Slashdot Mirror
UK To Passively Monitor Every Vehicle
DrSkwid writes "The UK Police are building a network to monitor the movement of every vehicle in the U.K. through an extensive Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) system. The data will be retained for 2 years. The Register further reports that the system will likely be used for issuing speeding fines." From the article: "The primary aims claimed for the system are tackling untaxed and uninsured vehicles, stolen cars and the considerably broader one of 'denying criminals the use of the roads.' But unless the Times has got the spacing wrong, having one every quarter of a mile on motorways quite clearly means they'll be used to enforce speed limits as well, which would effectively make the current generation of Gatsos obsolete. Otherwise, checking a vehicle's tax and insurance status every 15 seconds or thereabouts would seem overkill."
What's a Gatso?
Don't misread that you dyslexic perv.
"Piter, too, is dead."
having one every quarter of a mile on motorways quite clearly means they'll be used to enforce speed limits as well,
Does this mean drag-racers can practise on the highway and get away with it?
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
That we in the colonies won the war and started a country that didn't take away our rights and treat us like criminals.
I'd just like to say thanks for trying to waste my hard-earned tax money on this, rather than going out and using it for something useful like fixing the sorry state of our education system or making the NHS ever so slightly less pathetic.
Lenina Huxley, you are fined one-half credit for a sotto voce violation of the Verbal Morality Statute. Additionally, you are fined 120 credits per infraction of the Safe Speed Statutes, for exceeding the speed limit of 45 miles per hour on the freeway 72 times this morning. Be Happy!
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
Yet another reason for me to want to emigrate from the UK, what with ID cards, and 90 days detention without trial etc.(Thankfully the latter was defeated in parliment). At this rate, with ever more draconian laws I'll be able to claim asylum.
If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
I remember seeing something like this technology being tested with police. They setup a unit like this (might be the same thing) on a busy road. Anyways, a few hours later, the system caught a few stolen cars, speeders, and few other things, that led to a record number of arrests that day.
Kinda werid though, for some reason it reminds me of 1984.
Black Sky
2D Elite Inspired Game
this could be a very interesting tool. Other than it's privacy issues of course, it could be used in some neat ways.
Let's say you have a criminal who has been busted for drug charges. You could then find out where he's been, and probably track down where he gets his stuff from, and take it straight up the channels to the big guys.
Or does it not work that way?
One group of people asking why the English let their government run roughshod over them, and a group of Brits claiming that they fully understand the reasons behind the measures their government is taking and are willing to endure scrutiny for the public good.
1984 wasn't set in America.
Ok, never mind.
In other news, the Atlantic Ocean is described as being "considerably broader" than the English Channel.
But these are folks whose pet name for the gulf of water separating North America from Europe as "the pond".
One might go further and suggest that British people are prone to occasional tendencies towards understatement.
I just hope that the US doesn't adopt this idea.
I used to carry a bottle of whiskey for snake bite. And two snakes. -Nefarious Wheel
Good thing that America does not have a way to track us.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
I've always felt that these sorts of measures are alot better than the speed enforment that we have in Australia and many other places - The hidden multinova cameras that police now use here.
If you really want to stop speeding, this is the way to do it. All the time. Everywhere.
If it sounds radical, well at least it will mean that in the long run the speed limits themselves will have to be adjusted to something that is reasonable, rather than what has happened in most countries - speed limits that were set but which are only enforced a very tiny fraction of the time.
Also, getting done for doing too fast an average speed is far more important than getting unlucky for doing an instantaneous speed that is too fast at some random point in your trip. Almost everyone speeds a little at some time - unless you only use cruise control to drive with you will always run the risk of going too fast at some point when you aren't looking at your speedo. (And, its not exactly safe to drive the whole trip whilst looking only at your speed)
As for the privacy issues.
