Scariest speed camera of all... It checks your insurance, tax and even whether you ar

[csv8]

Scariest speed camera of all... It checks your insurance, tax and even whether you are tailgating or not wearing a seatbelt
By LUKE SALKELD

Even the most law-abiding driver might feel a shiver down the spine when spotting this speed camera at the roadside.

For as well as detecting speeding, it is packed with gizmos that check number plates to make sure insurance and tax are up to date.

It also measures the distance between vehicles to spot tailgating and takes pictures of the inside of the car – to make sure you are wearing a seat belt.



The latest weapon in speed camera technology can capture footage from 150ft away.

It is the first to detect multiple offences at the same time and is connected to police computers via satellite, so that prosecutions can be started within seconds of any offence.

Development of the system, known as Asset – Advanced Safety and Driver Support for Essential Road Transport – is being funded with around £7million of European money.


It is undergoing testing in Finland and is expected to be deployed across Europe from 2013, with each unit costing £50,000.

Motoring organisations gave it a mixed reception. AA president Edmund King said: ‘Tailgating is more dangerous in most cases than speeding so I think most motorists would welcome it.

'But it needs to be a safety measure, not a money-making machine.’

Campaign group Speed Cameras Dot Org said the device should not become a replacement for traffic police.


A spokesman said: ‘We cautiously welcome a device that can detect several potential offences, but it remains to be seen how accurate it is and how fairly it will be used.

‘It’s a pity that the main actions that cause the most accidents, namely not paying attention to the road, misjudging distances and other drivers’ intentions, cannot be detected by a device of any sort.

‘More police patrols and better driver education are the only ways to reduce accidents.’

The Asset test project is running until December 2011 with the aim of improving traffic safety.

The ‘Big Brother’-style set-up takes various pictures before filing details back to a central database via a GPS system. The equipment automatically destroys images over a month old and those in which no traffic violation is evident.

Its testing comes at a time when the Government has cut central funding for speed cameras and reduced the road safety budget by £38million.

The Asset camera is being tested by the VTT Technical Research Centre in Finland. It is currently mounted on a trailer but it is eventually expected to be converted to fit inside police vehicles.

Matti Kutila, senior research scientist at VTT, said: ‘The main intention is to support traffic police so that drivers follow traffic rules such as wearing seat belts, keep to the speed limit and maintain sufficient distance to the vehicle in front.

‘This, of course, is beneficial for road safety.’

Britain currently has separate cameras to detect speeding, tax and insurance violations, but Asset is the first to be able to spot a number of offences.

[Ben73]

I pretty sure they already have a camera in NSW that checks speed and Your number plate for any outstanding problems..

[fmc351]

Bloody Anna Bligh ...oh wait...

Bloody Brumby .... oh wait...


Yeah, doesnt matter who you elect, this revenue raising is global.

[mrbaxr6t]

I feel the need to give such a device the birds we do not want such a device here I will cease driving, and as a direct result working why work to have all my money taken from me anyway by these pieces of crap

[Bushbasher]

Can anybody say "CASH COW!"

[flappist]

Well you all know what to do....and just talking about it on a forum will not help a lot.

[fmc351]

Originally Posted by flappist

Well you all know what to do....and just talking about it on a forum will not help a lot.

I dont get to vote in Finnish elections.

[ltd_on20s]

pehaps we should start to be a bit more like the UK, and react how they react.

no comment from here now...

[ST]

Originally Posted by flappist

Well you all know what to do....and just talking about it on a forum will not help a lot.

Drive below the speed limit, wear a seatbelt, stay a few car lengths behind whoever is in front of you, keep on top of your tax and pay your insurance?

I don't know if I can do all that at once!

[low_72]

I would like to see them hide that one!!

[flappist]

Originally Posted by ST

Drive below the speed limit, wear a seatbelt, stay a few car lengths behind whoever is in front of you, keep on top of your tax and pay your insurance?

I don't know if I can do all that at once!

But as this will not lower the road toll but WILL lower revenue the speed limits will be lowered, rego will go up etc etc......

[ebxr8240]

Originally Posted by ST

Drive below the speed limit, wear a seatbelt, stay a few car lengths behind whoever is in front of you, keep on top of your tax and pay your insurance?

I don't know if I can do all that at once!

And be nice to your Mum...

[kaniSS]

Originally Posted by low64

I would like to see them hide that one!!

The latest weapon in speed camera technology can capture footage from 150ft away.

Where screwed if this gets in, and I assure you this Labor Government will bring this in. Bloody Criminals.

[fmc351]

Who is the premier of the Australian state of FINLAND?

[AWD Chaser]

http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/registrati...ex.html?rlid=2

In April 2010, the NSW Government announced legislative changes that allow enforcement camera images to be used to identify unregistered and uninsured vehicles - increasing the chances of getting caught.

