Residents woke in terror after speed camera was destroyed (From Daily Echo)

“However there was a potential risk to the nearby petrol station which could have had serious consequences.”

Not very likely, civil disobedience rules the day. Very well done to whoever did this. Its just a revenue collection device.

if there was a desire to slow traffic at this junction you'd have a mini roundabout in place.

This destruction is happening all over the country. Until they can make these cameras Bomb Proof, they will always be targeted by their victims.

A happy new year to whoever did this. Made my day!

So nice to read some good news just for once....perhaps the perpetrator(s) could turn their attention to the 21 cameras in Southampton next!!

Give this person a medal, too much money spent on cameras and not enough being put back into the community

Well played

Gone in a flash,
Dont supposed it was a lightning strike considering a neighbour reporting thunder and lightning?
Still they'll have it replaced by the time I go back to work no doubt.
Good luck to whoever did this.
s/w just-wild
Yup I reckon they were livid

even lo i find it amusing, it was bloody stupid, there was no telling where bits of metal could off gone. and any one agreeing with this sort of action you need to see a head shrink has do the people who done this. there are much safer ways like what happen in manchester some one use glass etching acid on the lens, or the one in north cumbria where a pipe cutter was used and the camera was thrown in the river.

No doubt the camera will be replaced with another, so what was the point of doing this?

CAMERA PROBE: An investigation officer looks at the damaged speed camera in Bishopstoke.

Don't think so somehow, unless he's in Panto... "It's behind you!"

If this is how they look at the damage, doesn't instill a lot of confidence in them catching the person responsible!

Interesting comments above....I wonder if you are the ones who complain about mindless vandalism throughout the towns and cities....and then complain because its the taxpayer..you and me..that pays for its replacement....stran
ge.. doesn't seem so funny anymore does it !

Good to see all the people who usually moan about tax payers' money down the drain now applauding this act of wanton destruction. Why? Because it serves *your* needs for a few days? Hypocrites.

That's a few grand squeezed out of the HCC purse... for the lulz.

Lone Ranger read my mind :D

Lone Ranger wrote:
Interesting comments above....I wonder if you are the ones who complain about mindless vandalism throughout the towns and cities....and then complain because its the taxpayer..you and me..that pays for its replacement....stran

ge.. doesn't seem so funny anymore does it !

Very good point LR, absolutely wreckless to do this and frightening for the people living nearby, and it will only be replaced at the cost to the Tax Payer, so absolutely pointless. Anyone who goes round blowing up speed cameras in the middle of the night really want to get themselves some sort of a life!

I agree with Lone Ranger. Whilst speed cameras are a nuisance to those who like to drive their cars faster than the legal limit, there is no excuse for mindless vandalism. I suppose the people who thought it was good are also those who drop litter out of cars - don't get me started. Have a merry new year anyway....

Wayne Thomas must have found a new route home.

Big Mac wrote:
Wayne Thomas must have found a new route home.

PMSL!! I love your one-liners Big Mac! :D

southy wrote:
even lo i find it amusing, it was bloody stupid, there was no telling where bits of metal could off gone. and any one agreeing with this sort of action you need to see a head shrink has do the people who done this. there are much safer ways like what happen in manchester some one use glass etching acid on the lens, or the one in north cumbria where a pipe cutter was used and the camera was thrown in the river.

at 2am I'd have thought the risk was minimal. If you go to the end of your road you'll find a differant band wagon to jump on, you've just exposed yourself as the plonker I thought you were.

I'm sure any camera removed with a disc or pipe cutter was in a less exposed area. well done again to whoever did this. Ignore prats like this idiot.

Take note, In Swindon the cameras have been removed and accidents and speeding levels have gone DOWN !!
There must be a moral in this somewhere

freemantlegirl2 wrote:

Lone Ranger wrote: Interesting comments above....I wonder if you are the ones who complain about mindless vandalism throughout the towns and cities....and then complain because its the taxpayer..you and me..that pays for its replacement....stran ge.. doesn't seem so funny anymore does it !

Very good point LR, absolutely wreckless to do this and frightening for the people living nearby, and it will only be replaced at the cost to the Tax Payer, so absolutely pointless. Anyone who goes round blowing up speed cameras in the middle of the night really want to get themselves some sort of a life!

you two are very funny, this was in no way mindless vandalism. and its funny, very very funny indeed.

As for needing a life, I'd say they've got one and a mighty fine attitude to unfair tax collection.