Well, I think its a little too late for anyone in the UK (maybe anywhere, really) to get worried about that. Look at the congestion tax in the UK (Automatic licence plate recognition). Look also at the ability to obtain a list of every base station that your mobile is associated with - the phone companies can do this if requested by a magistrate, although that usually only done in murder cases or similar. Look at the number of CCTV's that proliferate in every public place.
Unfortunatly, the invasion into our privacy has only just begun. There is no techonlogical way to avoid this - it will only get worse. Soon enough automatic facial recognition will be connected to all the CCTV's around and you will be trackable just for being visible. You can identify people by the way that they walk. Some systems now can identify potential suicides in the happening in train stations by the typical behaviour people make prior to jumping in front of trains.
The only solution to the privacy issues are legislative ones. You can't stop this level of data collection anymore, all we can do is ensure that only certain legitimate uses for it exist. This is the only way that any of us will have real protection in the future - if its in a constitution or in legislation.
Just my 2c worth,
Michael
There is no cryptographic solution to the problem where the intended receiver and the attacker are the same entity.
is keeping the records for two years - I can't see any good reason for that. The cameras themselves aren't much different from the camera system already used to maintain the congestuion charge in central london and are overall a Good Thing. (As a cyclist I find that the largest regular threat to my life tends to originate from speeding/incompetent motorists - and I want them to be caught and have their licenses revoked)
James P. Barrett
The regularity of the cameras is irrelevant, you only have to know the distance between them, and ensure their clocks are in sync to be able to issue a speeding ticket.
So thinking around the subject:
boakes.org
> The UK Gov't hasn't given us a whole heck of a lot of trouble since...
Really they fuc8ed you over big time. If they hadn't gone with you on the Iraq war fiasco then Iraq II would not have happened and you Yanks would still have a reasonably good international reputation. The UK gov plan is to make the US look so bad that the UK can lead Europe as this centuries only super power.
God shave the Queen!
The bikini - security through obscurity since 1943
you can ride it if you like
It's got a basket, a bell that rings
and things to make it look good
I'd give it to you if I could,
but I borrowed it
Syd Barrett escapes the universal monitoring!
"Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Every Western country is facing Big Brother issues. However, I wonder if the UK has created its own issue here: whether it is wise or moral to criminalize huge numbers of the population with the aim of raising extra revenue for the government. Few in the UK would argue that the present system of speed cameras (they are called Gatso cameras) is designed for much else other than making money for the state.
I guess if a government goes about giving very large numbers of otherwise law-abiding citizens a criminal record they should not expect much more than cynicism when it comes to other social problems. We are then all the losers.
A by-product of the current obsession with safety is that enormous sums have to be spent on repairing emergency vehicles whose suspension is wrecked going over speed bumps in urban areas. In addition, more acute cases die because it takes longer for an ambulance to get them to hospital and the ride there is bumpy to say the least. It might even turn out that the safety obsession kills more people than it is intended to save.
Meanwhile, new licensing laws in the UK permitting the sale of alcohol 24/7 promise many mores deaths from alcohol abuse and its fallout. Liver disease from alcohol abuse among those under 30 is several hundred per cent higher than it was even twenty years ago. Apparently it's OK to drink yourself to death in the UK, but woe betide you if you get in an automobile stone cold sober.
Las qué passoun
tournoun pas maï
What I don't understand is why speeding is so strictly enforced with this system. It's an entirely arbitrary system (well, loosely based on some aspect of the road) that is outdated for current car designs. Do you think my 1,500lb escort should have the same speed limit as some guys 2 ton '88 Cadillac, or an H2? Should I be forced to drive at the same speed as a senile senior citizen?
What about other circumstances where I sped up to avoid an accident, or to avoid further traffic congestion (as in moving into place to merge into an open spot rather than having 10 people brake behind you)?
No, bizarely all our road lengths are still measured in imperial units - even though every other damned thing is metric (except milk and beer which come in pints).
