Cameras to target bus lane motorists (From Swindon Advertiser)

there were an estimated 610,000 breaches last year

motorists would receive a £60 fine, which would be halved if paid within 14 days, or increased to £90 if unpaid within 56 days.

Ian13 wrote:
Does this work on foreign cars? Particularly the idiot in the black Ford Fiesta with Polish plates weaving in and out of Drakes Way yesterday?

Oldswindonian wrote:
About time too but unfortunately too little, too late and will be seen as another tax on motorists! And where are the patrol cars or cameras to catch the red light jumpers and the nutters driving with no lights on after dark and especially early morning. I have been commuting down the M4 for three years now and have never ever seen a patrol car. Who is keeping an eye on the idiots????

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:
As for bus lanes... It wouldn't be so bad if there were actually any buses using them!

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:

Oldswindonian wrote: About time too but unfortunately too little, too late and will be seen as another tax on motorists! And where are the patrol cars or cameras to catch the red light jumpers and the nutters driving with no lights on after dark and especially early morning. I have been commuting down the M4 for three years now and have never ever seen a patrol car. Who is keeping an eye on the idiots????

There were at least 4 in the Membury area just last night...

Oldswindonian wrote:

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:

Oldswindonian wrote: About time too but unfortunately too little, too late and will be seen as another tax on motorists! And where are the patrol cars or cameras to catch the red light jumpers and the nutters driving with no lights on after dark and especially early morning. I have been commuting down the M4 for three years now and have never ever seen a patrol car. Who is keeping an eye on the idiots????

There were at least 4 in the Membury area just last night...

Like buses then, all turning up together. I wonder what prompted such a gathering?

Tim Newroman wrote:
This would make some kind of sense, were it not for the fact that the majority of buses run virtually empty most of the time and are one of the major causes of all congestion and slow journey times on our roads.

Very obviously, this is about raising money.

there were an estimated 610,000 breaches last year

motorists would receive a £60 fine, which would be halved if paid within 14 days, or increased to £90 if unpaid within 56 days.

So, a likely revenue of at least £18,300,000 then.

THAT'S why the cameras will be guaranteed to go up.

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Tim Newroman wrote:
This would make some kind of sense, were it not for the fact that the majority of buses run virtually empty most of the time and are one of the major causes of all congestion and slow journey times on our roads.

Very obviously, this is about raising money.

there were an estimated 610,000 breaches last year

motorists would receive a £60 fine, which would be halved if paid within 14 days, or increased to £90 if unpaid within 56 days.

So, a likely revenue of at least £18,300,000 then.

THAT'S why the cameras will be guaranteed to go up.

There should also be a fine for the buses running empty

Oldswindonian wrote:

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:

Oldswindonian wrote: About time too but unfortunately too little, too late and will be seen as another tax on motorists! And where are the patrol cars or cameras to catch the red light jumpers and the nutters driving with no lights on after dark and especially early morning. I have been commuting down the M4 for three years now and have never ever seen a patrol car. Who is keeping an eye on the idiots????

There were at least 4 in the Membury area just last night...

Like buses then, all turning up together. I wonder what prompted such a gathering?

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Tim Newroman wrote:
This would make some kind of sense, were it not for the fact that the majority of buses run virtually empty most of the time and are one of the major causes of all congestion and slow journey times on our roads.

Very obviously, this is about raising money.

there were an estimated 610,000 breaches last year

motorists would receive a £60 fine, which would be halved if paid within 14 days, or increased to £90 if unpaid within 56 days.

So, a likely revenue of at least £18,300,000 then.

THAT'S why the cameras will be guaranteed to go up.

There should also be a fine for the buses running empty

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Tim Newroman wrote:
This would make some kind of sense, were it not for the fact that the majority of buses run virtually empty most of the time and are one of the major causes of all congestion and slow journey times on our roads.

Very obviously, this is about raising money.

there were an estimated 610,000 breaches last year

motorists would receive a £60 fine, which would be halved if paid within 14 days, or increased to £90 if unpaid within 56 days.

So, a likely revenue of at least £18,300,000 then.

THAT'S why the cameras will be guaranteed to go up.

There should also be a fine for the buses running empty

Bit of a ridiculous statement really. The buses cannot control who takes the bus any more than you or me. However I do agree that non-profitable bus routes should be removed. Use them or lose them!

rmc001 wrote:

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:

A.Baron-Cohen wrote:

Tim Newroman wrote:
This would make some kind of sense, were it not for the fact that the majority of buses run virtually empty most of the time and are one of the major causes of all congestion and slow journey times on our roads.

Very obviously, this is about raising money.

there were an estimated 610,000 breaches last year

motorists would receive a £60 fine, which would be halved if paid within 14 days, or increased to £90 if unpaid within 56 days.

So, a likely revenue of at least £18,300,000 then.

