UK Karting - Notice Board (Chat) : Re: We'll see.......

Notice Board (Chat)

Re: We'll see.......
Posted by 'itpro' on 10 Aug 2010 @ 21:12

| View Message Thread | Reply to this message |

itproJoined: August 2001
Total Posts: 6
[ View User Profile ]

Hold on......

If the Gatso was a 'money making tool' as you claim (as I SAID you'd claimed....)... then how do you 'square' that with your comment about: '....or cut the speed cameras to cut money...' ? Look at what you are claiming:-

'cut the cost of something which makes us a FORTUNE by switching it OFF and L*O*S*I*N*G the fortune....'

Surely, you can see that would be BONKERS....!!!?????

Secondly, like the REST of you.... you simply don't UNDERSTAND cameras or their relationship to speed limits..... Cameras can NEVER be in the 'wrong place' (so long as they are WITHIN speed limit areas). You COULD argue that the SPEED LIMIT was in the 'wrong' place or was at the 'wrong' value but the camera only ENFORCES the existing SPEED LIMIT! No matter WHAT you think about the positioning of the camera... the speed limit applies to the WHOLE area covered by the SPEED LIMIT.... it's not for YOU or ANYONE to decide that a certain PART of the speed limited area need NOT be obeyed any more than it's acceptable for ME to claim that I should be ALLOWED to 'mug' people in 'certain streets.... becasue I don't think the law should apply THERE!'

Get that into your head..... Cameras CANNOT be in the 'wrong place'..... it's ONLY speed limts which can be!

Thirdly... YES... SPECS ('average' speed cameras) are 'better'..... but..... they cost VASTLY more money. A Gatso costs Ł40,000 to install but a single SPECS 'tower' costs...... Ł100,000...... and you CANNOT fit them in 'single units'.... two is the MINIMUM! Secondly, they can ONLY work if there is another unit covering EVERY possible 'exit' from the road on which a driver can LEAVE the 'SPEC covered road'. Taken to its logical conclusion, that would require BILLIONS of pounds of cameras to cover a medium sized TOWN! Obviously, 'my side' would LOVE to use SPECS throughout the country but we KNOW that they HAVE to be restricted to 'simple' roads becasue they are N*O*T a licence to print money!......

Finally, nobody has EVER said that more speed MUST cause more accidents. That's plain DAFT as motorways have less accidents than country roads (mile for mile) and the speeds are HIGHER on motorways...... BUT..... what we DO claim is that if you DON'T enforce speed limits RIGIDLY in certain locations, the number of accidetns AT those locations WILL increase......

As I have said many times, now..... we'll SEE if switching OFF the Gatsos DOES increase the numbers of KSIs (Kills or Serious Injuries)....

Are you a 'gambling man' who'd like to take some BETS on the outcome......? Well..... you are anyway..... you are betting that you won't be killed or lose a loved one because cameras are switched off..... I hope you win THAT bet!

Ian

Message Thread:

We'll see....... by 'itpro' (10 Aug 2010 @ 17:53)

Re: We'll see....... by 'Aquila' (10 Aug 2010 @ 18:43)

Re: We'll see....... by 'itpro' (10 Aug 2010 @ 20:06)

Re: We'll see....... by 'Aquila' (10 Aug 2010 @ 20:45)

Re: We'll see....... by 'itpro' << You are here!

Re: We'll see....... by 'Aquila' (10 Aug 2010 @ 21:21)

Its 2010 by 'DavyBoy' (10 Aug 2010 @ 21:29)

Re: Its 2010 by 'Aquila' (10 Aug 2010 @ 21:36)

Re: Its 2010 by 'itpro' (10 Aug 2010 @ 22:03)

The oddest thing is. by 'AlfieMoon' (10 Aug 2010 @ 22:06)

Re: The oddest thing is. by 'itpro' (11 Aug 2010 @ 1:10)

Re: The oddest thing is. by 'AlfieMoon' (11 Aug 2010 @ 13:51)

Re: The oddest thing is. by 'itpro' (11 Aug 2010 @ 16:22)

Re: Its 2010.... Davy by 'itpro' (10 Aug 2010 @ 21:59)

Re: Its 2010.... Davy by 'DavyBoy' (11 Aug 2010 @ 14:17)

Re: Its 2010.... Davy by 'Traxtar' (11 Aug 2010 @ 15:10)

Re: Its 2010.... Davy by 'itpro' (11 Aug 2010 @ 16:29)

Re: Its 2010.... Davy by 'DavyBoy' (11 Aug 2010 @ 18:42)

Re: Its 2010.... Davy by 'RoadRat' (11 Aug 2010 @ 18:53)

Re: Its 2010.... RoadRat by 'itpro' (11 Aug 2010 @ 22:04)

Re: Its 2010.... Davy by 'itpro' (11 Aug 2010 @ 21:58)

Its not quite the same Ian by 'DavyBoy' (12 Aug 2010 @ 8:47)

Re: Its not quite the same Ian by 'itpro' (12 Aug 2010 @ 10:13)

Re: Its not quite the same Ian by 'DavyBoy' (12 Aug 2010 @ 11:46)