James P. Barrett
There are times when the offence of speeding is hardly justified as a safety issue. Overtaking is one such time when, done properly, one may need to exceed the speed of the vehicle one is passing..
Of course one could have fun with this. After passing one vehicle registration plate recognition camera at 150MPH one could slam on the brakes and park on the motorway for a minute or so.. then drop the clutch and zoom off again..!
If you have not done so already, get in contact with your local branch of No2ID. Sign the I refuse pledge (or at least the I support pledge). Lobby your MP and your councillors: many councils across the UK are passing resolutions to forbid government services from requiring their users to have ID cards.
This has already been reported by the bbc ( more reliable than The Register ) where a camera has been used to record car licence plates on entry to a car park, and generate automatic fines if a matching parking ticket was not purchased.
:o)
The system failed miserably because it falsely recorded cars *passing by* the car park.
It's a real intrusion, but on the other hand, try getting compensation if you are in an accident with someone driving without insurance.
I'll stick to monitoring speed cameras
Open Source Drum Kit, LPLC deve board - mjhdesigns.com
The romans posed the question "Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?"
I would be in favor of a system to track the movements of all cars and issue speeding violations as long as the data is a matter of public record and it can be proven (for example, via Freedom of Information requests) that all traffic regulations are being strictly enforce on all public officials, including elected official, appointed official, off duty police and their families, friends, and relatives, and anybody else in a position of influence.
If a speed limit is too low, I'm sure it would get rapidly fixed if there were 100% enforcement of fines and penalties against senators and representatives.
If a speed limit is, in fact, valid and legitimate for safety reasons then 100% enforcement is certainly a good thing.
The problem occurs when traffic regulations are constructed in such a way that everybody violates them because they are unreasonable and the police use them as a means of selectively grabbing people they have an illegitimate beef against.
I see a sudden market emerging for adhesive tape for modifying license plate numbers/letters to confuse the cameras. WIth little effort 5's make great 6's, 0's and 3's transmogrify into 8's, C's become 0's. And suddenly your car becomes anonymous. *cough* Not that I advocate this of course. -Kurt
"We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
This is simply a voluntary tax system. Want to help your gov.? Simply speed.
Besides, maybe they use the new money to fix some of the other systems or perhaps increase the police.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
I'm feeling sad that these kind of measures can be introduced in the UK and the citizens of the UK doesn't feel the need to throw those responsible for this surveilance into the ocean or something.
...
Seriously, why is it, that we have to live in such a passive society? Like if it would have been bred for obedience.
First, there were cameras on the streets and noone said a word
Then, there were monitoring of cars and noone said a word
Finally, when I got stripped from all my freedoms, labeled a criminal, then, there was noone to say a word.
Sad.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
I mean seriously... Of coarse speeding tickets will be issued with it. That is how they will raise funding for it. However, figuring out how much they were speeding is a whole different story altogether... Now grant it, the 1/4 mile distance will limit some of the speeds, but in theory, someone could hit 100+ mph and slow back down to 5 mph before they hit the next scanner, thus the overall time spent going the 1/4 mile could still be same time spent for going that distance as it would if you simply went the speed limit.
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
I don't normally like to resort to ad hominem attacks, but you are a moron for believing this.
There are so many problems with government organizations having this level of control over their citizenry. Starting with the people actually doing the control, who do they get to monitor these systems? What if it's some creepy guy trying to stalk women with this technology? What if it's someone trying to use knowledge of your actions to blackmail you? If I'm working the camera, and I see you walking down the street holding hands with one woman, then the next day another woman, I could demand that you pay me money or I'll let them know about each other, etc. This is one example but you can see many more. What if I'm not even working for the government, but I hack the system to gain access to this kind of information?
At a higher level, what's legal and what's not is always subject to change. You could be subject to hundreds of dollars in fines every day just for doing something that otherwise seems ordinary. See the above comment about the man asking a drug offender for directions. Nothing illegal took place, but in the investigation of the drug offender, while trying to find his customers and sources, you would get flagged for investigation and would be subject to search and arrest. Just getting arrested is often enough for you to lose your job and be embarassed by your friends, colleagues and family.