THAT'S why the cameras will be guaranteed to go up.

There should also be a fine for the buses running empty

Bit of a ridiculous statement really. The buses cannot control who takes the bus any more than you or me. However I do agree that non-profitable bus routes should be removed. Use them or lose them!

I don't agree with any of you there, every Swindon bus I've been on recently has been packed! No where to sit down, you have to stand up, and that's not just during rush hours, it's various times during the day! Must be down to reduced services, more people cramming onto fewer buses!
I think it's a bit of a joke though saying that cars in the bus lanes are holding up the buses, when the roadworks down Penzance Drive have been holding up many bus services for the last six months! Perhaps they should start fining people for digging the roads up, that should ease traffic jams.

Oldswindonian wrote:
About time too but unfortunately too little, too late and will be seen as another tax on motorists! And where are the patrol cars or cameras to catch the red light jumpers and the nutters driving with no lights on after dark and especially early morning. I have been commuting down the M4 for three years now and have never ever seen a patrol car. Who is keeping an eye on the idiots????

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:

Oldswindonian wrote:
About time too but unfortunately too little, too late and will be seen as another tax on motorists! And where are the patrol cars or cameras to catch the red light jumpers and the nutters driving with no lights on after dark and especially early morning. I have been commuting down the M4 for three years now and have never ever seen a patrol car. Who is keeping an eye on the idiots????

I agree.

I use to see them frequently on the M4 usually between J14 and J15 west bound parked up looking for speeders; whilst completely ignoring the red light jumpers at J15, and those that turn left on to the M4 east bound from the right hand lane. At J16 I've witnessed the police being unable to navigate the roundabout correctly changing lanes.

Thamesdown drive is also a hot spot for red light jumpers. Monday I had two articulated lorries and car run the red lights where the road from the old park and ride use to meet Thamesdown drive.

Slim1978 wrote:
Simply, bus lanes in Swindon should only operate at peak times 7.30am the morning till 9.30am and from 3.30pm to 6pm. At all other times they should be open to traffic. This would ease congestion everywhere. As for buses, the companies make enough money each year, they should contribute alot more to the up keep of the local roads. Just look at the damage on fleming way!! Another stealth tax on the poor motorist!!

bus lanes in Swindon should only operate at peak times 7.30am the morning till 9.30am and from 3.30pm to 6pm. At all other times they should be open to traffic.

Slim1978 wrote:
Simply, bus lanes in Swindon should only operate at peak times 7.30am the morning till 9.30am and from 3.30pm to 6pm. At all other times they should be open to traffic. This would ease congestion everywhere. As for buses, the companies make enough money each year, they should contribute alot more to the up keep of the local roads. Just look at the damage on fleming way!! Another stealth tax on the poor motorist!!

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:

Slim1978 wrote:
Simply, bus lanes in Swindon should only operate at peak times 7.30am the morning till 9.30am and from 3.30pm to 6pm. At all other times they should be open to traffic. This would ease congestion everywhere. As for buses, the companies make enough money each year, they should contribute alot more to the up keep of the local roads. Just look at the damage on fleming way!! Another stealth tax on the poor motorist!!

Don't buses pay a much larger amount of Vehicle Excise Duty?

Fines for unlawful behaviour are not taxes.

Tim Newroman wrote:

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:

Slim1978 wrote:
Simply, bus lanes in Swindon should only operate at peak times 7.30am the morning till 9.30am and from 3.30pm to 6pm. At all other times they should be open to traffic. This would ease congestion everywhere. As for buses, the companies make enough money each year, they should contribute alot more to the up keep of the local roads. Just look at the damage on fleming way!! Another stealth tax on the poor motorist!!

Don't buses pay a much larger amount of Vehicle Excise Duty?

Fines for unlawful behaviour are not taxes.

Depends which cars you compare them to, but the very biggest capacity buses that pollute the most only pay £500 per year.

Given that a very average, medium size car (that a person my barely drive all year) can easily cost £250 per year, the vehicle tax on buses is a complete joke.

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:

Tim Newroman wrote:

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:

Slim1978 wrote:
Simply, bus lanes in Swindon should only operate at peak times 7.30am the morning till 9.30am and from 3.30pm to 6pm. At all other times they should be open to traffic. This would ease congestion everywhere. As for buses, the companies make enough money each year, they should contribute alot more to the up keep of the local roads. Just look at the damage on fleming way!! Another stealth tax on the poor motorist!!

Don't buses pay a much larger amount of Vehicle Excise Duty?

Fines for unlawful behaviour are not taxes.

Depends which cars you compare them to, but the very biggest capacity buses that pollute the most only pay £500 per year.

Given that a very average, medium size car (that a person my barely drive all year) can easily cost £250 per year, the vehicle tax on buses is a complete joke.

