Speed Cameras

ART6

Since our Minister for transport has decided to impose speed cameras upon us when he has time from his busy schedule of supervising overspends on projects, it might be wise of him to review the implementation policy of our allies across the Irish Sea. The following procedures are highly recommended:

Locate all cameras immediately around blind bends where they only become visible when a vehicle is within twenty yards of them, and at the same time impose a limit of fifty kilometres per hour where the prevailing limit before the bend was one hundred. This will ensure that the motorist will have to brake hard to get within the limit, and will also ensure that anyone following him will run into the back of him. That will allow the minister to claim that the accident rate remains too high, thereby justifying more cameras.

Make sure that speed limit policy in general is illogical. Place a sixty kph limit at random on dual carriageways because then motorists will generally exceed the limit without noticing. Our government is already half way there having changed all limit signs to metric overnight, thereby ensuring that no-one knows what speed he should be doing because his speedometer is calibrated in mph.

Start a rumour by the judicious use of leaks that cameras will only react to speed excesses of more than ten percent over the limit, but actually set them to react to one kph over. That will have the effect of substantially increasing revenue from fines.

Put up large numbers of speed camera warning signs where everyone knows there are no cameras. That way motorists will come to disbelieve the signs and will be caught by unexpected devices. That is a great revenue earner.

Put several cameras in series over a short distance but hide them all. That policy can provide for several fines per vehicle to be recovered over a kilometre or so, and can also lose the driver his licence in the same distance. The revenue obtainable from a stretch of road will be significantly increased while at the same time the number of drivers on it will be reduced. The minister can then claim to have reduced the problem of gridlock on Irish roads without having spent any money on any curative measures.

Avoid the more advanced systems where cameras measure the average speed of a vehicle over a distance of a kilometre or so. After all, the purpose is to maximise revenue by trapping anyone who momentarily exceeds the limit, not just those who consistently do so.

Apply tolling on all roads where there is no alternative route and, particularly, where the motoring public have already paid for them ten times over. Then put lots of cameras on them. That will at least double the revenue potential, and will price motoring out of the reach of a sizeable proportion of the population. Those on benefits or fixed incomes will be forced off the road, and in the absence of anything resembling public transport, they will have to walk everywhere. Pensioners, particularly, will be faced with difficulties and will simply die younger from exposure and physical exhaustion. That will allow the minister’s colleagues in government to claim that they have also solved the problem of under capacity in the health service because the demand has dropped. Mary Harney will not have to resign.

Close all village post offices and regulate the shops out of existence. Then those village residents who can still afford a car will have to drive to the nearest town to post a letter or buy a loaf of bread, thus increasing their exposure to speed cameras and their potential for being fined. That is a very subtle revenue earner that generally escapes the notice of the public.

Do not allow concerns about lost revenue if too many drivers lose their licenses. There will always be an up and coming new generation of drivers, and if steps are taken to ensure that they wait years for a test, then they will always be inexperienced and more likely to speed.

Outfit the Gardai with hand held cameras and train the officers in camouflage and invisibility techniques. Take advice from the British SAS to teach them how to hide behind the bus shelters that are nowadays used for no other purpose, or to secrete themselves behind bushes. Order them into such locations on clear straight roads where there is an artificially low speed limit, and do so on Sunday mornings. Motorists are notoriously poor at keeping precisely to limits when there is nobody else about, and in such cases the revenue potential is satisfactorily high.

Place cameras in vans with darkened windows, and place the vans in locations that will puzzle oncoming motorists. Paint them in odd colours, or sign write them with incomplete messages. That will ensure that the motorist’s curiosity will be aroused and he/she will be looking at them rather than looking at his/her speedometer. Distracted drivers are good sources of revenue.

Limit maintenance of all roads and ensure that potholes are plentiful. Nothing distracts a driver from his speedometer better than a few good big holes.

Enforce rigidly the laws that require all drivers to pay careful attention to the road ahead, and prosecute each who causes an accident while staring fixedly at his speedometer. Charge him with driving without due care and attention, so that the next time he is allowed on the road he will not dare to look at his instruments. He will then become a fairly regular source of revenue from speed cameras.

In the event that the accident rate actually dips, even momentarily and for whatever reason, give all of the credit to speed cameras, and claim that it justifies many more of them (with the corresponding increase in revenue). If it increases place the entire blame on excess speed and install more cameras.