I can go on, but I hope that you see why your line of thinking that this is "only bad for bad people" is flawed.
Could the stated goals not be acheived more cheaply simply by fitting each vehicle with a transponder? Anything that must be installed every quarter mile of every road will necessarily be ungodly expensive.
Vehicles operating without a transponder would be fined steeply. A few random checks would ensure compliance.
It's one thing to be an evil overlord, but there's no excuse for being an expensive and incompetent evil overlord.
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
So how about we put cameras in every home, in order to detect criminal activities?
You've got nothing to hide, so it's all fine and dandy, right? After all, why watch you? You're just doing your average activities, right?
Mother, do you think they'll like this sig?
Bear in mind that Blair's ability to railroad through deeply unpopular legislation is seriously damaged after losing the "90 days" vote last week. The PLP are restive and not likely to rubberstamp deeply unpopular legislation.
I've been had by the London congestion charge system many times, which is always a pain but overall I don't moan about it because it's a Good Thing to ration traffic in central london (for lots of reasons.) That argument won't wash outside of city centres though.
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
It seems that the reason why they want a camera every 400 yards is so that they can enforce variable speed limits. From the article: "400 yards along motorways, and a trial on the M42 near Birmingham will first be used to enforce variable speed limits".
I last drove along the M42 just over a week ago, and there are plenty of new temporary speed limit signs, one above each lane. These were in use to slow the traffic down to help remove a traffic jam. It seems that all of this has been put in with the intention of these camera trials.
Personally, I think this is a good idea. Variable speed limits might help to curb congestion, especially on the M42 which regularly gets jammed with traffic going to the NEC and the many motorways that connect to it. We have had variable speed limits in the UK for a while now, but everyone (including the police) ignores them.
In the UK, driving is a privilage and not a right. You are issued with a licence which of course can be revoked by a court. A lot of speed limits do seem like BS, and the motorway speed limit IMHO ought to be 80, but if everyone is doing the same speed things might be safer.
The only problem I have with this, is that they want to hold the records for two years. Why? This will probably get tied into our expensive ID cards. Might be time to migrate.
Britain: Land of really stupid criminals who don't know enough to switch license plates before committing a crime with a car.
Seems to me that Q knew what he was doing when he gave James Bond an Aston Martin with changeable license plates.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
... despite the UK's continual attempts to make it easier to incarcerate people without trial, it does require motive, means, and opportunity, not to mention some evidence of a crime, rather than a conversation to get arrested/charged. There is always the option of wrongful arrest, if the police try to take it too far...
:-(
In general, though, I'm very disappointed. Christ, I thought geting rid of "lockemup, lockemALLup" Blunkett was a good thing. Looks like we swapped the frying pan for the fire
Simon
Physicists get Hadrons!
Errr, hang on a second. I think you'll find that the US uses Imperial (as in British) units. Not the other way around. Well most of the time - there are of course the bastardised Imperial units the US uses like larger fl. oz, fewer fl. oz to the pint (and thus smaller gallons), and smaller tonnes.
I think you meant bastardized and tons. When will these Brits learn to spell?
At least here in the U.S., the arrest gets all the press. An acquittal NEVER gets nearly as much press. Case in point, recently nine women attending two fraternity parties near the University of Colorado were taken to the hospital for alcohol poisoning. It was front-page news for several days when two of the women apparently tested positive for GHB, a "date-rape" drug. One of the frats has actually had its local chapter closed down for the rest of the year, maybe permanently.
Fast-forward several weeks, and guess what, the "quickie" test for GHB has a non-zero occurence of false positives. The more expensive, accurate, and time-consuming lab test came back negative on all nine women. Was it front page news for over a week that "frats didn't drug women after all"? I'll let you guess at the answer.
