Speed camera set on fire (From The Northern Echo)
Send us your pictures, video, news and views by texting NORTHERN ECHO to 80360 or email us
Speed camera set on fire
8:28pm Thursday 26th February 2009 in News
The speed camera on fire beside the A177 in Thorpe Thewles, near Stockton.
POLICE are investigating after a speed camera was set on fire.
Drivers on the A177 in Thorpe Thewles, near Stockton, called the emergency services at 7.45pm.
A tyre had been placed around the speed camera and set alight.
Passer-by Peter Troy of Sedgefield, said: "It is understandable that motorists feel anger about these things when they get penalty points, but this was blowing in the wind and pretty dangerous.
"I saw the burning tyre brush against one passing car."
The tyre then melted and fell to the ground, setting the verge on fire.
One fire crew from Stockton attended the scene to put out the blaze.
A spokesman for Cleveland Police confirmed they were investigating the incident.
Comments(32)
billysaid
says...
12:14am Fri 27 Feb 09
msg expat
says...
6:50am Fri 27 Feb 09
verysafedriver
says...
6:57am Fri 27 Feb 09
Billabong
says...
10:20am Fri 27 Feb 09
Dean M
says...
1:49pm Fri 27 Feb 09
I'd like to keep checking my speedo but I prefer to keep my eyes on the road....better to drive safely...
big arnie
says...
4:37pm Fri 27 Feb 09
"Oh bugger it, may as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb - Beryl, go into the boot and fetch me spare tyre and can of fuel..."
verysafedriver
says...
6:37pm Fri 27 Feb 09
verysafedriver
says...
6:39pm Fri 27 Feb 09
TimeBandit
says...
1:17pm Sat 28 Feb 09
When travelling along this route towards Sedgefield the road becomes single carriageway (national speed limit for this type of road 60mph) but there the limit drops to 50mph, there are no sidewalks and therefore next to no pedestrians ever present, there is a crossroads but that is also rarely used,a sharpe corner and then there is Thorpe Larches, small industrial units and a few houses where the speed limit remains at 50mph!, anyone with half a brain would assume that the limit would drop there but it does'nt. Mobile speed cameras frequent this stretch of road but nowhere near the houses or the corner nor the crossroads but along the straight stretch where vehicles coming off the dual carriageway are probaly doing 51mph (a speedo can have up to 10% error indication and still be legal!)or have accelerated slightly in anticipation of the dual carriageway, (cash cow cameras again!).
If you had bothered to read Dean M's comment properly you would have noticed that he does check his speedo but not obsessivley, prefering (as a good driver should) to keep his eyes on the road and his surroundings.
shoggoth
says...
3:59pm Sat 28 Feb 09
If you speed past one of these cameras, expect to pay the stupid-tax. While you are paying the stupid-tax I don't have to. Don't want to pay? Take notice of the clearly displayed speed limits and stay below them. Not hard is it.
verysafedriver
says...
10:17am Sun 1 Mar 09
verysafedriver
says...
1:21pm Sun 1 Mar 09
So lets recap... what exactly is wrong with speed cameras??? ah yes they catch people who break the speed limit hhmmm fancy that.
TimeBandit
says...
8:31pm Sun 1 Mar 09
As regards your foolish comment about my not being in control of my vehicle, how do you know this?. Throughout Spring, Summer and early Autumn I dispense with the car and ride a motorcycle, I have NEVER crashed nor fallen off in 20 odd years of riding, and have taken it up to 150mph (on a trackday) I might'nt be Valentino Rossi but I think I do have some riding ability. If I wished to avoid a speed camera then all I have to do is "pull a wheelie"(which I do'nt do on public roads!) and it cannot see my numberplate, instead I prefer to use roads which do'nt have fixed cameras, ie County Durham where the enlightened constabulary, if they catch you just one or two mph over the limit let it go, similarly in Northamptonshire, however Cleveland prosicute for fractions of mph over, so how about some consistency and apply the standards set by Durham nationally and then perhapes there would'nt such hostility towards speed cameras as then they would only be catching extreme offenders.
Please read my comments carefully and if you wish counter them with reasoned statements please do so but do'nt accuse me of writing stuff that I clearly have'nt and try to refrain from using insults it does you no credit, and suggests you feel your arguement perhapes is'nt too strong.
verysafedriver
says...
9:46am Mon 2 Mar 09
Dean M
says...
