Disabling speed camera alerts on satnavs

[The Cumbrian]

Don't get me wrong I am not talking about myself but there was a case recently made the media as a motorist had warned somebody by flashing their lights.

The fact remains the police are trying (presumably) to reduce speeding. Unless they are trying to raise funds by the trap it is perverse to object to others doing the same thing.

 

[Monsieur Abeille]

French have always been red hot on radar detection. Bad news if they are now going for fixed camera detection.

Does beggar the question if these satnav databases will still be sold and updated for France.

 

[Erichalfbee]

Unless they are trying to raise funds by the trap

heaven forbid!

 

[alanf]

Reading elsewhere, some satnav companies appear to have adopted 'dangerous zones' as an alternative in France. All cameras are in 'dangerous zones' but not all zones have cameras. Garmin and Tomtom have been mentioned.

Warning of zones is not forbidden apparently. There is some idea that warning of all the zones will encourage caution, while warning only of those with cameras encourages speeding where cameras are not fitted.

What will actually be enforced remains to be seen. It's not absolutely clear that possessing a satnav that has warnings loaded of cameras in UK and Italy, say, would be legal if used or even carried in the boot while passing through France.

http://translate.google.com/transla...routiere.gouv.fr/article.php3?id_article=4024

 

[hedgerow pete]

nope sorry, enrico, i dont belive the speed cameras are only on black spots/ prevent accidents far to many are in the wrong place for that . half are cash cows the other half are for safety,

 

[The Cumbrian]

half are cash cows the other half are for safety,

I am afraid I have to agree Pete. If they weren't cash cows there would be no reason for not allowing people to ware drivers. They argue the cameras are to reduce speeding and then stop people slowing vehicles down.

The only logical reason is they don't want to miss the money they might collect.

 

[rae]

Ultimately, it doesn't matter what the satnav companies do - there is a technology platform there, and people will exploit it. If we assume that in 10 years, pretty much every car will be connected to the internet, and that cars will "talk" to each other about traffic conditions etc, then there are a number of subversive things that will come out of this.

1) We have the current satnav company approach of listing the camera sites and pinging you on approach. How about subverting the cameras that will do lane/distance management and detecting them in real time? You could also detect which way they are facing, so be far more selective about when the ping goes off.

2) Real time detection of mobile speed detection vans. See a van - hit the touchscreen, have it reported to everyone.

3) Real time recognition of police cars. You can get ANPR for beans now, I'm thinking of putting a number plate reading camera at the bottom of our lane after being burgled one too many times. So, again subvert the forward facing camera on the car, and get it to read number plates and recognise the livery of a jam sandwich. Instantly you have a moving map of where the police are.

It is a bit like music piracy - it is an arms race. For every advance by one side, the other side counters it. This particular arms race could put some really dangerous tools in the hands of the wrong people, just like the music piracy arms race has.

 

[victor meldrew]

Gone are the days when sticking to the speed limit on urban roads ran the risk of being suspected of having had a few too many ,
People used to flash their lights and grumble about"Sunday Drivers Tut!"
Halcyon days No seat belts, no speed limits on non-lit roads , no breathalyser.
Regular Sunday evening pub crawl followed by a leisurely toddle home , never saw and accident ,never mind being involved in one !
Mind you Lady drivers were as rare as rocking horse pooh and very few drivers under the age of 30 years . Upshot , fewer cars on the road , no Chelsea tractors, just middle aged p**sed up couples wending their way home on unlit uncluttered roads
VM

 

[enrico]

My answer to all you cynics is that you seem to be deciding as a group how best to break the law.... Your choice..... You are so wrong about how things work but I will never convince you so I am not going to waste my breath. If I was to tell you that a jumbo jet crashes every month in England would you ever get in one again? The equivalent amount of people die on the roads in Britain every month... I don't want it to be me so I hope you drive carefully! God Bless you all and long live the boys in blue
E

 

[The Cumbrian]

My answer to all you cynics is that you seem to be deciding as a group how best to break the law.

I am certainly not trying to find how best to break the law and I don't think the OP was either.

The equivalent amount of people die on the roads in Britain every month... I don't want it to be me so I hope you drive carefully! God Bless you all and long live the boys in blue
E

I don't want to be one either which is why I obey the speed limit and in fact often drive at much lower speeds if the conditions make it such that any faster isn't safe.

However I would like to know why if they aren't fund raising the police object to people being warned of speed cameras by other motorists. Both the police and the motorist doing the warning are trying to achieve the same thing - reducing the number of people driving too fast.

Unless and until somebody can explain why the police object to others trying to achieve the same result as they are I am forced to believe that at least some speed cameras are for fund raising and not safety.

 

[rae]

You are so wrong about how things work but I will never convince you so I am not going to waste my breath. If I was to tell you that a jumbo jet crashes every month in England would you ever get in one again? The equivalent amount of people die on the roads in Britain every month...

When plod starts nicking people for tailgating on the motorway, I'll start to believe that they are serious about road safety. You can drive past a jam sandwich at 70 about 6 feet from the car in front, and they'll do nothing. If you blow past them on an empty motorway at 90, they'll nick you. Why? Because the really dangerous offence is very hard to prove, and involves effort. The simple numerical offence is really easy to prove, and they have a nice gadget on the dashboard to send the evidence required to extract the cash from you.

Not driving at a speed that is compatible with your visible stopping distance is the number one cause of accidents - speeding or otherwise.

And on the "jumbo jet" analogy, more people are KSI by falling down stairs or out of/off buildings - doesn't mean we all have to live in bungalows.

 

[Luminos]

My answer to all you cynics is that you seem to be deciding as a group how best to break the law.... Your choice..... You are so wrong about how things work but I will never convince you so I am not going to waste my breath. If I was to tell you that a jumbo jet crashes every month in England would you ever get in one again? The equivalent amount of people die on the roads in Britain every month... I don't want it to be me so I hope you drive carefully! God Bless you all and long live the boys in blue
E

I'm on first-name terms with the local gendarmes, and it's not from being caught speeding!
And I didn't think my OP was especially cynical - was it? It wasn't meant to be...