Re: Its not quite the same Ian by 'itpro' (12 Aug 2010 @ 13:33)

Re: Its not quite the same Ian by 'DavyBoy' (12 Aug 2010 @ 16:17)

Re: Its not quite the same Ian by 'itpro' (12 Aug 2010 @ 16:31)

Re: Its not quite the same Ian by 'DavyBoy' (12 Aug 2010 @ 17:53)

Re: Its not quite the same Ian by 'itpro' (13 Aug 2010 @ 10:42)

Re: Its not quite the same Ian by 'davidmc' (13 Aug 2010 @ 14:06)

Of COURSE I support the development of limiters by 'itpro' (13 Aug 2010 @ 14:53)

Re: Its not quite the same Ian by 'davidmc' (12 Aug 2010 @ 18:27)

Ok, you two! by 'itpro' (13 Aug 2010 @ 10:55)

Re: Ok, you two! by 'DavyBoy' (13 Aug 2010 @ 11:29)

Re: Ok, you two! Hang on.... by 'itpro' (13 Aug 2010 @ 11:42)

Re: Ok, you two! Hang on.... by 'DavyBoy' (13 Aug 2010 @ 13:56)

Re: Ok, you two! Hang on.... by 'itpro' (13 Aug 2010 @ 14:43)

Re: Ok, you two! Hang on.... by 'DavyBoy' (13 Aug 2010 @ 15:13)

Re: Ok, you two! Hang on.... by 'davidmc' (13 Aug 2010 @ 15:17)

Re: Ok, you two! Hang on.... by 'itpro' (13 Aug 2010 @ 15:40)

Re: Ok, you two! Hang on.... by 'itpro' (13 Aug 2010 @ 15:51)

Re: Itpro by 'davidmc' (13 Aug 2010 @ 16:01)

Re: Ok, you two! Hang on.... by 'itpro' (13 Aug 2010 @ 16:20)

Re: Ok, you two! Hang on.... by 'DavyBoy' (13 Aug 2010 @ 17:57)

Re: Ok, you two! Hang on.... by 'itpro' (16 Aug 2010 @ 14:09)

Itpro by 'davidmc' (16 Aug 2010 @ 15:00)

Re: Ok, you two! Hang on.... by 'itpro' (16 Aug 2010 @ 21:10)

Re: Ok, you two! by 'davidmc' (13 Aug 2010 @ 11:53)

Re: Ok, you two! by 'itpro' (13 Aug 2010 @ 12:14)

Re: Ok, you two! by 'davidmc' (13 Aug 2010 @ 13:07)

Re: Ok, you two! by 'itpro' (13 Aug 2010 @ 14:32)

Re: Ok, you two! by 'RoadRat' (13 Aug 2010 @ 15:06)

RoadRat by 'itpro' (13 Aug 2010 @ 16:08)

Re: Ok, you two! by 'davidmc' (13 Aug 2010 @ 15:13)

Re: Ok, you two! by 'itpro' (13 Aug 2010 @ 15:53)

Re: Ok, you two! by 'Traxtar' (16 Aug 2010 @ 18:10)

Re: Ok, you two! by 'itpro' (16 Aug 2010 @ 21:15)

Re: We'll see....... by 'Aquila' (10 Aug 2010 @ 21:31)

Re: We'll see....... by 'itpro' (10 Aug 2010 @ 22:01)

Re: We'll see....... by 'itpro' (10 Aug 2010 @ 21:56)

Re: We'll see....... by 'RoadRat' (11 Aug 2010 @ 11:23)

Re: We'll see....... by 'PaulMRotax' (11 Aug 2010 @ 20:55)

Re: We'll see....... by 'Newshound' (11 Aug 2010 @ 21:14)

Re: We'll see....... by 'PaulMRotax' (11 Aug 2010 @ 21:34)

Re: We'll see....... Newshound by 'itpro' (11 Aug 2010 @ 21:54)

Re: We'll see....... Newshound by 'PaulMRotax' (12 Aug 2010 @ 7:45)

Re: We'll see....... Newshound by 'itpro' (12 Aug 2010 @ 10:19)

Re: We'll see....... Newshound by 'PaulMRotax' (12 Aug 2010 @ 18:44)

Here's the 'WINNER' by Paul! by 'itpro' (13 Aug 2010 @ 11:27)

Re: Here's the 'WINNER' by Paul! by 'PaulMRotax' (13 Aug 2010 @ 18:40)

Re: Here's the 'WINNER' by Paul! by 'itpro' (16 Aug 2010 @ 12:25)

Re: Here's the 'WINNER' by Paul! by 'PaulMRotax' (17 Aug 2010 @ 21:15)

Paul..... by 'itpro' (11 Aug 2010 @ 22:07)

Re: Paul..... by 'Doink' (12 Aug 2010 @ 0:11)

Re: Paul..... by 'itpro' (12 Aug 2010 @ 10:29)

Re: Paul..... by 'PaulMRotax' (12 Aug 2010 @ 18:47)

Re: We'll see....... by 'Newshound' (11 Aug 2010 @ 22:20)