The police sent me a photo of my car speeding and a charge of £60 and 3 points on my license

I sent them a photograph of my cheque

mick sterbs wrote:

freemantlegirl2 wrote:

Lone Ranger wrote: Interesting comments above....I wonder if you are the ones who complain about mindless vandalism throughout the towns and cities....and then complain because its the taxpayer..you and me..that pays for its replacement....stran ge.. doesn't seem so funny anymore does it !

Very good point LR, absolutely wreckless to do this and frightening for the people living nearby, and it will only be replaced at the cost to the Tax Payer, so absolutely pointless. Anyone who goes round blowing up speed cameras in the middle of the night really want to get themselves some sort of a life!

you two are very funny, this was in no way mindless vandalism. and its funny, very very funny indeed. As for needing a life, I'd say they've got one and a mighty fine attitude to unfair tax collection.

If you don't like the term 'mindless vandalism', how about 'thoughtless vandalism'? No thought for anyone other than themselves!
There was a reason for introducing these cameras. It was an attempt to curb speeding and in the process, save some lives - maybe even yours!

Anyone who has a driving licence should know the speed limits. If they want to break them, then let them take the consequences. They gamble and if they lose, they get a fine.

If you don't like speed cameras, stand for parliament with that as your agenda and see how many mindless vandals support you!

Linesman wrote:

mick sterbs wrote:

freemantlegirl2 wrote:

Lone Ranger wrote: Interesting comments above....I wonder if you are the ones who complain about mindless vandalism throughout the towns and cities....and then complain because its the taxpayer..you and me..that pays for its replacement....stran ge.. doesn't seem so funny anymore does it !

Very good point LR, absolutely wreckless to do this and frightening for the people living nearby, and it will only be replaced at the cost to the Tax Payer, so absolutely pointless. Anyone who goes round blowing up speed cameras in the middle of the night really want to get themselves some sort of a life!

you two are very funny, this was in no way mindless vandalism. and its funny, very very funny indeed. As for needing a life, I'd say they've got one and a mighty fine attitude to unfair tax collection.

If you don't like the term 'mindless vandalism', how about 'thoughtless vandalism'? No thought for anyone other than themselves! There was a reason for introducing these cameras. It was an attempt to curb speeding and in the process, save some lives - maybe even yours! Anyone who has a driving licence should know the speed limits. If they want to break them, then let them take the consequences. They gamble and if they lose, they get a fine. If you don't like speed cameras, stand for parliament with that as your agenda and see how many mindless vandals support you!

Couldn't agree more lino - I expect Mick thinks graffiti is art.....

Smiley69 wrote:

Linesman wrote:

mick sterbs wrote:

freemantlegirl2 wrote:

Lone Ranger wrote: Interesting comments above....I wonder if you are the ones who complain about mindless vandalism throughout the towns and cities....and then complain because its the taxpayer..you and me..that pays for its replacement....stran ge.. doesn't seem so funny anymore does it !

Very good point LR, absolutely wreckless to do this and frightening for the people living nearby, and it will only be replaced at the cost to the Tax Payer, so absolutely pointless. Anyone who goes round blowing up speed cameras in the middle of the night really want to get themselves some sort of a life!

you two are very funny, this was in no way mindless vandalism. and its funny, very very funny indeed. As for needing a life, I'd say they've got one and a mighty fine attitude to unfair tax collection.

If you don't like the term 'mindless vandalism', how about 'thoughtless vandalism'? No thought for anyone other than themselves! There was a reason for introducing these cameras. It was an attempt to curb speeding and in the process, save some lives - maybe even yours! Anyone who has a driving licence should know the speed limits. If they want to break them, then let them take the consequences. They gamble and if they lose, they get a fine. If you don't like speed cameras, stand for parliament with that as your agenda and see how many mindless vandals support you!

Couldn't agree more lino - I expect Mick thinks graffiti is art.....

Graffiti makes great art. Maybe we could all chip in and get Banksy to paint a camera there instead?

mick sterbs wrote:

southy wrote:
even lo i find it amusing, it was bloody stupid, there was no telling where bits of metal could off gone. and any one agreeing with this sort of action you need to see a head shrink has do the people who done this. there are much safer ways like what happen in manchester some one use glass etching acid on the lens, or the one in north cumbria where a pipe cutter was used and the camera was thrown in the river.

at 2am I'd have thought the risk was minimal. If you go to the end of your road you'll find a differant band wagon to jump on, you've just exposed yourself as the plonker I thought you were.

