>>
>> I simply couldn't believe that they thought it more important to catch people who were
>> accelarating a little early though quite safely onto a wide open stretch of road rather
>> than catching those speeding past as visitors to Stonehenge crossed the road 1/2 a mile
>> back.
>>
There's a regular safety camera van in our village about 2 or 3 times a month. It always parks up in the same place and stays for 2 or 3 hours before moving on.
It's one road (30mph) through the village, there are several places where exeeding the limit is very dangerous.
- a "blind hump back bridge with a petrol station and pub carpark on one side and a busy side road joins on the other side
- a place where parents & children cross the road to reach a village hall for playgroups etc
- a primary school
- a village shop that many elderly folk use - most houses are on opposite side of the road to the shop
- a church on a narrow bit of the road, there's often funerals or events taking place
However the "safety" van ignores all these hazards and chooses to park at the edge of the village beyond the built up area, beyond any houses or buildings, at a point where the speed limit changes to 50mph.
There is a narrow dead end lane that branches off the village road right by the 50 sign and then turns and runs parallel with this road and the van is able to park there and take advantage of the few trees and natural cover this affords.
The van is actually in the 50 limit area but it's camera is pointing back into the village and is able to pick off motorists as they pick up speed just before they enter the 50 limit.
There was a representative from either the camera partnership of council (I missed the start) talking on local radio the other day stating that cameras were only placed on stretches of road where exceeding the limit was very likely to cause an accident or where actual accidents had occured, and that the only reason for siting both fixed and mobile cameras was to protect the public.
He was - of course - lying.
Jacks
|
