Brits To Tackle Loud Exhaust Pipes With Noise Cameras

[Bheezy27403_imp]

You will like a red light camera after a car hit you or someone in your family gets hurt by a car running a red light.

A red light camera will do nothing to prevent that. They aren't there for safety, they are strictly an income producing construct set up by lazy governments.

[GoldOxide_imp]

You will like a red light camera after a car hit you or someone in your family gets hurt by a car running a red light.

A red light camera will do nothing to prevent that. They aren't there for safety, they are strictly an income producing construct set up by lazy governments.

A red light camera will do nothing to prevent that. They aren't there for safety, they are strictly an income producing construct set up by lazy governments.
Hmm, have to disagree to somewhat. Maybe some gov'ts are "lazy", but it is known practice that many set-ups are decoys that only appear to be monitoring - I suppose to save costs. Nevertheless, decoy or authentic set-up, the motive is to modify driver behaviour and hopefully reduce risk to everybody.

[Bazbro_imp]

You will like a red light camera after a car hit you or someone in your family gets hurt by a car running a red light.

A red light camera will do nothing to prevent that. They aren't there for safety, they are strictly an income producing construct set up by lazy governments.

A red light camera will do nothing to prevent that. They aren't there for safety, they are strictly an income producing construct set up by lazy governments.
Sorry, but I strongly disagree, Bheezy.
The UK figures show that well-placed cameras at accident-spot junctions and stretches of road really DO focus minds and reduce collisions,/deaths.
What went wrong in the UK was that every council jumped onto the bandwagon and were putting up cameras all over the place in inappropriate spots too. This blatant "revenue earning" was exposed for what it was and the government put a stop to it due to public protest.
So there is a middle way - dangerous junctions or stretches of road protected by cameras, but a proliferation of merely revenue-earning cameras is a no-no. That'sl all you have to guard against.
A spin-off from this is that when you're warned there is a camera, you KNOW it is an accident black spot and can react accordingly with extra care.

[Randy B]

When red light camera go in, you tend to reduce red light running, but you get a corresponding increase of rear enders at those intersections due to the "unexpected" stop.
And if someone is going to run a light into an intersection and cause an accident, they aren't going to stop for a camera. If they are running a red light trying to beat it and miss by ½ a second, POP, they get a ticket. But if they run a stale red into an intersection, that's when the accidents happen. I.E. they just weren't paying attention to the signal in the first place and ran it. No camera is going to stop that behavior. I'd attribute that to distracted driving over anything else.
But what do I know, I just stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

[Squibble_imp]

You will like a red light camera after a car hit you or someone in your family gets hurt by a car running a red light.

A red light camera will do nothing to prevent that. They aren't there for safety, they are strictly an income producing construct set up by lazy governments.

A red light camera will do nothing to prevent that. They aren't there for safety, they are strictly an income producing construct set up by lazy governments.
Sorry, but I strongly disagree, Bheezy.
The UK figures show that well-placed cameras at accident-spot junctions and stretches of road really DO focus minds and reduce collisions,/deaths.
What went wrong in the UK was that every council jumped onto the bandwagon and were putting up cameras all over the place in inappropriate spots too. This blatant "revenue earning" was exposed for what it was and the government put a stop to it due to public protest.
So there is a middle way - dangerous junctions or stretches of road protected by cameras, but a proliferation of merely revenue-earning cameras is a no-no. That'sl all you have to guard against.
A spin-off from this is that when you're warned there is a camera, you KNOW it is an accident black spot and can react accordingly with extra care.

A red light camera will do nothing to prevent that. They aren't there for safety, they are strictly an income producing construct set up by lazy governments.
Sorry, but I strongly disagree, Bheezy.
The UK figures show that well-placed cameras at accident-spot junctions and stretches of road really DO focus minds and reduce collisions,/deaths.
What went wrong in the UK was that every council jumped onto the bandwagon and were putting up cameras all over the place in inappropriate spots too. This blatant "revenue earning" was exposed for what it was and the government put a stop to it due to public protest.
So there is a middle way - dangerous junctions or stretches of road protected by cameras, but a proliferation of merely revenue-earning cameras is a no-no. That'sl all you have to guard against.
A spin-off from this is that when you're warned there is a camera, you KNOW it is an accident black spot and can react accordingly with extra care.
I agree wholeheartedly, the camera's are in essence a good idea and do have an impact on the safety, but, the as Bazbro say's the councils in the UK have used them as a huge "cash cow"

Interesting to hear so many of the US members saying they would like to see the noise camera's on their side of the pond, in a lot of cases with bike exhausts the ones that make the most noise seem to be Harley's

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-n...l-vehicles

[Houtman_imp]

I'm a fairly radical libertarian. But I'm not an anarchist. Regarding personal liberty, someone once said, "Your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose." Governments exist to stop, punish, and prevent contact between fists and noses.

