pooter <charles.poo....TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> story in the UK telegraph, "average speed cameras on way"
>> they appear to be several cameras that take photos of cars
>> at beginning and end of stretchs of roads and a computer works
>> out your average speed. If its higher than speed limit you get a ticket
>> Pooter.
>
> My main objection to these is on privacy grounds and on the basis of
> the presumption of innocence. a Radar speed camera only records the
> location of lawbreakers, assuming it functions correctly. The state
> is entirely justified in collecting information relating to an offense
> that is known to have taken place. Average speed cameras record the
> location of every motorist passing a given point, regardless of
> whether or not the motorists have committed an offense. I consider
> permitting the state to collect information on the basis that an
> offense _might_ take place to be profoundly dangerous and a violation
> of both privacy rights and the right to presumption of innocence.

You reckon? What makes you think they don't record the details of every
vehicle passing a camera? They only send fines to lawbreakers, but with
digital technologies used in most fixed speed cameras it doesn't cost
the operators any more to record the details of all vehicles passing the
camera, speeding or not. Tollroad operators (private and public)
already collect information on every single vehicle passing certain
points, whether or not they have committed any sort of offence. Look
around you and you'll find that most roads which carry large volumes of
peak hour traffic already have video surveillance equipment which
collect images of every vehicle (and even people not in vehicles).

Nev..
'04 CBR1100XX
 >> Stay informed about: average speed cameras in UK 

"Nev.." <idiot.RemoveThis@mindless.com> wrote in message
news:477b74ec$0$25485$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> the big dog wrote:
>> On Jan 2, 9:05 pm, pooter <charles.poo....RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> story in the UK telegraph, "average speed cameras on way"
>>> they appear to be several cameras that take photos of cars
>>> at beginning and end of stretchs of roads and a computer works
>>> out your average speed. If its higher than speed limit you get a ticket
>>>
>>> Pooter.
>>
>> My main objection to these is on privacy grounds and on the basis of
>> the presumption of innocence. a Radar speed camera only records the
>> location of lawbreakers, assuming it functions correctly. The state
>> is entirely justified in collecting information relating to an offense
>> that is known to have taken place. Average speed cameras record the
>> location of every motorist passing a given point, regardless of
>> whether or not the motorists have committed an offense. I consider
>> permitting the state to collect information on the basis that an
>> offense _might_ take place to be profoundly dangerous and a violation
>> of both privacy rights and the right to presumption of innocence.
>
> You reckon? What makes you think they don't record the details of every
> vehicle passing a camera? They only send fines to lawbreakers, but with
> digital technologies used in most fixed speed cameras it doesn't cost the
> operators any more to record the details of all vehicles passing the
> camera, speeding or not. Tollroad operators (private and public) already
> collect information on every single vehicle passing certain points,
> whether or not they have committed any sort of offence. Look around you
> and you'll find that most roads which carry large volumes of peak hour
> traffic already have video surveillance equipment which collect images of
> every vehicle (and even people not in vehicles).
>
> Nev..
> '04 CBR1100XX

They are a great tool when used to identify unregistered and stolen
vehicals.

Boxer
 >> Stay informed about: average speed cameras in UK 

"Nev.." <idiot DeleteThis @mindless.com> wrote in message
news:477b74ec$0$25485$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> the big dog wrote:
>> On Jan 2, 9:05 pm, pooter <charles.poo... DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> story in the UK telegraph, "average speed cameras on way"
>>> they appear to be several cameras that take photos of cars
>>> at beginning and end of stretchs of roads and a computer works
>>> out your average speed. If its higher than speed limit you get a ticket
>>>
>>> Pooter.
>>
>> My main objection to these is on privacy grounds and on the basis of
>> the presumption of innocence. a Radar speed camera only records the
>> location of lawbreakers, assuming it functions correctly. The state
>> is entirely justified in collecting information relating to an offense
>> that is known to have taken place. Average speed cameras record the
>> location of every motorist passing a given point, regardless of
>> whether or not the motorists have committed an offense. I consider
>> permitting the state to collect information on the basis that an
>> offense _might_ take place to be profoundly dangerous and a violation
>> of both privacy rights and the right to presumption of innocence.
>
> You reckon? What makes you think they don't record the details of every
> vehicle passing a camera? They only send fines to lawbreakers, but with
> digital technologies used in most fixed speed cameras it doesn't cost the
> operators any more to record the details of all vehicles passing the
> camera, speeding or not. Tollroad operators (private and public) already
> collect information on every single vehicle passing certain points,
> whether or not they have committed any sort of offence. Look around you
> and you'll find that most roads which carry large volumes of peak hour
> traffic already have video surveillance equipment which collect images of
> every vehicle (and even people not in vehicles).
>
> Nev..
> '04 CBR1100XX

Nev you are entirely correct!


