Comments on: UK Speed Camera Burned, More Maryland Photos

By: BMW325I

BMW325I — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 06:16:07 +0000

Or to be more discrete about it except the initial drill hole. Use expanding foam as it slowly destroys the insides. Or get a beater and ram it from behind.

By: Areitu

Areitu — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 21:55:58 +0000

no_slushbox : Regarding destroying speed cameras, thermite is not illegal to possess and the ingredients are relatively easy to obtain. Butane torches and old tires are also easily found.

Detroit-Iron :
I’ve always wondered the same thing. I imagine you could simply wash the paint off.

By: David Holzman

David Holzman — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 20:21:48 +0000

An intelligent technology would change the speed limit on vehicles based on the zone they enter: 75 for highway, 30 for residential streets, 15 for narrow streets.

That could start a stampede to old cars

By: Flashpoint

Flashpoint — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 17:24:14 +0000

These cameras are about one thing…making money.

If the government really were out to “protect citizens from themselves”, cars would have alcohol sensors that refuse to start the car based on the driver’s health, and they would be SPEED LIMITED TO 70 MPH.

An intelligent technology would change the speed limit on vehicles based on the zone they enter: 75 for highway, 30 for residential streets, 15 for narrow streets.

But, I know this is coming. After all, newer cars can have their engines disabled by the police to prevent car chases LOL.

By: Detroit-Iron

Detroit-Iron — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:29:10 +0000

How about paintball guns?

By: David Holzman

David Holzman — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:19:12 +0000

another great comment directly above by no_slushbox. I’m David Holzman and I approve this message.

By: no_slushbox

no_slushbox — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 15:35:35 +0000

Camera warnings seem like a damn good strategy. Especially since a huge speed camera weakness is that they are stuck in a fixed location.

Destroying speed cameras is a pretty serious offense, and usually involves the illegal use of explosives or firearms, likely adding to the offense. Simply putting up warnings is much less risky.

However, there are three problems with the above strategy:

1) They are defacing the road, and even if they are using chalk they could possibly face some trumped up vandalism or driver distraction charge.

2) They have to STAND IN THE ROAD to write the message.

3) “GOV. SCAM” or “GREEDY SCAM” is not a particularly effective warning that a speed camera is coming up. It’s more likely to make people think that some random nut is running loose in the area.

I would advise these people to simply put up cheap but large and noticeable signs by the side of the road saying: “Warning: Speed Camera Ahead”.

In some areas they might even be able to get permission from the owner of the property next to the road to put the sign up on their property – putting the sign beyond the reach of the authorities.

Even if people speeding past their property really pisses off the property owner a “Warning: Speed Camera Ahead” sign is going to slow people down much more effectively than a hidden speed camera targeted more at revenue generation than speed control.

By: toxicroach

toxicroach — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 15:00:14 +0000

I dunno, cutting into their profits is probably the only really effective way to stop it. They are cutting down on yellow light times to increase revenue, for gods sake. It’s not like they are even pretending to themselves that they are working for the public benefit, and the practice is so lucrative they aren’t going to shut down voluntarily.