The RTA can now use images from enforcement cameras to check if a vehicle is unregistered or uninsured. This means that when a vehicle is caught committing a primary offence (eg speeding), the vehicle's number plate information will be checked against RTA records to determine if the vehicle was unregistered and possibly uninsured at the time of the primary offence.

In addition to any fines for the primary offence, penalty notices may be issued for vehicles found to be unregistered. Where a vehicle is also uninsured, it may be subject to an additional penalty.

[ebxr8240]

Yep even tickets sent when car was on trailor ...

[flappist]

Originally Posted by fmc351

Who is the premier of the Australian state of FINLAND?

Look up GATSO and see where they came from, how they were tested and where they are now deployed.

[DJM83]

Originally Posted by flappist

Well you all know what to do....and just talking about it on a forum will not help a lot.

Doesnt matter who you vote for they are all tarred with the same brush. So they may 'give with one hand but take with the other' so to speak.

[Nikked]

*Insert "If your not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to worry about" comment here....

[ST]

Originally Posted by flappist

But as this will not lower the road toll but WILL lower revenue the speed limits will be lowered, rego will go up etc etc......

Exactly. They don't even try to disguise the fact that road monitoring is becoming more and more about business rather than safety.

They can get away with regular speed/red light cameras as they are supposed to be deterrents, but being behind on your rego and insurance? I was not aware they were current road safety issues.

[Bucknaked]

Canberra Policing have been using speed camera's with Plate recognition Software for at least the last 6 years.

[fmc351]

Originally Posted by flappist

Look up GATSO and see where they came from, how they were tested and where they are now deployed.

Yes, but all the ranting, and 'you know what to do' nonsense is disingenuous and destructive to the cause.

Like you said, whats the point in yabbering on a forum about it. Moreover, whats the real point in blaming Labor governments. EVERY party will install more, and more, they all need the revenue.

But probably the most significant shortsighted aspect, you will not gain support away from the forums like that. You need to convince individuals of, liberal, labor, national, LNP, green, and the multitude of other political persuasions that these devices dont do what they claim in the name of safety. Further, they do in fact apportion to innocent people, guilt. They simply get it wrong, often enough to be of concern in a democracy based on innocence until proven guilty. And a lot more often than people can prove, and that is the point, its near impossible to defend yourself.

You will not get that message across if you blame parties, you lose half the audience. ALL parties will use these anyway, or do you believe they wont?

Youre making political, what should be about road safety and the right to defend yourself. I repeat, anyone who thinks swapping one government for the next is the answer, has their head in a place the sun dont shine.

[fmc351]

Originally Posted by ST

Exactly. They don't even try to disguise the fact that road monitoring is becoming more and more about business rather than safety.

They can get away with regular speed/red light cameras as they are supposed to be deterrents, but being behind on your rego and insurance? I was not aware they were current road safety issues.

Exactly the point, they dont need to hide it anymore. Have you ever wondered why thats so? No-one cares about cameras, and anyone speaking about them blames one party, whoever is in.

Its stupid. Youve lost once you start that. Stick to something the public will take notice of, their own liberty.


And yes, rego is an issue worth persuing. The costs added by non-payment of CTP adds to your rego when any incidents by unreg drivers is covered by the nominal defendant.

[Cav]

I like the camera's the Poms use to detect a problem with registration and then their road taxes.

There is a show on TV and often when they pick these people up it turns out they are not very law abiding citizens.

If you owe the NSW Govt money either from a fine or other kinda thing - you can't renew your licence, or your registration etc until the debt is paid. That means guys are driving around with no licence and no rego; and probably no insurance.

What does this mean to you?

Well if they damage your car, tough. They won't have the money to pay for it. You can take them to court, but if they have no money, you won't get paid. If you claim insurance it costs you in excess; and if you change insurers looking for the beat deal, you must tell the insurance company you have a made a claim. It doesn't matter if it was not your fault. You will receive a loading on the policy.

Then there's the third party stuff. You know, the fund that pays the medical bills for car accident victims. When others are not paying, your contribution is much higher.

So I am in favour of any measure that will catch people who do not fulfill their obligations and bludge on the rest of us.

As for speed cameras, don't get me started.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by fmc351

Yes, but all the ranting, and 'you know what to do' nonsense is disingenuous and destructive to the cause.

Like you said, whats the point in yabbering on a forum about it. Moreover, whats the real point in blaming Labor governments. EVERY party will install more, and more, they all need the revenue.

But probably the most significant shortsighted aspect, you will not gain support away from the forums like that. You need to convince individuals of, liberal, labor, national, LNP, green, and the multitude of other political persuasions that these devices dont do what they claim in the name of safety. Further, they do in fact apportion to innocent people, guilt. They simply get it wrong, often enough to be of concern in a democracy based on innocence until proven guilty. And a lot more often than people can prove, and that is the point, its near impossible to defend yourself.