Ad to this that the now installed "fixed" speed cameras plus a set of
sensors (at about 2km intervals) built into every new major road and you see
that the above mentioned system already exists.
 >> Stay informed about: average speed cameras in UK 

the big dog wrote:
> On Jan 2, 9:05 pm, pooter <charles.poo... RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > story in the UK telegraph, "average speed cameras on way"
> > they appear to be several cameras that take photos of cars
> > at beginning and end of stretchs of roads and a computer works
> > out your average speed. If its higher than speed limit you get a ticket
> > Pooter.
>
> My main objection to these is on privacy grounds and on the basis of
> the presumption of innocence.  a Radar speed camera only records the
> location of lawbreakers, assuming it functions correctly.  The state
> is entirely justified in collecting information relating to an offense
> that is known to have taken place. Average speed cameras record the
> location of every motorist passing a given point, regardless of
> whether or not the motorists have committed an offense.  I consider
> permitting the state to collect information on the basis that an
> offense _might_ take place to be profoundly dangerous and a violation
> of both privacy rights and the right to presumption of innocence.

Heavy vehicle drivers have had this system foisted upon them for years
("Safe-T-Cam"). This is just the rest of the population catching up.

Would you prefer compulsory tachographs and 100km/h speed limiters?


BTH
 >> Stay informed about: average speed cameras in UK 

>
> Ad to this that the now installed "fixed" speed cameras plus a set of
> sensors (at about 2km intervals) built into every new major road and you
> see that the above mentioned system already exists.
>
>


Yes but only in western countries.


 >> Stay informed about: average speed cameras in UK 

BT Humble wrote:
> the big dog wrote:
>> On Jan 2, 9:05 pm, pooter <charles.poo....DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> story in the UK telegraph, "average speed cameras on way"
>>> they appear to be several cameras that take photos of cars
>>> at beginning and end of stretchs of roads and a computer works
>>> out your average speed. If its higher than speed limit you get a ticket
>>> Pooter.
>> My main objection to these is on privacy grounds and on the basis of
>> the presumption of innocence. a Radar speed camera only records the
>> location of lawbreakers, assuming it functions correctly. The state
>> is entirely justified in collecting information relating to an offense
>> that is known to have taken place. Average speed cameras record the
>> location of every motorist passing a given point, regardless of
>> whether or not the motorists have committed an offense. I consider
>> permitting the state to collect information on the basis that an
>> offense _might_ take place to be profoundly dangerous and a violation
>> of both privacy rights and the right to presumption of innocence.
>
> Heavy vehicle drivers have had this system foisted upon them for years
> ("Safe-T-Cam"). This is just the rest of the population catching up.
>
> Would you prefer compulsory tachographs and 100km/h speed limiters?
>
>
> BTH
"speed limiters" as on the semis' that pass you at well over 100
KPH ?
Pooter.
 >> Stay informed about: average speed cameras in UK 

On Jan 3, 8:07 am, BT Humble <bt_hum....RemoveThis@bigpond.com> wrote:
> the big dog wrote:
> > On Jan 2, 9:05 pm, pooter <charles.poo....RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > story in the UK telegraph, "average speed cameras on way"
> > > they appear to be several cameras that take photos of cars
> > > at beginning and end of stretchs of roads and a computer works
> > > out your average speed. If its higher than speed limit you get a ticket
> > > Pooter.
>
> > My main objection to these is on privacy grounds and on the basis of
> > the presumption of innocence. a Radar speed camera only records the
> > location of lawbreakers, assuming it functions correctly. The state
> > is entirely justified in collecting information relating to an offense
> > that is known to have taken place. Average speed cameras record the
> > location of every motorist passing a given point, regardless of
> > whether or not the motorists have committed an offense. I consider
> > permitting the state to collect information on the basis that an
> > offense _might_ take place to be profoundly dangerous and a violation
> > of both privacy rights and the right to presumption of innocence.
>
> Heavy vehicle drivers have had this system foisted upon them for years
> ("Safe-T-Cam"). This is just the rest of the population catching up.
>
> Would you prefer compulsory tachographs and 100km/h speed limiters?
>
> BTH