My car (limited mileage) is £470 a year... In the course of a year it probably emits less carbon dioxide than the average kettle is responsible for.

:(

That a bus driving thousands and thousands of miles only pays £500 is ridiculous - we should get rid of VED completely and put all tax on the price of fuel..

nobody wrote:

Slim1978 wrote:
Simply, bus lanes in Swindon should only operate at peak times 7.30am the morning till 9.30am and from 3.30pm to 6pm. At all other times they should be open to traffic. This would ease congestion everywhere. As for buses, the companies make enough money each year, they should contribute alot more to the up keep of the local roads. Just look at the damage on fleming way!! Another stealth tax on the poor motorist!!

Typical knee jerk comment, how exactly is a fine for breaking the law a stealth tax?

Tim Newroman wrote:

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:

Tim Newroman wrote:

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:

Slim1978 wrote:
Simply, bus lanes in Swindon should only operate at peak times 7.30am the morning till 9.30am and from 3.30pm to 6pm. At all other times they should be open to traffic. This would ease congestion everywhere. As for buses, the companies make enough money each year, they should contribute alot more to the up keep of the local roads. Just look at the damage on fleming way!! Another stealth tax on the poor motorist!!

Don't buses pay a much larger amount of Vehicle Excise Duty?

Fines for unlawful behaviour are not taxes.

Depends which cars you compare them to, but the very biggest capacity buses that pollute the most only pay £500 per year.

Given that a very average, medium size car (that a person my barely drive all year) can easily cost £250 per year, the vehicle tax on buses is a complete joke.

My car (limited mileage) is £470 a year... In the course of a year it probably emits less carbon dioxide than the average kettle is responsible for.

:(

That a bus driving thousands and thousands of miles only pays £500 is ridiculous - we should get rid of VED completely and put all tax on the price of fuel..

Yup. However you look at it, buses pollute FAR more than cars and, mile for mile, pay FAR less road tax.

They congest roads, they now even have their own ******** roads given over to them and yet they run around, 80% of the time, either empty of with an amount of people on them who could actually fit in one taxi AND save money on their fare if they did so!

itsamess3 wrote:
Contrary to numerous claims many busses meet the requirement for zero RFL due to being under the emissions criteria. As do numerous LGVs-dual fuel-electric and HFC vehicles--even if they are test or prototype vehicles they must have a valid RFL.
I would add the site setting out rates do list busses of LGV size can pay as little as £165 p.a.

rmc001 wrote:

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:

Oldswindonian wrote:
About time too but unfortunately too little, too late and will be seen as another tax on motorists! And where are the patrol cars or cameras to catch the red light jumpers and the nutters driving with no lights on after dark and especially early morning. I have been commuting down the M4 for three years now and have never ever seen a patrol car. Who is keeping an eye on the idiots????

I agree.

I use to see them frequently on the M4 usually between J14 and J15 west bound parked up looking for speeders; whilst completely ignoring the red light jumpers at J15, and those that turn left on to the M4 east bound from the right hand lane. At J16 I've witnessed the police being unable to navigate the roundabout correctly changing lanes.

Thamesdown drive is also a hot spot for red light jumpers. Monday I had two articulated lorries and car run the red lights where the road from the old park and ride use to meet Thamesdown drive.

This has been an issue for years, where nothing is ever done about people who deliberately break the law by jumping red traffic lights, use mobile phones at the wheel, drunken driving etc. Better to go after the law obiding citizens who accidentally drift a few miles over the speed limit. At the end of the day it's all about how much money can be made from it.

itsamess3 wrote:
Tim
Cars come under the same rules as to emissions as LGVs/Busses-it is up to the individual to select a vehicle with zero emissions and RFL

Phantom Poster wrote:
Well now that it's a talent contest - I am a brain surgeon, speak 15 languages and am a stunt man in my spare-time. I can also spell 'operator' properly. Therefore anything I say trumps itsamess!

That's the nice thing about being on here - unlike real life you can be anything you want!

Your problem appears to be you expect everyone to accept all you say--they do not.

Phantom Poster wrote:
I'd guess that itsamess has been doing a bit of googling and that Serbo-Croatian will be an upcoming excuse for a certain spelling mistake!

itsamess3 wrote:

Phantom Poster wrote: Well now that it's a talent contest - I am a brain surgeon, speak 15 languages and am a stunt man in my spare-time. I can also spell 'operator' properly. Therefore anything I say trumps itsamess! That's the nice thing about being on here - unlike real life you can be anything you want! Your problem appears to be you expect everyone to accept all you say--they do not.

Well we all know you have no talent as your physics was not up to standard and you ended up in a local factory-yet still claimed to have been invited to view a top secret reactor--hardly surprising you cannot raise a comment on bus lanes--or anything really.

Bazzaroony wrote:
Thought the issue was bus lane cameras, not personal back stabbing.