I'm sure any camera removed with a disc or pipe cutter was in a less exposed area. well done again to whoever did this. Ignore prats like this idiot.

it dont matter what time of day or night it was, this was just pain dumb, and stupid it happened near homes, just stop and think a bit before you open your gob again. a bit of metal the size of an iron filin traveling at the speed of a bullet will kill or main, any harden bits of metal could off easy gone though a window bounce or ricochet of a wall or window frame and still keep most of its speed and could of hit some one.
go and see a head shrink will you.

southy wrote:

mick sterbs wrote:

southy wrote:
even lo i find it amusing, it was bloody stupid, there was no telling where bits of metal could off gone. and any one agreeing with this sort of action you need to see a head shrink has do the people who done this. there are much safer ways like what happen in manchester some one use glass etching acid on the lens, or the one in north cumbria where a pipe cutter was used and the camera was thrown in the river.

at 2am I'd have thought the risk was minimal. If you go to the end of your road you'll find a differant band wagon to jump on, you've just exposed yourself as the plonker I thought you were.

I'm sure any camera removed with a disc or pipe cutter was in a less exposed area. well done again to whoever did this. Ignore prats like this idiot.

it dont matter what time of day or night it was, this was just pain dumb, and stupid it happened near homes, just stop and think a bit before you open your gob again. a bit of metal the size of an iron filin traveling at the speed of a bullet will kill or main, any harden bits of metal could off easy gone though a window bounce or ricochet of a wall or window frame and still keep most of its speed and could of hit some one.
go and see a head shrink will you.

Now the area of expertise has been expanded to cover ballistics. Fantastic.

I wonder how some of those who applaud this vandalism would feel if they had a call from the police today to tell them that their son or daughter had been killed at this very location by a speeding driver.

Southy, do you know of a good head shrink? if not I could locate one for you – save you the trouble of looking their number up again.

Derek of Dibden Purlieu wrote:

southy wrote:

mick sterbs wrote:

southy wrote:
even lo i find it amusing, it was bloody stupid, there was no telling where bits of metal could off gone. and any one agreeing with this sort of action you need to see a head shrink has do the people who done this. there are much safer ways like what happen in manchester some one use glass etching acid on the lens, or the one in north cumbria where a pipe cutter was used and the camera was thrown in the river.

at 2am I'd have thought the risk was minimal. If you go to the end of your road you'll find a differant band wagon to jump on, you've just exposed yourself as the plonker I thought you were.

I'm sure any camera removed with a disc or pipe cutter was in a less exposed area. well done again to whoever did this. Ignore prats like this idiot.

it dont matter what time of day or night it was, this was just pain dumb, and stupid it happened near homes, just stop and think a bit before you open your gob again. a bit of metal the size of an iron filin traveling at the speed of a bullet will kill or main, any harden bits of metal could off easy gone though a window bounce or ricochet of a wall or window frame and still keep most of its speed and could of hit some one.
go and see a head shrink will you.

Now the area of expertise has been expanded to cover ballistics. Fantastic.

no ben simple logic of physics and maths.

You got the simple bit right Southy

I know this camera very well.....it's near a junction on a ackward bend.

This camera's dangerous....people take their eyes off the road because of this camera and don't fully focus on the junction.

They'd be better off putting Traffic Lights at this junction instead.

to be boring and sit on both sides of the fence...... I think this is very funny, I doubt there was much danger to it being as it was 2.30 in the morning and it did put a smile on my face, rarely are these safety devices and serve that purpose but more money makers, however its true it will only be replaced out of tax payers money, bugger!

Bedlover wrote:
to be boring and sit on both sides of the fence...... I think this is very funny, I doubt there was much danger to it being as it was 2.30 in the morning and it did put a smile on my face, rarely are these safety devices and serve that purpose but more money makers, however its true it will only be replaced out of tax payers money, bugger!

the voice of reason, good man!

And a message to 'newsfanatic', don't be such a melodramatic drama queen! You are the sort of fool who won't except critism of striking firemen because your house could catch fire?

Big Mac wrote:
You got the simple bit right Southy

you better go and have a chat with the uxb div at marchwood, and let them explain to you. or go and revisit your head shrink.

my old man told me on xmas day, that he thought the camera had been blown up....

lmfao.... nice job :)

Bedlover wrote:
to be boring and sit on both sides of the fence...... I think this is very funny, I doubt there was much danger to it being as it was 2.30 in the morning and it did put a smile on my face, rarely are these safety devices and serve that purpose but more money makers, however its true it will only be replaced out of tax payers money, bugger!

good post, but people should be, before money.