3:51pm Mon 2 Mar 09
If it was really about 'speed kills' then put them in front of schools, hospitals and other built-up areas where speed is more likely to kill.
And if we are constantly going to get nicked for a couple of miles or so over the limit then this will lead to having to constantly check the speedo - instead of watching the road.
verysafedriver
says...
4:40pm Mon 2 Mar 09
verysafedriver
says...
4:42pm Mon 2 Mar 09
Dean M
says...
5:54pm Mon 2 Mar 09
However, it is - in my opinion - the deliberate positioning of these camera's where they will catch large numbers of motorists, driving just a few mph over the limit in area's where there is little or no danger to pedestrians, that is questionable. This is what makes me (and many others) believe they are tax camera's.
billysaid
says...
7:44pm Mon 2 Mar 09
TimeBandit
says...
8:13pm Mon 2 Mar 09
Verysafedriver, take your head out of your backside and think about what you have written, that certainly is the case in County Durham but NOT in Cleveland where as I said fractions of an mph WILL get you prosecuted, and as I said before there is no consistency in applying the law.
However, only today, I was travelling along a road, in the Cleveland police authority area, with a 40mph speed limit. At this particular time of day the weather was bright and sunny and the road was bone dry, I was aware that a police patrol car was following me and a cursory glance at my speedo showed 42mph but the policeman was unperturbed as I was not tailgating anybody or otherwise endangering anyone, in other word a bit of discretion was wisely used, but had I gone past a speed camera it would have been 3 points and a fine.
In addition to a comment by Dean M about positioning of cameras (near schools etc) on the Stockton ring road a 30mph limit was introduced, however on this route is a primary school whose entrance is off this road but there is no pedestrian crossing(with or without signals there at all). There is a lollypop lady but she is at the mercy of the beer swillers(common in Stockton!),and mobile phone users-pity there is'nt a camera to catch these far worse offenders- what more proof does anyone need that local authorities and camera partnerships are NOT INTERESTED in road safety but in extracting revenue from allready overburdended motorists.
In France speed limits are dependant on weather conditions unlike here, where, on the 40mph road I mentioned before, 39mph might well have been inappropriate during the recent spate of bad weather we had but would a camera have detected this NO, the answer is to get more police vehicle out on patrol with experienced officers and then we might be rid of the drunks and mobile users some discretion could be used with speed depending on road conditions although I think we are all agreed that excessive amounts over the limit deserve prosecution.If I want to speed there are places I can go (at a cost) to do so and be safe from idiots on their mobiles, those who've had a few bevvies or most likely both!.
PettyComplainer
says...
9:44pm Mon 2 Mar 09
Speed cameras (even the police have stopped trying to call them 'safety cameras'!) only record the 'crime' of travelling faster than a proscribed limit, not prevent it.
Therefore the only benefit of cameras recording these offences are the resulting fines.
Dean M
says...
11:13pm Mon 2 Mar 09
verysafedriver
says...
8:34am Tue 3 Mar 09
er, can you show me where I haves said I have never done anything wrong??
Dean M
says...
9:33am Tue 3 Mar 09
Dean M
says...
9:34am Tue 3 Mar 09
verysafedriver
says...
6:11pm Wed 4 Mar 09
Ninja Rider
says...
9:15pm Wed 4 Mar 09
TimeBandit
says...
9:38pm Wed 4 Mar 09
Of course people get fined just for that very safe driver, if you do'nt believe me then come to Cleveland authority area- especially Redcar and Cleveland - and drive past a mobile unit 2mph over the limit and see what happens (save up your 60 quid first though!).
As regards more cameras, get real, in bad weather it may well be inappropriate to travel at or just below the speed limit but wheras a camera will not spot this, an experienced police officer almost certainly will and also cameras do'nt detect drunken driving or other offences. The reason possibly being is that the majority of road users are pretty responsible people who do'nt drink, use mobiles or drive recklessly but occationally stray a few mph over the limit - for which it is relativly easy to build a device to detect- and are therefore are an easy target for the money grabber government and authorities.
verysafedriver
says...
5:57pm Thu 5 Mar 09
verysafedriver
says...
5:59pm Thu 5 Mar 09
billysaid
says...
7:52pm Thu 5 Mar 09
Dean M says...
11:14pm Thu 26 Feb 09
Not that I would advocate people taking such drastic action of course......but I do hope they get away with it.