Always Grumpy wrote:

Bazzaroony wrote: Thought the issue was bus lane cameras, not personal back stabbing.

No, bus lane cameras are nowhere near as interesting as seeing Itsamess squirming, as so many people point out the many faults in his idiotic ramblings.

Buses vs. busses

In 21st-century English, buses is the preferred plural of the noun bus. Busses appears occasionally, and dictionaries list it as a secondary spelling, but it’s been out of favor for over a century. This is true in all main varieties of English.

bus
noun (plural buses; US also busses)

Bazzaroony wrote:
This drags on and on ad nausium. Perhaps costs could be cut by having an artist sketch the bus lane transgressors.

itsamess3 wrote:
A.G.
There is nothing particularly clever in knowing that the OED lists both spellings and that they are both nouns and verbs. As the OED is charged with defining the english language and sanctioning new words--they are the authority. OED will also give the history of all words in depth if you use the option to sign in to their site.
Do remember you are the man who argued for over a week that diesel/electric trains were pure electric--so nice to hear all the new HS2 all electic trains and lines have been approved.
Meanwhile the debate is about the bus lanes and bus gates--do feel free to comment.

itsamess3 wrote:
Tim

"He also knows full well that 'busses' is not the accepted and correctly used modern spelling"
Fact-the OED defines spellings and their origins. Exam boards used to mark down for errors. Buses is a 21st century change from busses-but still valid.
Unlike some of your clangers in many of your posts (too many to point out and pettiness to do so).
The so called statistics you have claimed as to RFL are far from accurate as are your claims as to compared emissions. LGVs may well achieve the emission standard for zero RFL but penalised under the number of axles and suspension type.
P.P.
As i have stated--nothing you have said bears any resemblance to this article. If you review your posts of that time--you will find my responses to be accurate as to what you claimed.
You clearly breached site rules here and by adding your monologue left your electronic footprint-not so bright are you.

itsamess3 wrote:
A.G
"You even make a simple spelling mistake and claim it's ok to use a spelling of a word that hasn't been in common use for a hundred years".

Now thats what i call an own goal.

Until 1961 busses was the only listing in the OED as the plural for bus as both noun and verb. The entry threafter still listed both spellings with buses as the preferred word.
Appeals were made and for the new century OED confirmed listings for both spellings and buses as the preferred spelling.
As you have clearly said you will target me for your abuse at every opportunity--how childish.

itsamess3 wrote:
P.P.
Terms and conditions--do ask Tim as he recently quoted the site terms where it breaches to transfer material from the site to outside sources.
In your case you added comments to an article on a domain site to encourage others to read it. Simple-by adding to the domain-if no electronic trace was found you could not add the comment you made.
Only one person identified themselves here--add blindness to your faults.
No claim by me to have secret software--a simple task to trace the origin of the electronic pathway. Not illegal unless hacking into the particular computer.
More like you coming here and targetting me with your abusive comments which have nothing to do with the articles-commonly known as stalking and trolling.
You have consistently misquoted what and why i planned to do what i did-my aim was to prove that person to be an habitual liar as once identified the person who lied in court to have 2 persons convicted will face justice-my efforts have secured an appeal and on the warned list.
Your 4 questions
1. Mathematics has no relationship to spelling-scientific maths you should no as you claimed to have studied physics.
2. Tracing an electronic footprint is not illegal and can only be used if the user has broken internet law or a potential crime is suggested.
3. On your claim you were invited to view the reactor i told you then-general viewing is a guided tour and the only persons allowed in the reactor room are staff and visitors with security clearance.
I have moved twice since that debate-do keep up.
You do have this habit of misreporting what i said.

itsamess3 wrote:
"
Tim
"For somebody 'out of the country', the excellent and truthful post by Phantom Poster certainly stung you into a VERY rapid response.”

You are becoming quite hilarious and very much grasping at straws--firstly i was called back to headquarters from leave with 1 hour time difference-then onwards to another time zone of 9 hours difference for a specific purpose. Many airlines now allow communication devices.

Tim Newroman wrote:
Most people would expect a highly qualified, internationally admired nuclear scientist to be able to spell, 'operator'.

Even more people would expect such an individual to be able to laugh off their error, once pointed out to them, as a simple - inevitable - typo.

However, nobody can quite believe that such a person would, for a number of days, continually repea the claim that their misspelling was actually a correct spelling.

Hope your trip abroad is going well, you seem to have spent the majority of it posting on here or chasing a moving BBC signal.

itsamess3 wrote:
"
Tim
"For somebody 'out of the country', the excellent and truthful post by Phantom Poster certainly stung you into a VERY rapid response.”

You are becoming quite hilarious and very much grasping at straws--firstly i was called back to headquarters from leave with 1 hour time difference-then onwards to another time zone of 9 hours difference for a specific purpose. Many airlines now allow communication devices.