Una wrote:
<squeak!> Who is to judge whether behaviour is 'good'?
Me. :-) Well, that's why I put it in quotes.
and Louise responded to me:]
the police were being seen as "unfair" by these motorists.
That very much depends on where they're going to put their unmarked cars and when.
I beg to differ. Because although I can't argue much with this:
There are times and places when it is perfectly safe to exceed the legal speed limit
or this:
I don't see that it matters terribly if I choose to do 90mph on the M25 at midnight.
...I can take issue with the principle. There's a big ol' difference between whether it's sensible for the police to apprehend and/or prosecute, and whether you can be offended just because they didn't forewarn you.
Also bear in mind that the current speed limits were put in place in the 60s and haven't been revised since, except downwards in some places by local councils. If I were driving a 1960s car with drum brakes and narrow crossply tyres, I wouldn't want to do 90mph on the M25.
By and large, I wouldn't want to be hit by a car doing 30mph, never mind one doing 45.
As far as B7 is concerned, those cameras we see in the Way Back could be the exact equivalent of the current town centre cameras to reduce crime.
Could be. Una wrote:
But I would add that the technology which we have been discussing doesn't just have applications for preventing speeding
Indeed. But I think it's important to draw a distinction between the potential for abuse, the bad effects of a technology, and the good effects.
steve