The point is that NO-ONE knew when someone was going to drive by, walk by (some people do work at night you know!) and be hit by shrapnel... there was no guarantee that no-one would be hurt, explosives are dangerous things and totally unpredictable! it was wreckless and stupid... however funny we might find the idea, to do it so close to where people are living was foolhardy at best, and if they get caught maybe prison! is that best for their family? that they get banged up blowing a speed camera! ffs, people need to get a perspective on this.. I hate the things but they are signed, we know where they are so if you get caught by on e really you're not concentrating on the road. I'm all for a bit of public spirited action but this was stupidity at it's worst....

freemantlegirl2 wrote:
The point is that NO-ONE knew when someone was going to drive by, walk by (some people do work at night you know!) and be hit by shrapnel... there was no guarantee that no-one would be hurt, explosives are dangerous things and totally unpredictable! it was wreckless and stupid... however funny we might find the idea, to do it so close to where people are living was foolhardy at best, and if they get caught maybe prison! is that best for their family? that they get banged up blowing a speed camera! ffs, people need to get a perspective on this.. I hate the things but they are signed, we know where they are so if you get caught by on e really you're not concentrating on the road. I'm all for a bit of public spirited action but this was stupidity at it's worst....

what a load of rubbish, what do you suggest as a 'public spirited action' in defence of this tax.

Shrapnel? it was a small steel camera, not APC or tank? Depending on your view of speed camera's the shrapnel could of been classed as friendly fire I guess.

The majority think this was an excellent thing to do, you are flogging a dead horse (killed by shrapnel from a speed camera IED).

As Michael Caine said: "YOU WERE ONLY SUPPOSED TO BLOW THE BLOODY DOORS OFF !"

Well done whoever blew that camera up - brilliant . I expect the people that are moaning are the very same rover driving pains in the a*"e that preach the highway code to everyone and hold us all up just because they have nowhere to get to or they've allowed an extra four hours for their journey to halfords which they've been planning for six weeks . Speed cameras are unpopular for the simple reason that they're there for revenue and not safety reasons.

southy wrote:

Big Mac wrote:
You got the simple bit right Southy

you better go and have a chat with the uxb div at marchwood, and let them explain to you. or go and revisit your head shrink.

Southy, you are a legend in your own living room. Absorbed in the font of knowledge and wisdom, you're unique talent is truly wasted on mere matters of conjecture.
Your views on worldly events, (let alone the local scene), have no limit.
Please enlighten us all further...

This happened on Weds 23rd, and was after it had been previously covered in what looked like horse manure, so someone either had a serious issue with it, or it was struck by lightning? As has been previously posted though, it is on a very dangerous junction and a roundabout would be a much more sensible option. I drive the road every day to work and have done for the last 6yrs, I have never seen it flash, even the SatNav doesn't recognise it. I'm going for Mother Nature on this one, though with a injustice angle.

Big Mac wrote:

southy wrote:

Big Mac wrote:
You got the simple bit right Southy

you better go and have a chat with the uxb div at marchwood, and let them explain to you. or go and revisit your head shrink.

Southy, you are a legend in your own living room. Absorbed in the font of knowledge and wisdom, you're unique talent is truly wasted on mere matters of conjecture.
Your views on worldly events, (let alone the local scene), have no limit.
Please enlighten us all further...

oh i have my limits, but unlike many others i know where they are.
take a look at that picture what can you see.
i tell you what i can see an elongated dent just above the flash and where camera lens was.
makes you wonder what did they use to put the explosives in. was it a steel pipe or copper unlikey to be any thing softer than copper, because you look at the dip hood thats been blown up and taken part of the corner up to,
then you wonder what happen to the container the explosives was put in, what happen to the bits where did they go.
like i said in my first post its amusing but it dam right stupid what they done, they have acted with out thinking first what could of happen. a much better way would of been to use glass etching acid on the lens, that way the camera would still be there and not get replace so fast. it will all depend on how often it is used before they noticed the lens is damage.

This brilliant bit of vandalism would of been so much better if they had blown up a speed camera that was actually functioning. Its common knowledge that this one was never turned on.