I had a point somewhere in there. Oh yeah, I'd prefer not to be arrested just because I happened to come into casual contact with a criminal.
-paul
Pistol caliber is like religion: everyone has their favourite, and theirs is the only right choice.
I submitted the story about Texas trying to do this (almost this EXACT story) but with ACTIVE RFID and yesterday and it was REJECTED! WTF!?!
e n/entries/1451n ow_this_worrie.html
If anyone cares, here's two write up on Texas' attempt from a both sides of the political aisle:
http://journals.aol.com/republicanjen/RepublicanJ
http://www.houstondemocrats.com/archives/2005/04/
Your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
A home is a private place, a street is a public place. Shall I draw a diagram?
And if you have absolutely no privacy in public? Even if you walk past CCTV cameras, you are primarily observed, not tracked. In general, there is no record of you being there. I would certainly feel that a full record of my public movements would be an invasion of my privacy. Even big celebreties tend to get some privacy. Try these on for size, all "public" facts:
Who bought condoms last week.
Who slept where, either going away or coming over.
Who went to Alcoholics Anonymous.
Who went to see Fahrenheit 9/11 in cinema.
Who went to a mosque last week.
That's a lot of social, political, religious and other profiling for each and every citizen. In general, I place a big difference between being observed and being tracked, and what is being described here is a tracking system. Would you really like to have the government keep a huge file on everything and everyone? Move to DDR, ca. 1970 but don't bring that society here. We don't need nor want it.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Oh, this goddamned stupid argument again. So, if you're not committing crimes, why don't we stick a camera up your ass so you can have a perpetual colonsocopy? Obviously, it would be good for your health, no? It could have embedded GPS, and remote monitoring so in the event that you develop a polyp the doctors can come and tear you out of your mistress' bed and take that sucker out!
Maybe some of us don't like living under a microscope, for any reason? Could increase your safety in a way significantly relative to the amount of privacy (every)one gives up? I sincerely doubt it.
I'll take my chances with the fucking speeders and terrorists, thanks.
Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."- Ayn Rand, "Atlas Shrugged"
Your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
More exactly - just to find out who is an opposition LEADER before people start listening and vote. And jail him for 90 days.
That is very debatable. The speed limits here in the UK are now so absurd in many places that the vast majority of motorists exceed the limit, yet no accidents ever result (literally; speed limits have been dropped on roads that haven't had even a minor injury accident in a decade).
This is just another power play by Blair's dictatorship and his ever more draconian Home Secretaries, right along with ID cards for everyone, the National Identity Register, electronic strip searching on the way onto the London Underground, the RIP Act, detention without trial for as long as they can get away with, installing CCTV everywhere (yes, we're still the most spied-upon nation in the world), reversing the burden of proof and/or attempting to do away with jury trials for increasing numbers of cases...
All of these things, of course, are "justified" by arguing that they increase national security, help to prevent crime, or otherwise benefit Joe Public. Unless he's in the wrong place at the wrong time, in which case he loses his benefits because some junior staffer in a government office mistyped one number out of 1,000 they entered that day into the master database. Or the ANPR system misreads a number plate, and sends him a fine for doing the physically impossible, which he then has to challenge in court after several weeks of concern, with no compensation for the time wasted or grief caused. Or his daughter's the one being rendered naked for the pervert watching the screens at the Underground station. Or he's late for the train, and since he ran through the screen he's obviously a terrorist so they shoot him dead. Or he's black, old, bald, young, or a registered member of an opposition political party, the biometric recognition doesn't work, and he's held for three months as a suspected terrorist on the whim of a senior politician, by which time he's lost his job, his home, and the trust of all his family and friends, not to mention the ability to challenge the statements of absolute fact issued by our political leaders (and I use the term loosely, since they didn't even win the popular vote in England, never mind an overall majority that might justify their absolute control of parliament, not that this particular abuse ever went before parliament) to justify all these Big Brother efforts.