Re: We'll see....... by 'stevenw' (12 Aug 2010 @ 1:08)

Re: We'll see....... by 'Aquila' (12 Aug 2010 @ 7:30)

Re: We'll see....... by 'PaulMRotax' (12 Aug 2010 @ 7:39)

Re: We'll see....... by 'Newshound' (12 Aug 2010 @ 8:58)

Newshound by 'stevenw' (12 Aug 2010 @ 9:05)

Re: Newshound by 'Newshound' (12 Aug 2010 @ 9:09)

Re: Newshound by 'stevenw' (12 Aug 2010 @ 9:20)

Re: We'll see....... by 'PaulMRotax' (12 Aug 2010 @ 18:49)

Re: We'll see....... by 'PaulMRotax' (12 Aug 2010 @ 7:51)

Re: We'll see....... by 'RoadRat' (12 Aug 2010 @ 8:38)

Re: We'll see....... by 'Aquila' (12 Aug 2010 @ 9:00)

Re: We'll see....... by 'itpro' (12 Aug 2010 @ 10:07)

Re: We'll see....... by 'RoadRat' (12 Aug 2010 @ 11:18)

Re: We'll see....... by 'itpro' (12 Aug 2010 @ 11:44)

Re: We'll see....... by 'Doink' (12 Aug 2010 @ 12:00)

Re: We'll see....... by 'itpro' (12 Aug 2010 @ 13:34)

Re: We'll see....... by 'RoadRat' (12 Aug 2010 @ 12:25)

Re: We'll see....... by 'itpro' (12 Aug 2010 @ 13:26)

Re: We'll see....... by 'davidmc' (12 Aug 2010 @ 18:51)

Re: We'll see....... by 'itpro' (13 Aug 2010 @ 11:01)

Re: We'll see....... by 'davidmc' (13 Aug 2010 @ 12:02)

Re: We'll see....... by 'itpro' (13 Aug 2010 @ 12:19)

Re: We'll see....... by 'davidmc' (13 Aug 2010 @ 13:12)

Re: We'll see....... by 'Aquila' (12 Aug 2010 @ 12:12)

Re: We'll see....... by 'Newshound' (12 Aug 2010 @ 13:41)

Re: We'll see....... by 'itpro' (12 Aug 2010 @ 13:48)

Re: We'll see....... by 'itpro' (12 Aug 2010 @ 13:45)

Re: We'll see....... by 'Aquila' (12 Aug 2010 @ 14:13)

Re: We'll see....... by 'itpro' (12 Aug 2010 @ 14:40)

Re: We'll see....... by 'PaulMRotax' (12 Aug 2010 @ 18:54)

Re: We'll see....... by 'itpro' (13 Aug 2010 @ 11:03)

Re: We'll see....... by 'buzzinrussell' (12 Aug 2010 @ 14:38)

Re: We'll see....... by 'Aquila' (12 Aug 2010 @ 14:41)

Re: We'll see....... by 'itpro' (12 Aug 2010 @ 14:47)

Re: We'll see....... by 'itpro' (12 Aug 2010 @ 14:45)

Re: We'll see....... by 'Gillard77' (12 Aug 2010 @ 16:36)

Re: We'll see....... by 'Newshound' (12 Aug 2010 @ 16:53)

Re: We'll see....... by 'davidmc' (12 Aug 2010 @ 19:04)

Newshound by 'itpro' (13 Aug 2010 @ 11:33)

Re: We'll see....... by 'buzzinrussell' (12 Aug 2010 @ 20:54)

Be careful Russ....... by 'Newshound' (12 Aug 2010 @ 21:24)

Re: Be careful Russ....... by 'buzzinrussell' (12 Aug 2010 @ 22:15)

Re: Be careful Russ....... by 'PaulMRotax' (12 Aug 2010 @ 22:35)

Re: We'll see....... by 'itpro' (13 Aug 2010 @ 11:45)

Firmly touching wood as I type. by 'RoadRat' (13 Aug 2010 @ 18:44)

Did I really say that....... by 'RoadRat' (14 Aug 2010 @ 7:40)

Re: Did I really say that....... by 'Doink' (14 Aug 2010 @ 12:21)

For those who think I claim to be perfect.... by 'itpro' (16 Aug 2010 @ 12:36)

Re: For those who think I claim to be perfect.... by 'Gillard77' (16 Aug 2010 @ 15:30)

Re: For those who think I claim to be perfect.... by 'itpro' (17 Aug 2010 @ 0:05)

Re: For those who think I claim to be perfect.... by 'PaulMRotax' (19 Aug 2010 @ 7:48)

Gillard by 'itpro' (13 Aug 2010 @ 11:29)

Re: Gillard by 'Gillard77' (13 Aug 2010 @ 13:01)

Post a Reply:

You may post a direct reply to this message which will appear in this thread.
To post a new or unrelated message use This Form. Top of Page
Notice Board Index

[ UK Karting Main Index ]


News	Karts & Karting	Notice Board	Market Place	Companies Directory	Tracks Directory	Events Calendar	Race Results	Photo Gallery	Links