Big Mac wrote:

Smiley69 wrote:

Linesman wrote:

mick sterbs wrote:

freemantlegirl2 wrote:

Lone Ranger wrote: Interesting comments above....I wonder if you are the ones who complain about mindless vandalism throughout the towns and cities....and then complain because its the taxpayer..you and me..that pays for its replacement....stran ge.. doesn't seem so funny anymore does it !

Very good point LR, absolutely wreckless to do this and frightening for the people living nearby, and it will only be replaced at the cost to the Tax Payer, so absolutely pointless. Anyone who goes round blowing up speed cameras in the middle of the night really want to get themselves some sort of a life!

you two are very funny, this was in no way mindless vandalism. and its funny, very very funny indeed. As for needing a life, I'd say they've got one and a mighty fine attitude to unfair tax collection.

If you don't like the term 'mindless vandalism', how about 'thoughtless vandalism'? No thought for anyone other than themselves! There was a reason for introducing these cameras. It was an attempt to curb speeding and in the process, save some lives - maybe even yours! Anyone who has a driving licence should know the speed limits. If they want to break them, then let them take the consequences. They gamble and if they lose, they get a fine. If you don't like speed cameras, stand for parliament with that as your agenda and see how many mindless vandals support you!

Couldn't agree more lino - I expect Mick thinks graffiti is art.....

Graffiti makes great art. Maybe we could all chip in and get Banksy to paint a camera there instead?

Graffiti? Art? Nah! Mick thinks it's an Italian dish that goes with chips!

Well done the bomber. Hope Julian Hewitt has to pay out of his own pocket the supercillious tw@

What a load of rubbish journalism, made to sound like a stick of dynamite was used!
"The grey camera lens was sent flying down the road" & "massive explosion" etc
Just read it again without adopting a pro or anti stance and you'll see what a badly written article it really is.
Bet it was just large firework that was set off and did more damage than was expected.
But don't expect to ever find out what really happened, because sensationalism is what sells papers, not factual reporting. This piece is just cr*p

From the article: “It’s quite worrying to think that there is someone going around with these type of explosive devices and being able to plant them so close to our homes.”

How melodramatic! This isn't Hollywood, we're not going to all have to barricade ourselves indoors while the camera-killers take over!

Fair play on this one, there are so many better ways to deal with road safety than the Big Brother approach (obligitory Orwellian reference).

There are to many cameras around these days. Well done to who ever did it.

OK...who left their curry on the camera?.

I do wonder... if the government introduced a policy where they abolished the fines, but three strikes and your licence is removed with zero tolerance, how people would feel?
.
My experience is that those who bemoan cameras "and the money they raise" is that they tend to have atleast 2 speeding fines under the hood. You all have every opportunity to starve them of their income, and yet the fines keep coming.

i think blowing up speed cameras is awful. My cat came running in frightened and wagging his tail. I had to give him a sedative and let him sleep inside the duvet. Their ears are so sensitive and he was so happy hunting for chickens in my neighbours back garden in Bishops Waltham.

Fair play to whoever did this and can they do the one in bitterne. Nothing more than a cash cow.

Sounds like whoever did this could become quite successful if he/she turned this into a business! If you do, can you fit the two cameras on Northam Bridge into your hectic schedule please!!! =) Well done you! Keep up the good work!! Happy New Year!! =)

UTS wrote:
Fair play to whoever did this and can they do the one in bitterne. Nothing more than a cash cow.

Cash cow? As I said above drivers have every opportunity to starve their income.
.
No one is going to find it funny if the perp blows his hand off doing another. Then who is going to pay for the ambulance and A&E? (average cost £12k) Or the replacement camera installation (approx £5k). The idiot is a burden on the tax payer either way and everyone is paying for him.

This was a heroic act, and the results are as beautiful as the morning sunrise seen from the mountains of the Costa Del Sol.

There appears to be a sign of change on the horizon. Motorists get a very unfair deal these days, so.... I'd welcome more of this.

jimbobbo wrote:
This was a heroic act, and the results are as beautiful as the morning sunrise seen from the mountains of the Costa Del Sol. There appears to be a sign of change on the horizon. Motorists get a very unfair deal these days, so.... I'd welcome more of this.

I completely agree with you Jimbobbo!!! I've seen and climbed those very mountains!! I say climbed, it was a cable car but I climbed the rest of the way!! =)
It's about time us motorists fought back against these horrid cameras. Should there be more cameras that get this treatment? Yes. I'm with Jim and I would welcome more of this as well!! =)

bigronthestaff wrote:

jimbobbo wrote:
This was a heroic act, and the results are as beautiful as the morning sunrise seen from the mountains of the Costa Del Sol. There appears to be a sign of change on the horizon. Motorists get a very unfair deal these days, so.... I'd welcome more of this.