Because letting the government encroach even further on our rights is
going to make that day came _later_, right?
 >> Stay informed about: average speed cameras in UK 

On Jan 2, 10:26 pm, "Nev.." <id... DeleteThis @mindless.com> wrote:
> the big dog wrote:
> > On Jan 2, 9:05 pm, pooter <charles.poo... DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> story in the UK telegraph, "average speed cameras on way"
> >> they appear to be several cameras that take photos of cars
> >> at beginning and end of stretchs of roads and a computer works
> >> out your average speed. If its higher than speed limit you get a ticket
> >> Pooter.
>
> > My main objection to these is on privacy grounds and on the basis of
> > the presumption of innocence. a Radar speed camera only records the
> > location of lawbreakers, assuming it functions correctly. The state
> > is entirely justified in collecting information relating to an offense
> > that is known to have taken place. Average speed cameras record the
> > location of every motorist passing a given point, regardless of
> > whether or not the motorists have committed an offense. I consider
> > permitting the state to collect information on the basis that an
> > offense _might_ take place to be profoundly dangerous and a violation
> > of both privacy rights and the right to presumption of innocence.
>
> You reckon?

Yup

> What makes you think they don't record the details of every
> vehicle passing a camera?

Back when the flash was visible, the flash only took place when
offenders went by. I'm not conspiracy theorist enough to just assume
that the government has exceeded it's authority by doing what you
suggest.

> They only send fines to lawbreakers, but with
> digital technologies used in most fixed speed cameras it doesn't cost
> the operators any more to record the details of all vehicles passing the
> camera, speeding or not.

AFAIK the legislation authorizing speed cameras did not authorize the
government to collect this information.

> Tollroad operators (private and public)
> already collect information on every single vehicle passing certain
> points, whether or not they have committed any sort of offence. Look
> around you and you'll find that most roads which carry large volumes of
> peak hour traffic already have video surveillance equipment which
> collect images of every vehicle (and even people not in vehicles).
>
> Nev..

There's a big difference between a video record of a particular chunk
of road and a record indexed by registration number. An indexed
record is considerably more intrusive than a video record as an
indexed record can be used to track individuals whereas a video record
is useful for more legitimate law enforcement activities but tracking
an individual using video records is prohibitively time consuming.

The government has no authority to collect and index this sort of
information and private toll roads are not so ubiquitous that I cannot
avoid private toll roads if I find the potential privacy violation
sufficiently onerous.
 >> Stay informed about: average speed cameras in UK 

On Jan 3, 6:33 pm, "Nev.." <id... RemoveThis @mindless.com> wrote:
> the big dog wrote:
> >> They only send fines to lawbreakers, but with
> >> digital technologies used in most fixed speed cameras it doesn't cost
> >> the operators any more to record the details of all vehicles passing the
> >> camera, speeding or not.
>
> > AFAIK the legislation authorizing speed cameras did not authorize the
> > government to collect this information.
>
> What legislation? Which jurisdiction are you talking about..or are you
> just making generalized assumptions based on your opinions and
> converting them into law? Just because something isn't explicitly
> described doesn't mean it can't ever be done. I'll bet there is nothing
> in the legislation authorising the police to conduct Random Breath
> Testing in Victoria which explicitly states that the police conducting
> random breath testing at booze buses are allowed to record the
> registration of every vehicle which is stopped for a breath test, but
> look around next time you see one and there will be a cop with a
> clipboard standing there noting them all. I dare you to challenge his
> right to write down what is in plain view for all to see.
>
> Nev..
> '04 CBR1100XX

I don't. I challenge his right to put up a camera and connect it to
OCR software to perform that function automatically.
 >> Stay informed about: average speed cameras in UK 

Take a look at some of the signs on the F3 sometime especially south bound
up from
hawksbury river and at the southern end turning onto the pac hwy, they have
things
hanging off them that look like etag readers, i've often wondered if they
are collecting some "statistics"
that way on the sly........