You will not get that message across if you blame parties, you lose half the audience. ALL parties will use these anyway, or do you believe they wont?

Youre making political, what should be about road safety and the right to defend yourself. I repeat, anyone who thinks swapping one government for the next is the answer, has their head in a place the sun dont shine.

Obviously I have touched a nerve here. Maybe you should read back over my posts for the last few years.

My position is MAKE IT PERSONAL.

Vote whomever supports this out, not the party the ACTUAL person.

All of a sudden you will find that this becomes an unpopular subject that none will support.
It has worked many many times before and will always work in the future.

As opposed to you idea of just lying back and letting them stick something other than a head where the sun does not shine.....

[Ben73]

I don't know what to say.... except for the same thing I say every time I see a thread like this.
Speed cameras are a money making thing. The government does not give 2 shits about you and your safety... they don't care whether you get home at night or not, they only care that they make enough money. We should stand up for ourselves against these money making cons.

Catching Unreg and Uninsured vehicles is fair enough.
But fining everyone who accidentally does 10 over the limit in clear weather is ********.

[fmc351]

Originally Posted by flappist

Obviously I have touched a nerve here. Maybe you should read back over my posts for the last few years.

My position is MAKE IT PERSONAL.

Vote whomever supports this out, not the party the ACTUAL person.

All of a sudden you will find that this becomes an unpopular subject that none will support.
It has worked many many times before and will always work in the future.

Yeah, and hows that been going for you? Oh wait, here we are, more and more, and more cameras. Oh yeah, its obviously a stroke of 'jeanyus'.

How does any of what you said effect the guy in parliament? Votew him/her out. Yeah, how? You need a majority of voters for that.

Umm, did you miss the part where obviously voters dont care about cameras, or enthusiasts, or people who like driving. How do i know that, ummm, more cameras and more cameras, and no-one cares except enthusiasts. They are the majority of people in Australias states, to them, slowing every car nut down is perfect, and they do believe the only people who speed are car nuts. The dude annoying their quiet latte at the beachfront with his doof doof, a car nut, who obviously speeds, thats how they see it. You must travel in a very narrow circle if youre unaware of that.

You jump on Labor every chance you get, its clear you have an agenda that is not purely camera related, Im just calling you on it. If it was the LNP, and sooner or later it will be, and they will introduce more cameras, Im betting those who say vote em out, will be met with "and what, go back to Captn Bligh?" as opposed to this constant vote em out you give now.

You may be albe to fool others, but you will never convince me half of this is not your political bias. I can read.

Originally Posted by flappist

As opposed to you idea of just lying back and letting them stick something other than a head where the sun does not shine.....

Youre the one who wants to lay back, until the next election, then lay back again. Thats the very nature of waiting for elections to get results. They arent a daily occurence.

[jamesson1980]

I think i saw this on a current affairs show, well the advert for the episode anyway. I missed the show but was curious because on the promo they showed what looked like a google maps streetview car that took footage of your car and in the example given, as the driver passed, they hypothetically nabbed him for
*speed
*unroadworthy tires
*elbow out the window
*mobile phone in hand
*seatbelt
*faulty brake light
.. and stated that this driver would lose all his demerit points and licence is one hit.

Some of the above items are fair enough, I'd welcome the phone, seatbelt, tailgating and other true safety detections.. but the rest was extreme and hopefully it was just an example of the program promoters getting carried away.

Anyway, I think we're safe in Australia considering the government's love affair with revenue. Soon, too many drivers would be off the road and not getting stung for further offences.

[bungarra]

WA government are looking at having these mounted in fixed locations and was in the Sunday Times a few months ago. The Police minister stated "These are for your saftey". When he was questioned about the tailgating and that if someone cut in front of another car a meter before the detection point, how would the alleged offender for tailgating fight it. He stated that they would need to prove that the other car cut in front!!

Who would admit to that?

[fmc351]

Originally Posted by bungarra

He stated that they would need to prove that the other car cut in front!!

Who would admit to that?

See here, this is what must be focused on to defeat them.

You must prove your innocence, I thought the diggers fought for what our flag represents. Your liberty, youre right to a fair trial, youre right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty. Let alone the fact that it is near impossible to prove your innocence. That is why we have a system where innocence is presumed, it is nearly always impossible to prove a negative. A copper in his car, witnessing that, would have pulled the other guy over for not allowing enough room before pulling back in.

That comment is the exact opposite of what our flag represents. This is the slow erosion of the things that make us a great nation to live in. If they are allowed to keep doing this, there will be further erosions, governments didnt give the freedoms we have, it is steeped in fight.