I completely agree with you Jimbobbo!!! I've seen and climbed those very mountains!! I say climbed, it was a cable car but I climbed the rest of the way!! =)
It's about time us motorists fought back against these horrid cameras. Should there be more cameras that get this treatment? Yes. I'm with Jim and I would welcome more of this as well!! =)

well here the easy answer for you and it dont cost money. so stay with in the speed limit. what is that saying commit a crime be prepared to pay the price. every time one gets damage it cost us the tax payers. and blowing them up near homes is stupid and a very careless act.

southy wrote:

bigronthestaff wrote:

jimbobbo wrote:
This was a heroic act, and the results are as beautiful as the morning sunrise seen from the mountains of the Costa Del Sol. There appears to be a sign of change on the horizon. Motorists get a very unfair deal these days, so.... I'd welcome more of this.

I completely agree with you Jimbobbo!!! I've seen and climbed those very mountains!! I say climbed, it was a cable car but I climbed the rest of the way!! =)
It's about time us motorists fought back against these horrid cameras. Should there be more cameras that get this treatment? Yes. I'm with Jim and I would welcome more of this as well!! =)

well here the easy answer for you and it dont cost money. so stay with in the speed limit. what is that saying commit a crime be prepared to pay the price. every time one gets damage it cost us the tax payers. and blowing them up near homes is stupid and a very careless act.

Southy, you don't have a clue mate.

My mother got fined for doing 35 miles per hour in a 30 this year. She's never had a motoring conviction in her 45 years of driving and she was on a downhill stretch of road. I'm not saying she is right, but the system sucks. Why should my mother be tarnished with the same brush as every other speeder, including those who blatantly disregard speeding regulations to such an extend that it becomes dangerous. My mother had to attend a drivers awareness course where she was patronised by a 12 year old for 4 hours for the handsome fee of 75 quid.

You strike me as a bit of a smart ****, jack of all trades, master of none type of guy.

Shoulda woulda coulda. Blowing up a speed camera classic. Did anybody die "No" was anybody injured "No". 1 question, how many traffic lights do you hear of being blown up. Not many because people understand they are their to control traffic which does save lives. Where as speed camera's are usaully in sneaky places to bring in revenue. If speed camera's were put on certain parts of the m27/m3 where deaths occur almost daily then i think people would not have such negativity towards these camera's.

jimbobbo wrote:

southy wrote:

bigronthestaff wrote:

jimbobbo wrote:
This was a heroic act, and the results are as beautiful as the morning sunrise seen from the mountains of the Costa Del Sol. There appears to be a sign of change on the horizon. Motorists get a very unfair deal these days, so.... I'd welcome more of this.

I completely agree with you Jimbobbo!!! I've seen and climbed those very mountains!! I say climbed, it was a cable car but I climbed the rest of the way!! =)
It's about time us motorists fought back against these horrid cameras. Should there be more cameras that get this treatment? Yes. I'm with Jim and I would welcome more of this as well!! =)

well here the easy answer for you and it dont cost money. so stay with in the speed limit. what is that saying commit a crime be prepared to pay the price. every time one gets damage it cost us the tax payers. and blowing them up near homes is stupid and a very careless act.

Southy, you don't have a clue mate.

My mother got fined for doing 35 miles per hour in a 30 this year. She's never had a motoring conviction in her 45 years of driving and she was on a downhill stretch of road. I'm not saying she is right, but the system sucks. Why should my mother be tarnished with the same brush as every other speeder, including those who blatantly disregard speeding regulations to such an extend that it becomes dangerous. My mother had to attend a drivers awareness course where she was patronised by a 12 year old for 4 hours for the handsome fee of 75 quid.