"pooter" <charles.pooter.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:13no0119qr8dl57@corp.supernews.com...
> BT Humble wrote:
>> the big dog wrote:
>>> On Jan 2, 9:05 pm, pooter <charles.poo....TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> story in the UK telegraph, "average speed cameras on way"
>>>> they appear to be several cameras that take photos of cars
>>>> at beginning and end of stretchs of roads and a computer works
>>>> out your average speed. If its higher than speed limit you get a ticket
>>>>
>>>> Pooter.
>>> My main objection to these is on privacy grounds and on the basis of
>>> the presumption of innocence. a Radar speed camera only records the
>>> location of lawbreakers, assuming it functions correctly. The state
>>> is entirely justified in collecting information relating to an offense
>>> that is known to have taken place. Average speed cameras record the
>>> location of every motorist passing a given point, regardless of
>>> whether or not the motorists have committed an offense. I consider
>>> permitting the state to collect information on the basis that an
>>> offense _might_ take place to be profoundly dangerous and a violation
>>> of both privacy rights and the right to presumption of innocence.
>>
>> Heavy vehicle drivers have had this system foisted upon them for years
>> ("Safe-T-Cam"). This is just the rest of the population catching up.
>>
>> Would you prefer compulsory tachographs and 100km/h speed limiters?
>>
>>
>> BTH
> "speed limiters" as on the semis' that pass you at well over 100
> KPH ?
> Pooter.
 >> Stay informed about: average speed cameras in UK 

On Jan 3, 7:18 pm, "Boxer" <some....RemoveThis@nowhere.com> wrote:
> "the big dog" <thebyg....RemoveThis@mailinator.com> wrote in messagenews:3625c9b6-2327-4512-a511-63eeaf4dd641@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Jan 3, 6:33 pm, "Nev.." <id....RemoveThis@mindless.com> wrote:
> >> the big dog wrote:
> >> >> They only send fines to lawbreakers, but with
> >> >> digital technologies used in most fixed speed cameras it doesn't cost
> >> >> the operators any more to record the details of all vehicles passing
> >> >> the
> >> >> camera, speeding or not.
>
> >> > AFAIK the legislation authorizing speed cameras did not authorize the
> >> > government to collect this information.
>
> >> What legislation? Which jurisdiction are you talking about..or are you
> >> just making generalized assumptions based on your opinions and
> >> converting them into law? Just because something isn't explicitly
> >> described doesn't mean it can't ever be done. I'll bet there is nothing
> >> in the legislation authorising the police to conduct Random Breath
> >> Testing in Victoria which explicitly states that the police conducting
> >> random breath testing at booze buses are allowed to record the
> >> registration of every vehicle which is stopped for a breath test, but
> >> look around next time you see one and there will be a cop with a
> >> clipboard standing there noting them all. I dare you to challenge his
> >> right to write down what is in plain view for all to see.
>
> >> Nev..
> >> '04 CBR1100XX
>
> > I don't. I challenge his right to put up a camera and connect it to
> > OCR software to perform that function automatically.
>
> Why would you care?
>
> What have you got to hide?
>
> Boxer

Are you a voyeur?
 >> Stay informed about: average speed cameras in UK 

big dog wrote:
> On Jan 3, 8:07 am, BT Humble <bt_hum... RemoveThis @bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> > Heavy vehicle drivers have had this system foisted upon them for years
> > ("Safe-T-Cam"). This is just the rest of the population catching up.
>
> > Would you prefer compulsory tachographs and 100km/h speed limiters?
>
> > BTH
>
> Because letting the government encroach even further on our rights is
> going to make that day came _later_, right?

Could you possibly rephrase that? I can't tell which side of that
point you're arguing.


BTH
 >> Stay informed about: average speed cameras in UK 

pooter wrote:
> BT Humble wrote:
> > Would you prefer compulsory tachographs and 100km/h speed limiters?
>
> "speed limiters" as on the semis' that pass you at well over 100
> KPH ?
> Pooter.

Heh! But I bet their speed limiters all function perfectly at rego
inspection time.


BTH
 >> Stay informed about: average speed cameras in UK