Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

UK to monitor all vehicles movements.

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by Geoff3DMN, Nov 16, 2005.

  1. Yes and as soon as the government can 'justify' it.

  2. Yes but not for more than 10 years.

    0 vote(s)
  3. Maybe, but not for a long long time.

    0 vote(s)
  4. Never happen here...

    0 vote(s)
  1. This is a link to a web article on 'The Register' web site.


    I thought this sort of thing was at least 10 years away... but it seems I was being optimistic... although it's probably that far away from being implemented in Australia anyway.

    This sort of system is only the first stage also... in vehicle monitoring will be the next 'big thing' *sigh*.

    Enjoy your (mostly) unmonitored motorbike riding while it lasts people...
  2. QUOTE from above link. "Don't worry though - if you haven't done anything wrong you've nothing to fear."

  3. I read that line as being anti the idea...

    I just assumed something at the end like your 'yeah right ok'
  4. Actually, it gets even worse. The government has the power - and the technology - to remotely control the movement of your car (ie. speed, braking) via satellite. It requires equipment installed of course, but this can easily be accomplished at YOUR expense, compulsorily.
    Exactly what the consequences might be of a computer in space shutting your throttle for you in the middle of a fast sweeper (as you creep over the speed limit) don't bear thinking about.
    Or doing the same in the middle of an overtake :shock:
  5. the sky IS falling

    C'mon guys, read the report. It clearly states "according to an Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) strategy document leaked to the Sunday Times"

    Strategy documents appear all the time, they don't always result in action.

    "sensors every 400 yards"; there's no government in the country who could afford such a system every 4 kilometres..
  6. Those sensors could be bulk produced for a few hundred dollars tops in quantity.

    The cost of a motorway is in the millions of pounds per km and few thousand more for monitoring is nothing.
  7. The Gasto system in England is used all over the nation; we can't even agree on speed limits between states in a nation where only one of our states ISN'T bigger than England......
  8. That's about the only reason I suspect we won't have vehicle monitoring here until in vehicle monitoring becomes common... excepting perhaps high volume roads like the Hume and city freeways.

    All bets are off once a cheap in vehicle system is available though I reckon...
  9. Motorola have an in-car system on trial in the US as we speak. It's supposed to be for warning of police coming up from behind, ambulances, school crossings, etc, but it requires a sensor in the car and transponders on top of every second light staunchion, hideously expensive, I would have thought. And there's some disquiet that it could be turned from passive to active use.
  10. Political suicide.

    This is just the safetycrat coppers and public servants thinking that they yet more weapons to tackle modern crime. A nightstick and a bobby helmet used to do the trick.
  11. I find it worrying though that they are actually considering this sort of stuff... because what someone can think of someone else will find a way to do eventually...
  12. The ignition of every new bike will be interlocked to the compulsory seat-mounted anal probe.

    There are no consequent safety benefits, but symbolism's important.
  13. I dispute that; in certain parts of Sydney they will become mandatory. :LOL:
  14. It was always going to happen I guess...just a question of when.

    You should be more concerned about the monitoring of people movements ;)
  15. personally i not sure whether that sort of system is going to work here. Remember alot of these samller countries you can drive/ride from one side to the other in 1 day. So with size we have more roads to cover and idea like the sensos every 400 meters they just couldn't justify, in most of te rural areas. I would think we will end up with more of a gps tracking system if they were to introduce any system here........... either way still scary stuff (how will you be able to go have an affair if you are being traced) :p :LOL:
  16. If a car can be built that drives itself safely in all road conditions and suituations then one day very few people will ever drive on a public road.Using gps, radar, and on road sensors as this is already been developed although in its infancy.

    Over 90% off accidents are caused by human error. When a self driving car is mass produced that causes far less accidents than this, then insurance for non-self driving cars will go through the roof. Their will be lobby groups and safety advocates calling for it to be made illegal to drive on a public road considering all the lives that can be saved by cars that drive themselves with signifigantly less errors leading to accidents and road deaths. Somewhere in the world a government, maybe a country like Japan will legislate for no more human driving (its just to risky). Also the cars will communicate with each other and the roads will work more effeciently. The stats will show huge improvement in road safety and the world will follow on. The only place to drive/ride will be on a track. I think that in a highly industriallized country with already excellent roads this could happen bettween 15 - 30 years.

  17. next thing you know, they'll want to shove a gps tracker up our bums to both reduce workplace accidents and prevent crime.

    people pay their taxes and let the government know where they live an work, that's enough. they don't want them tracking their every move - that's a total invasion of privacy.

    remember, the government is supposed to work for us, not dictate crap like this.
  18. So how many bikes use motorways /freeways if there's an alternative?

    This stuff is crap for catching real criminals or terrorists. Unless they are in a real hurry anyone with something to hide will use the B & C roads and avoid the motorways. The only ones that they'll catch are the dumb ones - and they'll catch them anyway. :LOL:

    What you really need to worry about is the mandatory registering of ALL vehicles - even those which are off the road being restored - or sitting in a museum somewhere :roll: . Ask the Classic & Vintage people in Britain about the effects of that. It would be a nice little earner and I'm surprised no one here has thought of it - actually no, on second thoughts the rural lobby would kill it, farmers might have to pay for all those POS that they've got rusting away in sheds :LOL:

    Anyway, as someone said - it's a strategy paper - the cops will put it up, it will get knocked back but they'll get something less (that they really want)in its place.

  19. It's a popular line nowadays, whittling away our civil liberties is as simple as saying "we need to catch terrorists, and our system might catch a couple of them if they are dumb. Oh, by the way, we are also going to use to enforce speed limits, do rego checks and keep a database of where the rest of you have been"

    Just throw the word "terrorists" in there, and you can slip any kind of fascist legislation through - regardless of whether it will actually stop terrorism.

    What about the idea of charging people $400 a year on their licence instead of their vehicle? make registration a nominal fee, and make every moving machine or road user (incl bicycles 8) ) need to be registered. :D
  20. Forget rego what we really need is something along the lines of the US system where every vehicle must have at least 3rd party insurance, at least that way no one would be out of pocket if they're not at fault in an accident.