You strike me as a bit of a smart ****, jack of all trades, master of none type of guy.

yea well like they say the law is a as$ at times. but if your mother has been driving for 45 years then she should know how to hold a car back on its speed even going down hill.
look i am no to-goodie-two-shoes my self. but if i get caught speeding, then i look at what evidence they got, and see if there is an angle to slip though on. but if there is none then pled guilty and take what coming.
if your mum has been doing 2 miles less she could of slip though on the 10% rule, its not law but most judges will give you that 10% over the speed limit, for errors on the speed techo and going down hill or over taking.
listen set your radio at 101.5 and leave it on while your driving. you find out sooner later why.
what else ah yes check any speeding picture for other cars or road signs, those can give false readings, check to see if that camera was check and reset ect that day, use the law to beat the law.
not a jack of all trades i am a rigger by trade and one of the best at it, being a rigger brings you into contact with all sorts of things, things you aft to learn about before you do a job on what ever it is, other things you learn has you get older, plus i have some in common with people like carol vorderman mozart einstein hawkings and a number off other people and that is, well you know your brain is have its diffrent departments and theres a gap between each one some people are born with a connection bridge to one part of the brain to another part that should not be there. one of the most common is people with photographic memory they have this bridge across one part to another, it all depends on what part or parts is connect and how it will effect you, like carol vorderman she see a number or hears a number she also see a a shade of colour in her mind that represent that number like 2 red +2 red = 4 a darker red if she puts down the wrong answer say 5 it comes up has a total off beat colour say blue and she knows that its wrong right away, but because we have this condition you suffer else where, like my self i am able to store all sorts of info if i not right i will be very very close to being right, has andy of locks heath has all ready noticed and it bugs him a little bit. but i suffer like all the others like me in another area you probley all ready notice what it is grammar and spelling but i can live with it.
tell whats your earliest memory you can remember.

RealTalkSouthampton wrote:
Shoulda woulda coulda. Blowing up a speed camera classic. Did anybody die "No" was anybody injured "No". 1 question, how many traffic lights do you hear of being blown up. Not many because people understand they are their to control traffic which does save lives. Where as speed camera's are usaully in sneaky places to bring in revenue. If speed camera's were put on certain parts of the m27/m3 where deaths occur almost daily then i think people would not have such negativity towards these camera's.

Well thats rubbish! They're painted bright yellow!! How much harder is that to spot?
.
Signs warning you well before you approach them, painted bright yellow, too usually! Obviously you guys didnt see those then?
.
Then they're on a national list published by the AA, the RAC, the Government, even the Police will tell you where they are. And yet people still get fines.
.
If you're blind perhaps you shouldnt be driving is my beleif ;-P
.
So a question for you. If a man walked down your road at 2am firing a gun into the air, bullets flying every where but no one was hurt, would that be acceptable to you? You would want to know why he was firing a gun at 2am and would feel quite intimidated.

Well Done! Yet another REVENUE SCAMERA DESTROYED.. An interesting point though... Obviously the Police have a total lack of common sense!.. Just looking at the photo it is quite clear that it was NOT an explosion!.. It was quite obviously External.. Possibly a Shotgun?.. There seem to be pellet holes... When is our Government going to accept that the majority of people in this Country are NOT Stupid (Except for Politicians and Police Officers) Climate Change SCAM, Revenue Camera SCAM.. IRAQ WAR (Weapons of mass destruction) SCAM.. See:- http://tinyurl.com/y
e6tl9a
and
http://www.abd.org.u
k/
For the REAL TRUTH..

majoreyeswater wrote:
Well Done! Yet another REVENUE SCAMERA DESTROYED.. An interesting point though... Obviously the Police have a total lack of common sense!.. Just looking at the photo it is quite clear that it was NOT an explosion!.. It was quite obviously External.. Possibly a Shotgun?.. There seem to be pellet holes... When is our Government going to accept that the majority of people in this Country are NOT Stupid (Except for Politicians and Police Officers) Climate Change SCAM, Revenue Camera SCAM.. IRAQ WAR (Weapons of mass destruction) SCAM.. See:- http://tinyurl.com/y e6tl9a and http://www.abd.org.u k/ For the REAL TRUTH..

I thought about the 'explosion' idea too whilst looking at the photo above.

Question: How did the explosives get into the camera in the first place? Also, the top of the yellow front appears to be bowing inwards. I'm no physicist but, an explosion would have pushed this panel OUT, surely.

Job well done all the same, regardless!!

bigronthestaff wrote:

majoreyeswater wrote: Well Done! Yet another REVENUE SCAMERA DESTROYED.. An interesting point though... Obviously the Police have a total lack of common sense!.. Just looking at the photo it is quite clear that it was NOT an explosion!.. It was quite obviously External.. Possibly a Shotgun?.. There seem to be pellet holes... When is our Government going to accept that the majority of people in this Country are NOT Stupid (Except for Politicians and Police Officers) Climate Change SCAM, Revenue Camera SCAM.. IRAQ WAR (Weapons of mass destruction) SCAM.. See:- http://tinyurl.com/y e6tl9a and http://www.abd.org.u k/ For the REAL TRUTH..