I used to think the tin foil hat brigade were eccentrics. In recent years, looking at the direction New Labour have taken our government, I think the sooner we have a written constitution and a constitutional court above parliament and answerable only to the public, the better.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
I think that this will probably cost them money.
If you know that you will be "caught" and have to pay everytime you speed, you probably won't do it if you really don't have to.
So my guess is that they will spend a lot of money to install such a system and afterwards will lose lots of money because of less people speeding.
I think it is more likely that the system will be used to create a giant toll system.
"wait...i can have 4 kids, sit on my ass all day, get a free house, free dental, free health and make £40,000 a yer."
So you won't get with the program. Whose fault is that?
"Can i come to USA?"
I thought the USA was the laughing stock of the world, where everybody is fat and supports a government of morons and warmongers.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Very insightful comment. However, "Mrs Grundy" is only prevalent in the smaller towns and nicer neighborhoods. The more dense the population, the harder it is for her to keep track.
:-)
If you'll allow me to expand on this: (whoops--too late
Anyone that chooses to live in 'any' societal setting is subject to some form of scrutiny. Whether it's speeding/red-light/street cameras, "Mrs. Grundy", or the nice folks waiting for the next asteroid to come pick you up....SOMEBODY is watching you, and your actions are kept in an archive--somewhere.
Now, to get to the meat of the topic. My problem with 'this' kind of scrutiny is that it is more profit-driven than it is safety/public interest driven. I'm sure that there are statistics that can quote 'lives saved', or 'terrorists thwarted', but all I hear on the news about these cameras is the amount of revenue generated for the city. I'm sure the city isn't the only one profiting either. Someone created the technology, and someone maitains the system. It's a win-win situation for the profiteers, but we ("...the so-called 'normal' human beings") lose.
They accept our taxes to pay for the system, and they profit from the revenues generated.
Hmmmmm....
What happens when you do feel the need to commit a crime? You're not going to be too happy then are you?
This isn't about catching speeders. It's about tracking your each and every move, for ever and ever. I'd be nervous about this if they were keeping records for two *weeks*, nevermind two *years*. What they really want is to be able to say "Where is license plate #27D726" at any given moment in time, so that they can put "the bad guys" away. The definition of "the bad guys" can easily change with the wind, and they'll have the security net to find and catch all the homosexuals, johns, pot-smokers, poker players, or any other evil-criminal-du-jour. Stupid laws that have made criminals of everyone have been passed before, and will pass in the future. This is just stupid.
"No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
"I hearby inform you under powers entrusted to me under section 47, paragraph 7 of council order numbr 438476, that Mister Buttle, Archibald residing at 412 North Tower Shangri-La Towers has been invited to assist the Ministry of Information with certain inquiries, and that he is liable to certain financial obligations as specified in council order RV/CZ/907/X. Sign here, please. Thank you. That is your receipt for your husband, and here is my receipt for your receipt."
We (the so-called "normal" human beings) place an importance to our privacy that sets the need to be not-monitored in our homes higher than the need to avoid some crimes that could possibly happen.
And some of us (less pretentious) folks "place an importance to our privacy that sets the need to be not-monitored [anywhere] higher than the need to avoid some crimes that could possibly happen."
On the other hand, our behavior in public places is already monitored by Mrs. Grundy, so having a camera filming us in those circumstances will not make much difference in our personal sense of privacy.
Yeah, because having a nosy neighbor is exactly like having hundreds (thousands!) of hours of video footage of you stored away in digital format. Having a person see you walk down the street is exactly like having a second-by-second record of where you are stored in some government computer.
Forget the diagram, you're off the map.
"Driving is a privilege" is no more sensible than "walking around outside is a privilege." How about "appearing in a public place without having every minute detail of your appearance and habits scanned and logged forever along with the same information about everyone else in a location and medium unknown and inaccessible to you ... is a privilege."
