Going 420 mph In A 30 mph Zone?

from the you-might-want-to-slow-down-a-bit dept

It's been almost exactly three years since we wrote about a UK driver who received an automated ticket from a speeding camera, clocking his car cruising at a speedy 406 mph. The police chalked it up to a "clerical error." However, apparently those clerical errors are still happening, as a cab driver in the UK has now been issued a ticket for traveling 420 mph in a 30 mph zone. Again, the police chalk it up to "an employee processing error." Unfortunately, despite the driver's claims in the article that he's set a new land speed record, that's not even true in the world of bogus tickets. We've seen other reports clocking people at at least 480 mph. It's probably not such a big deal when the errors are so obvious -- but it makes you wonder how many people get in trouble for similar errors that aren't so extreme? Unless you happen to be good enough at math to disprove a slight exaggeration in your speed, you might just be completely out of luck. You would think that systems like these would (a) not let humans adjust the recorded speed and (b) have some sort of "reality" filter to pick up these extreme errors -- but apparently neither feature is in place. Perhaps that's why we once had that story of a brick wall clocked at 58 mph.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    Enrico Suarve, 8 Jan 2007 @ 2:40am

    Re: Re: Re: gravy train

    True enough anonymous - but why should those who can afford a decent sat nav system be effectively 'allowed' to do so with impunity or at least at less risk than others?

    It's the double standard that is concerning on this one

    Also it is like misanthropic humanist states, the gravy train mentality of them - they are not there for safety or anything similar - they are there for £££

    To drive to town from my house I pass 2 schools >20 busy pedestrian crossings and 1 junction at which 3 people have died in separate crashes over 2 years

    I also pass 4 speed cameras - needless to say the cameras are not anywhere near the above danger areas and are instead all on sections where the road becomes a dual carriageway, which if you are going to speed is probably the safest place to do so barring a motorway

    There are very few accidents near them, not because they make the road safer, but because there never were many accidents there - they are on the safest sections of road

    I agree "don't speed" is the best policy but, if the system you employ to raise money from speeders is inaccurate and prone to error then it’s wrong and don't try to sell such an obvious money making scheme as a 'safety system'

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.