I thought about the 'explosion' idea too whilst looking at the photo above. Question: How did the explosives get into the camera in the first place? Also, the top of the yellow front appears to be bowing inwards. I'm no physicist but, an explosion would have pushed this panel OUT, surely. Job well done all the same, regardless!!

Simple physics, its been taped to the lens and had blown the lid backwards. There is an overlap to the lid to allow for the sun and rain.
.
Shotguns would not do this, there would be evidence of cordite splatter if done at close proximity, or damage to surrounding properties if done from a distance.
.
Heat from the blast may also contribute to the shaping of the lid. As can the motion of it swing back.

downfader wrote:

bigronthestaff wrote:

majoreyeswater wrote: Well Done! Yet another REVENUE SCAMERA DESTROYED.. An interesting point though... Obviously the Police have a total lack of common sense!.. Just looking at the photo it is quite clear that it was NOT an explosion!.. It was quite obviously External.. Possibly a Shotgun?.. There seem to be pellet holes... When is our Government going to accept that the majority of people in this Country are NOT Stupid (Except for Politicians and Police Officers) Climate Change SCAM, Revenue Camera SCAM.. IRAQ WAR (Weapons of mass destruction) SCAM.. See:- http://tinyurl.com/y e6tl9a and http://www.abd.org.u k/ For the REAL TRUTH..

I thought about the 'explosion' idea too whilst looking at the photo above. Question: How did the explosives get into the camera in the first place? Also, the top of the yellow front appears to be bowing inwards. I'm no physicist but, an explosion would have pushed this panel OUT, surely. Job well done all the same, regardless!!

Simple physics, its been taped to the lens and had blown the lid backwards. There is an overlap to the lid to allow for the sun and rain. . Shotguns would not do this, there would be evidence of cordite splatter if done at close proximity, or damage to surrounding properties if done from a distance. . Heat from the blast may also contribute to the shaping of the lid. As can the motion of it swing back.

Very good point. Hadn't thought of that. Told you I was no physicist!!! =)

bigronthestaff wrote:

downfader wrote:

bigronthestaff wrote:

majoreyeswater wrote: Well Done! Yet another REVENUE SCAMERA DESTROYED.. An interesting point though... Obviously the Police have a total lack of common sense!.. Just looking at the photo it is quite clear that it was NOT an explosion!.. It was quite obviously External.. Possibly a Shotgun?.. There seem to be pellet holes... When is our Government going to accept that the majority of people in this Country are NOT Stupid (Except for Politicians and Police Officers) Climate Change SCAM, Revenue Camera SCAM.. IRAQ WAR (Weapons of mass destruction) SCAM.. See:- http://tinyurl.com/y e6tl9a and http://www.abd.org.u k/ For the REAL TRUTH..

I thought about the 'explosion' idea too whilst looking at the photo above. Question: How did the explosives get into the camera in the first place? Also, the top of the yellow front appears to be bowing inwards. I'm no physicist but, an explosion would have pushed this panel OUT, surely. Job well done all the same, regardless!!

Simple physics, its been taped to the lens and had blown the lid backwards. There is an overlap to the lid to allow for the sun and rain. . Shotguns would not do this, there would be evidence of cordite splatter if done at close proximity, or damage to surrounding properties if done from a distance. . Heat from the blast may also contribute to the shaping of the lid. As can the motion of it swing back.

Very good point. Hadn't thought of that. Told you I was no physicist!!! =)

:-)

Reports are coming in that the culprit drove off at 29mph in a state of drunkeness in his uninsured, untaxed, unroadworthy car.

sadly cameras don't catch drunk/uninsured/unta
xed deathtraps.

:-)

Report says "The force of the explosion sent the grey camera lens flying down the road" - I wonder how fast that was going.

Great in one way, as they are camera's for revenue and are mostly placed in low accident area's and I personally think until they are placed in high accident area's they are a complete waste of tax payers money.

On the flip side this will now take more money out of the tax payers pocket, it's a shame the government don't value killing speed to save live's, as much as they do to line their greedy pocket's!!!!

force544 wrote:
This brilliant bit of vandalism would of been so much better if they had blown up a speed camera that was actually functioning. Its common knowledge that this one was never turned on.

This camera does actually work because people i know have been caught on it well done to the person who done this x