Noise pollution is a serious social problem that detracts from the enjoyment of life and increases stress and health problems by depriving people of the ability to chill and relax. Although not pleasant, I am tolerant of necessary noise like jackhammering to repair a sidewalk and lawn mowers. I'm not tolerant of unnecessary noise like open turbo'd exhaust on speeding dump trucks, f@rt-can tuner cars, "rolling coal" diesel pickups, "boom-boom" cars, and illegally modified car and motorcycle exhaust.

There's a reason it's illegal: it's @&!#%@ obnoxious! Riding around on an extremely loud motorcycle is the social equivalent of f@rting in people's faces. What makes anyone think that is cool and should be tolerated? We all have to live together and having personal liberty in a civil society means being cognizant and respectful of others' right to peace and quiet. Logically, the rider of a loud motorcycle can't claim a right to make noise while denying that others have a right to enjoy a quiet environment. Since the rider of the loud bike is at cause and the passive citizen being disturbed is at effect, the loud rider is an aural aggressor and is objectively in the wrong. The passive citizen on the other hand has done nothing to disturb their neighbors' enjoyment of their lives.

Those who deny rights to others can claim none for themselves. And, there's no such thing as the "right to disturb".

Bring on the noise police.

VERY WELL STATED !

You will like a red light camera after a car hit you or someone in your family gets hurt by a car running a red light.

A red light camera will do nothing to prevent that. They aren't there for safety, they are strictly an income producing construct set up by lazy governments.

A red light camera will do nothing to prevent that. They aren't there for safety, they are strictly an income producing construct set up by lazy governments. I disagree with your statement , after a heavy fine some people might think twice about running a red light , especially if their insurance goes up as well.

[Bazbro_imp]

The evidence is to the contrary, Randy. After the second or third ticket and the offender in danger of losing his licence, insurance premium going up, etc., the penny drops that, er, maybe they ought to be taking more care and NOT tempted to jump red lights!

[Bheezy27403_imp]

A ticket after the fact of an accident will not negate the harm done in the accident.

[Randy B]

The evidence is to the contrary, Randy. After the second or third ticket and the offender in danger of losing his licence, insurance premium going up, etc., the penny drops that, er, maybe they ought to be taking more care and NOT tempted to jump red lights!

You're talking about those ½ second jumpers I mentioned, not the stale light runners that are not paying attention to the road.

The other major issue I have with this is that you have people operating a vehicle that doesn't own it. be it a family member, a friend, or an employee. The ticket still goes to the owner of the vehicle, not the operator. This goes straight to due process and the lack of it when it comes to these cameras.
I get it, we all want a safer world, but the world is not safe. You can't legislate out bad behavior no matter how badly that you might want to. People will continue to look at their phones, put on makeup, read the paper (only old people), eat CEREAL (I've seen this)....basically do anything and everything except pay attention to the road while driving, and no amount of laws or fines will stop them.
Don't get me wrong here, running red lights is a bad thing, and so are overly loud exhaust pipes. I have sat next to an open pipe V-twin in traffic and it was deafening with the window up. That needs to be taken care of by the police, and not with a fixit ticket. Add points and insurance premiums to the cost and they'll put the quieter pipes back on. If they don't, impound the vehicle.
Either way, the cameras are revenue streams more than anything. And one of the big arguments against them? They target the poor and underclass. Go figure.

[Bazbro_imp]

You're right Bheezy, but the object is to change bad behaviour over time. We went through all these debates when the cameras were being trialled and then installed.
The only people with anything to fear are the constantly terminally-poor drivers who regularly, as part of their normal driving habits, take chances at red lights.
You, as a law-abiding, 'normal' driver, have nothing at all to fear from cameras at dangerous junctions - nothing to fear and everything to gain.
Just imagine the situation where someone who ran a red light, then slammed into you. The camera would show what he'd done and all his protestations that it was YOU who had jumped YOUR light would be proven nonsense. You then win!
No, Randy ,my statement refers to ALL red light jumpers - they ALL get ticketed and some cameras can even show how long the light has been red, evidence of really dangerous driving.