Scariest speed camera of all comes from the UK

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

Luke Salkeld
DailyMail.co.uk
3rd November 2010

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.

One of the first counties in the country to switch off its speed cameras is to turn them back on again – after speeding soared.


Oxfordshire deactivated its 72 fixed and 89 mobile units on August 1 after the county council withdrew its funding to Thames Valley Safer Roads Partnership.


Shortly afterwards the partnership claimed the number of drivers speeding past deactivated cameras had increased by up to 88 per cent.


Yesterday it emerged that the police and council were nearing a deal to turn all the cameras back on.

Speed Cameras are on their death bed. Nobody wanted them and the coalition government has ceased all funding for them. There is no evidence that they cut the accident rate.

Swindon, the first Local Authority to switch them off (in September 2009) has just reported a 12 month study that the amount of accidents in the so-called "blackspots" (areas with most accidents - the very justification for putting the cameras in place in the first place)... has actually gone down. Of course the Speed Camera Partnership came straight out and said "the study isn't long or in depth enough" rewording that pseudoscientist cliche of "more research is needed until we get the results most favourable to us".

Ironically, this was the same Speed Camera Partnership that after four days of the switch off said "speeding has increased dramatically!".

Funny how all that shit goes. This issue never would've left the ground here.

Of course, speeding is a problem and the evidence suggest that speeding is a factor in around 1/3 of all accidents but there are more effective ways of increasing safety without having these contraptions at the side of the road.

Argh! An article from the Daily Wail...shield my fragile little eyes.

Oxfordshire deactivated its 72 fixed and 89 mobile units on August 1 after the county council withdrew its funding to Thames Valley Safer Roads Partnership.

Shortly afterwards the partnership claimed the number of drivers speeding past deactivated cameras had increased by up to 88 per cent.

Yesterday it emerged that the police and council were nearing a deal to turn all the cameras back on.

Err....I don't really care how much 'speeding' has increased - that could be anything from a couple of mph over the limit. I'm only really interested in seeing figures related to accidents caused by speeding. And like the article said, the real problem is tailgating (shut up Matt!)

I read the article and I don't see why this has anything to do with the UK - it's being developed in Finland...did I miss something?

Average check speed cameras are the only thing that really keep people's speed down over large areas - and imho they should only be used whilst road works are being carried out or possibly in highly pedestrianised areas.

and imho they should only be used whilst road works are being carried out or possibly in highly pedestrianised areas.

Which is precisely the only places they are being used. And I'm okay with that, on motorways and dual carriageways where these are being used it isn't a common occurence to see people walking at the side of the road. Workmen deserve the protection of temporary reduced speed in these areas.

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:Of course, speeding is a problem and the evidence suggest that speeding is a factor in around 1/3 of all accidents but there are more effective ways of increasing safety without having these contraptions at the side of the road.

It is here also. People bitch about gas prices yet you see them passing you on the freeways here going 15 to 20 miles over the speed limit.

BecMacFeegle wrote:I read the article and I don't see why this has anything to do with the UK - it's being developed in Finland...did I miss something?

Yep.

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

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:

and imho they should only be used whilst road works are being carried out or possibly in highly pedestrianised areas.

Which is precisely the only places they are being used. And I'm okay with that, on motorways and dual carriageways where these are being used it isn't a common occurence to see people walking at the side of the road. Workmen deserve the protection of temporary reduced speed in these areas.

We have laws in most states here on speeding in work areas. The fine is double. So, if the fine for going 10 over the limit is $75, it becomes $150 in a work zone.

That's fair enough. As for these cameras. I can't see them really making an appearance here.

We have red light cameras here. It's still being litigated in some states. Run a red and get a ticket in the mail.

We also have them. Not as many as speed cameras but I bet they stop a lot more accidents.

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:We also have them. Not as many as speed cameras but I bet they stop a lot more accidents.

The problem that's happening with the red light cameras is the ticket gets charged to the one of the car regardless to the fact that he/she may have not been driving it at the time. It doesn't identify the driver, only the license plate number.

Oh right. Over here I believe (as I've never been caught speeding or going through a red light) that prior to the ticket being sent, the Police send a letter asking who the driver was on the day.

Here's a couple for you to look at......

Houston voters reject red-light cameras by wide margin
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7276380.html

It's Official: "Red Light Cameras" Don't Work
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-parker/its-official-red-light-ca_b_744775.html