Very rarely will they mention the waste that is so pervasive in our public services.
It might be interesting to note that (at least in the US) the public has been clamoring for the privitization of certain government services, thinking it would save money. The joke's on them. Many private companies, once they get their hand on the public teat, won't let go, and milk it for all they can. This is where these astronomically-prised ambulance rides come in. I can't seem to figure it out, but people in government that are responsible for spending money (never mind wisely, because that clearly doesn't happen), think this is OK. The government just can't seem to get away from this mindset that has them paying several times what a normal person with half a brain would end up paying for the same thing.
They were also conveniently not working the day of the London tube and bus bombings on 7/7. They even tried that scam the day Jean Charles de Menezes was gunned down at point blank after calmly walking through the ticket barriers, stopping to buy a newspaper and entering and sitting down in the tube train. Then it was leaked that the cameras were working fine, with their evidence not corrobating the police's version of events.
I am a professional driver, and see this every day. The motorways are full of people who are too scared to use the outside lane when neccessary, but who drive in the centre lane almost obsessively. Consequently, when they come up behind a slower moving vehicle in the centre lane, they brake, causing following traffic to either, brake hard themselves, or, swerve into the outside lane, regardless of the traffic situation. This is what causes pile-ups. I drive for miles on virtually empty motorways sometimes and there are still lines of cars in the centre lane, usually only 20 or 30 feet behind each other. There is another problem with this - when I have to overtake a vehicle in the left hand lane, I have to 'break into' this line of cars somehow. This is difficult when they are only 20 feet apart, so I have to pull out much sooner, and stake my claim before they pull alongside.
I could go on for hours about the bad things that are happening on the roads, but speeding is the least of my worries. My truck has a tachograph, so anytime the police wants to stop me, they can tell instantly whether I've been speeding or not. Why should the car drivers be exempt from this ? Bad driving is the real issue, and nothing much is being done about it. I am fed up with seeing females negotiating junctions with their right hand holding a phone to their left ear and their left hand on the right hand side of the steering wheel. Sometimes the right hand has a piece of food in it as well ! No-one can argue that that behaviour is safe, either for them or others.
In the end, there are too many cars on the road, driven by very basically qualified people. No one forced them into this situation. The free market sold these people cars and the idea of freedom, so they can't really complain that they need a car to get to work, the shops, whatever. It's down to their buying habits that turned villages into dormitories for workers who have to drive 50 miles to work everyday. Either people find alternative ways to work (internet based etc) or live closer to the place of employment.
How long can the country as a whole be held to ransom by the car ? The government can't ban cars outright, but they can make it as difficult (read expensive) as possible to own and operate one.
As a disclaimer, I must add that I ride a GSX1100 suzuki, and so speeding is a virtual certainty, but even then, it is so much harder to find adequate space in which to do so, because of the unpredictability of the other traffic. But as a motorcyclist, I know with painful certainty what a mistake at speed will mean. I have in the past fallen off and hit the road at over 60 mph, and it's not fun believe me. So, hands up all those car drivers who have intimate knowledge of the surface of the road. Apart from motorcyclists / cyclists, there aren't any hands showing. This is where it has gone wrong. Every driver should be aware of the road surface in front of them, the temperature, how wet the road is, what white lines feel like as you go over them. That's where true control comes from, being aware of your surroundings.
Instead, they have the heating up high, the sound turned up, and sit in the middle lane eating and talking on their phones, and hope that no-one gets in their way until they get to work.
I for one won't miss their departure from the environment, and sad to say, they deserve everything they get in the mean time.
The amount of times I've seen one truck trying to overtake another
(usually going uphill! Wtf?!) on a 2 lane road so causing hundreds of
metres of car traffic building up behind I've lost count of. What
exactly is the point of overtaking another truck if you're only going
0.5 mph faster? I mean really , what is the point? If I was of a paranoid
nature I'd say the truckers did it on purpose just to piss off the car
drivers.