Camera not in use

[Drago]

https://brc.org.uk/news-and-events/...gated/retail-crime-spiralling-out-of-control/

This is misunderstood by even the very politician's claiming to want to change it, and is widely misreported. There is actually no "threshold."

There is a different charging code for thefts of £200 or above. Thats it. Nothjng more. A 6 digit alphanhmeric code. That is an administrative distinction for the justice system.

There is no operational threshold. A theft of £195 isn't treated or responded to any differently than one of £205...of of they are it's not due to any nominal threshold because there isn't one.

 

[Bonefish Blues]

Thanks. Interesting.

So if I was being picky with myself, my original statement might be slightly misleading in taht every offence could be prodecuted, but

This is misunderstood by even the very politician's claiming to want to change it, and is widely misreported. There is actually no "threshold."

There is a different charging code for thefts of £200 or above. Thats it. Nothjng more. A 6 digit alphanhmeric code. That is an administrative distinction for the justice system.

There is no operational threshold. A theft of £195 isn't treated or responded to any differently than one of £205...of of they are it's not due to any nominal threshold because there isn't one.

See above what I was in the process of typing, but you've done the job.

However, consider this: https://retail-merchandiser.com/news/only-14-of-shoplifting-cases-in-the-uk-result-in-prosecution/

Is there any other offence where only 1 in 7 detected crimes are prosecuted? Serious Q, not looking to argue!

 

[Marchrider]

Yes but not only them, also the ones who might be doing under 70 but still suddenly brake unnecessarily down to under 50. If folks left enough space it wouldn't be an issue of course but in reality any sudden and unnecessary braking can cause knock on issues.

Sounds like a couple of total chumps who should have there driving licences torn up and their cars crushed - if the first driver knew what they were doing, they would not of needed to brake, and as for the tail-gating idiot with the reactions of a local government department.... should not be driving.

anyways, by the time anyone reads the message "Not in Use" it would be too late to brake. These signs will be made the most use by regular drivers who now know they don't have to slow down on that road.

 

[DRM]

I always assumed it was to prevent people making panic braking movements just before the camera, disrupting flow and risking collisions.

The only ones I've seen seem to be on those average speed cameras on temporary roadworks where there's usually a 50 limit. In heavier traffic having people panic brake from 70 (more likely 80-90) down to 50 is liable to end up with someone running into them. When they're operational there's usually a 50 limit sign well before the first camera.

This^^^^ It's before roadworks start, after the cones have gone to prevent someone, more than likely speeding, panic braking & going from 80-90 mph to less than 50mph, causing untold carnage

 

[DRM]

Sounds like a couple of total chumps who should have there driving licences torn up and their cars crushed - if the first driver knew what they were doing, they would not of needed to brake, and as for the tail-gating idiot with the reactions of a local government department.... should not be driving.

So, going by that logic, it's all my fault, when entering the roadworks today, M1 South at Leeds that having slowed to 50Mph as ordered by the signs, that some idiot in a Tesla private hire car, comes belting down the outside lane at warp factor 9, cuts in at the cones blocking lane 3, just where the camera is, then slams all on down to about 46mph from around 75-80 Mph for the camera, which now seem to be set up to capture the rear of the car, not the front, so would have got this particular "chump" as he was speeding up to the coned of area to get in front, putting everyone else in danger

 

[DRM]

People do. Maybe you wouldn't. I wouldn't, unless I had carelessly drifted above the limit, but I can't remember the last time I was in that situation when I saw a camera.

But I hve seen people who are driving at the speed limit hiot the brakes when they saw a camera.

Surely you’ve seen them? I have. Flying up in the outside lane, not paying enough attention, see the camera, stand on the middle pedal.

I see it all the time, MGIF, MGIF, MGIF (Must get in front)

 

[Marchrider]

So, going by that logic, it's all my fault, when entering the roadworks today, M1 South at Leeds that having slowed to 50Mph as ordered by the signs, that some idiot in a Tesla private hire car, comes belting down the outside lane at warp factor 9, cuts in at the cones blocking lane 3, just where the camera is, then slams all on down to about 46mph from around 75-80 Mph for the camera, which now seem to be set up to capture the rear of the car, not the front, so would have got this particular "chump" as he was speeding up to the coned of area to get in front, putting everyone else in danger

so you were doing 50 in a 50 and a clown overtakes you at 75 and then brakes to 46 ? (4 mph less than your speed)

I do hope you were able to avoid crashing into his rear ?

 

[Drago]

so you were doing 50 in a 50 and a clown overtakes you at 75 and then brakes to 46 ? (4 mph less than your speed)

I do hope you were able to avoid crashing into his rear ?

The person responsible for that is the clown, not the camera.

In any case, think about the relative velocities, distances and mathematics of that. The "victim" would themselves have to be significantly negligent to actually impact the car ahead under the numbers you cite.

 

[DRM]

so you were doing 50 in a 50 and a clown overtakes you at 75 and then brakes to 46 ? (4 mph less than your speed)

I do hope you were able to avoid crashing into his rear ?

I’m quite capable of avoiding a clown that has the choice of side swiping me, or flattening the cones that were there to protect the workers on the road works, thank you