|
|
|
|
Author |
Message |
Mrs Kickstart |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Mrs Kickstart Brolly Dolly
Joined: 06 Apr 2004 Karma :
|
Posted: 20:18 - 07 Mar 2006 Post subject: Extending the use of cameras to bring in essential revenue |
|
|
Hi,
This might encourage the front number plate rules to be brought it.
I think the person from Liberty missed the point in that most would not be breaking the law
Not mention the other tosh thats there
anyway here it is :-
Quote: |
Drivers talking on mobile phones or failing to wear seatbelts could find themselves tracked down through a widened use of road surveillance cameras, under proposals due to be floated in parliament tomorrow. The plans would form part of a major expansion of camera surveillance which critics say is already transforming Britain into the most watched country in the world.
The case for cameras to be focused on people using mobiles as they drive is made by the independent adviser to the transport select committee, Robert Gifford, of the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety (Pacts).
He argues that automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) technology should be applied in new ways to help defray costs of cameras and to catch offenders. "One of the good things about ANPR is that people are often multiple offenders so it would provide useful intelligence," he said. "Those responsible for 7/7 got to Luton station by car."
Mr Gifford said expanding the use of technology for tracking the movements of cars could lead police to people who had committed other offences in the same way that Al Capone was eventually caught through his income tax evasion. He claimed that for greater safety and "the greater good of society", most people would be prepared to accept "a slight reduction of our liberty".
Existing road cameras divide into two groups: speed cameras, of which there are around 6,000 nationally; and up to 8,000 ANPR cameras which trigger a reaction when wanted, stolen or cloned number plates or uninsured cars are spotted. Under the proposal, police would also look out for mobile phone users and seatbelt offenders. Those arguing in favour of expanding the cameras cite the continuing death toll on roads and the threat of terrorism. In 2004, 3,221 people died in accidents and 31,130 were seriously injured.
It is also argued that the cameras bring in essential revenue.
Department of Transport figures released under the Freedom of Information Act indicated that total fine receipts for speeding and traffic light offences detected by camera in 2003-04 were £113.5m, of which nearly £92m was "reinvested in road safety as payments back to ... the police, local highway authorities and magistrates courts". The Treasury retained the balance of nearly £22m.
Tomorrow's transport committee session and a further meeting next week will examine how far this technology can be expanded and what use can be made of the data. Evidence will be presented by bodies representing the police and organisations that campaign on road safety.
Any attempt to widen the application of camera surveillance is likely to be strongly resisted.
Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed campaign which opposes cameras, said: "Ministers and senior civil servants are largely being persuaded that technological interventions are a good idea by those with a vested interest in the technology. The sums involved are huge."
Mainstream motoring organisations also have reservations. Andrew Howard, head of road safety at the AA Motoring Trust, believed that current technology was not good enough to implement the idea properly: "It would be difficult to prove whether you were holding your mobile phone or scratching your ear."
A spokeswoman for Liberty said increasing the use of cameras to catch drivers breaking the law would not be a curb on their civil liberties.
|
____________________ Help fight the safety camera partnerships -- www.pepipoo.com |
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
jok |
This post is not being displayed .
|
jok Scooby Slapper
Joined: 06 Dec 2005 Karma :
|
Posted: 21:01 - 07 Mar 2006 Post subject: |
|
|
I, for one, totally agree with more cameras. Terrorists undeniably use cars and other vehicles to go about their business, so it is vital that we keep all motorists under tight control. However, these ideas do not go anywhere near far enough. As was seen during the attack on London, terrorists also use trains and sometimes even walk to some places; clearly, this leaves a massive hole in this nation's security. As such, I propose to cover the country in a grid of 30ft by 30ft cells enclosed by 8 ft electrified barbed wire walls, with passport controls required to move from one cell to another. Especially once biometric ID cards have been forcefully accepted by the population, society would finally regain a measure of safety and terrorist attacks would be all but impossible.
Trains would run in special path ways, but (in my opinion long overdue) passport checks before boarding a train would of course be put into place. Furthermore, people would no longer be allowed to carry baggage, which can be used to hide explosives, and would have to change into regulation boiler suits in supervised changing areas to prevent smuggling of any description.
The costs could easily be recouped by introducing a speed limit for pedestrians of 1mph, with harsh fines for any offenders. I believe the increase in pavement safety easily justifies such a plan. Furthermore, it will boost employment figures in the short term while the walls are constructed as well as in the long term, since the gateways between cells need to staffed. Additionally, a "pay as you walk" scheme could be introduce to further mitigate the expenses incurred by this scheme and finally defray the costs of maintaining pavements and foot paths in a fair manner. A shoe tax would also add to the revenue, as would a compulsory MOT for pedestrians (including a strict emissions test).
Of course, terrorists and rebels might object to these ideas, but since...
Ah, sod it... what on earth are these people smoking? ____________________ CG125 (stolen->recovered!) || Wars do not decide who's right, only who's left. |
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
lilredmachine |
This post is not being displayed .
|
lilredmachine World Chat Champion
Joined: 24 Jan 2005 Karma :
|
Posted: 21:37 - 07 Mar 2006 Post subject: |
|
|
none of whch would actually work of course, as the london bombers were british and had passports ____________________ Bikes: too many, too much for one man to maintain anyway. |
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
jok |
This post is not being displayed .
|
jok Scooby Slapper
Joined: 06 Dec 2005 Karma :
|
Posted: 21:54 - 07 Mar 2006 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
Old Thread Alert!
The last post was made 18 years, 56 days ago. Instead of replying here, would creating a new thread be more useful? |
|
|
|
This page may contain affiliate links, which means we may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. By clicking on an affiliate link, you accept that third-party cookies will be set.
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
Read the Terms of Use! - Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
Debug Mode: ON - Server: birks (www) - Page Generation Time: 0.09 Sec - Server Load: 0.5 - MySQL Queries: 17 - Page Size: 47.2 Kb
|