H

It only seems to be since the yanks woke up.

Over here if you’re just a bit over they’ll normally put you on a speed awareness course for the first time getting caught.

And I 100% agree on fines being income based. I think some of the Scandinavian countries have done that. I also think there needs to be some kind of catch for the super rich who work the system so they don’t really declare an income. Maybe if your net worth is x times the national average the fine is the greater of either a percentage of your net worth or income.

In the vicinity of camera sites, the pre/post reductions ranged from 8% to 49% for all crashes and 11% to 44% for fatal and serious injury crashes. Compared with controls, the relative improvement in pre/post injury crash proportions ranged from 8% to 50%.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20927736/

I don’t know what the rules are in the USA but over here you should be stopping on amber, not blasting through.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/light-signals-controlling-traffic

Maybe you guys ought to campaign to get the law changed. They used to be grey over here, but pressure was put on the government and how they’re all high vis yellow with loads of warnings before them.

Sucks to be whenever you are I guess. I’m used to that way they work where I live.

Fixed speed camera housings located within an area of street or highway lighting should be coloured yellow either by painting both the front and back of the housing or covering both the front and back of the housing with retroreflective sheeting. In an area not covered by street or highway lighting, the speed camera housing should be treated with yellow retroreflective sheeting.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a819278e5274a2e87dbe588/dft-circular-0107.pdf

I mean I don’t know how you could think it wouldn’t be. Well signposted camera will help you pay more attention to your speed on the slope, it’s woods so presumably animals could run out at you.

If you can’t see a bright fucking yellow speed camera, and haven’t been paying attention to the ten dozen signed, then that’s 100% on you.

I don’t think anyone has ever received a speeding fine from a speed camera who was going at the speed limit.

Stop being a cunt and think of others road safety.

Except they do make it safer and because there’s always tonnes of signs around them you don’t get the brake slamming. They act as a deterrent. Plus accidents at lower speeds are inherently less dangerous.

Mobile speed traps, however, are a definite revenue boost.

So you’re going to go back on the death (and injury) part now that it has been pointed out that the study you linked was only about the collisions. And itself points research that shows that there is a reduction in death (and injury).

Right?

1. if you drive at the speed limit you won’t have a problem

2. the speed camera will be well signposted (car on the left so this is the UK) while it’s not a legal requirement that they have signposts I’ve never come across a fixed camera that isn’t

3. If you don’t break the law you won’t have a problem

4. the camera is painted bright yellow for visibility

5. once again for the those at the back who are hard of thinking: don’t speed and you won’t get fined

6. usually for first time offences if you’re just a bit over the limit you’ll get the option of a speed awareness course.

7. You’ve probably come to expect odd numbered points to tell you to not break the law by now, so I’ll mix it up: if you get caught breaking the law and get a slap on the wrist, don’t keep breaking the law.

I do agree though that the fining structure should be reformed, it should be a percentage of income with some provision in place so the super rich can’t get out of paying their appropriate share too.

Road safety is bad mmkay

"We” as in consumers don’t use enough to hurt companies by divesting.

I think you’re confused by what divesting is. That’s us as business owners, not as customers (obviously we as customers can hit them simultaneously from the other side too).

Yes, individually it doesn’t hurt them much, but it becomes the death of a thousand cuts.

If you can put pressure on your pension provider, local government, church, favourite charity or any other organisation you care about to drop funds with them in entirely then all the better.

By all means do anything you can to reduce your individual carbon footprint

Divesting is not to do with that, it’s about hitting these companies right in the share price.

Which, as I said, is exactly why we should stop giving them our money. Divestment is a key thing people can will hurt these companies massively.

The most significant difference individuals can make is to create political and legal pressure by voting and protesting.

Well can also stop giving them our money. Reduce consumption of their products through alternatives and overall reduction. We can also divest our investments away from funds that include their shares.

I think in vivo technologies (like CRISPR) will be the biggest game changer in medicine since antibiotics. The danger is that without robust socialised medical institutions these become cures that only the rich can afford.

That dog has amazing core strength lol.

Noises?

It brings new functionality and customization options for a Samsung phone. It’s a really cool app.