When experienced and highly regarded research organisations suggest that speed cameras don’t actually reduce accidents, rubbish their findings and insist that the minister knows better. Do not be mislead by the theory that a man has a mental problem if he insists he is right when everyone else thinks he is wrong. Do not allow irrefutable statistical evidence to colour judgement.

These recommended policies will generate very large incomes for the government and that, of course, leads to the question of how those revenues should be invested. Fortunately the solution to that is equally straightforward as that other country has demonstrated so ably. The public will support the use of the money to double ministerial salaries and pensions in the recognition that the incumbents are not paid anything like enough, and will also support the use of some of it to double the size of the civil service. After all, the transport department alone will need to be at least quadrupled in size to manage all the speed cameras. Spend more on the provision of government limousines, so that ministers do not unfairly face the risk of speeding fines themselves. Government drivers are dispensable, ministers are not. Use some of it to pay for covert vans and cameras and issue them free of charge to private contractors, who will operate them for annual fees without having to spend any of their own money on them. That way, in twenty year’s time, the government will be able to get rid of more public money by buying them out again.

However, the minister is strongly recommended to avoid temptation. He should not, under any circumstances, spend any of the money on road improvements or public transport, as that would be totally counter productive. It would also create confusion in the minds of the motoring public, who are not at all accustomed to seeing their taxes spent on such fripperies. The purpose here, after all, is stealth taxation and not stealth spending.

Oh, and just in case any suspicions are aroused, I have driven all sorts of vehicles, including high performance and race-tuned cars in the UK, Europe, and the US for forty-five years without collecting even a parking ticket.

astraboy

It would be funny if it were not so true.

cabrwab

Fantastic ART6, let me be the first to congratulate you on a wonderfully thought out and composed post.

in the words of homer j simpson "haha its funny because its true":D

KerranJast

They'd should first spend the money engineering out the black spots around the country. Any area which has had fatal accidents primarily due to the road layout MUST be fixed asap.

After that the "averaging" speed cameras should be the system put in if they are going to go ahead with cameras at all.

D_murph

cabrwab wrote: »

Fantastic ART6, let me be the first to congratulate you on a wonderfully thought out and composed post.

in the words of homer j simpson "haha its funny because its true":D

X2^ very good

i just hope he doesnt give them any ideas............

De Hipster

Congrats Art6 on a fantastically composed first post on boards.

Your next step should be to forward to the minister for transport et al & all national newspapers to underline the logic by which the government usually deploys all new revenue generating (supposed life-saving measures however questionable & unproven) schemes in this country.

Thoroughally enjoyable reading!

D_murph

De Hipster wrote: »

Your next step should be to forward to the minister for transport et al & all national newspapers to underline the logic by which the government usually deploys all new revenue generating (supposed life-saving measures however questionable & unproven) schemes in this country

X2. thats for sure.

farva

Very well written, and I couldn't agree with you more. They are simply a revenue generation tool and it is now clear that the UK have made a mistake implementing them. It is absolute insanity to bring in privatised speed cameras here.

This absolutely drives me up the wall though:

[QUOTE=ART6;55356308Outfit the Gardai with hand held cameras and train the officers in camouflage and invisibility techniques. Take advice from the British SAS to teach them how to hide behind the bus shelters that are nowadays used for no other purpose, or to secrete themselves behind bushes. Order them into such locations on clear straight roads where there is an artificially low speed limit, and do so on Sunday mornings. Motorists are notoriously poor at keeping precisely to limits when there is nobody else about, and in such cases the revenue potential is satisfactorily high.[/QUOTE]

The bus shelter oppisite Montrose hotel on the N11 is a favourite spot for the Gards on sunny Sunday mornings catching people exceeding the 60KM/H (dual carraigeway) speed limit as they come up the hill under the UCD flyover:mad::mad::mad:

Its quite simple, the majority of road deaths happen outside of Dublin, the speed limits are WAY to high there - 80/100 KM/H on "rural lanes"!! They need to be changed and the Gards need to stop shooting fish in a barrel on Dublin dual carraigeways/primary roads where the speed limits are WAY to low and concentrate their "efforts" on actual accident black spots.