If you object to surveillance you should have objected about 20 years ago.
This is nothing to do with surveillance and everything to do with people wanting to go to drive their massive 4x4 around in a city.
I get why they’re not happy about it, but at the same time sod them and their NIMBY attudes. The reason that these laws are necessary is because people will insist on buying stupid massive cars that do 8 miles to the gallon.
OR drive Diesels without particle filters fitted.
There is zero evidence that the information stored by ULEZ is anything more than the registrations of cars that are more dangerous than is acceptable. If you are part of the 90% of people who drive cars within the standard then there is no need to keep the information on file.
ULEZ is about particulates, not gas guzzling. Unfortunately, it won’t take many SUVs off the road. It affects petrol cars registered before 2006 and diesels before 2015.
90% of cars (and 95% of trips) are already compliant. There is a scrappage scheme to help people switch to a compliant model.
Yes, fuck surveillance. Driving is licensed and regulated. If you don’t want to be tracked, leave your phone at home and wear suitable clothing. Ride a bike or walk.
I think that if you are looking to reduce vehicle pollution, using number-plate readers for that specific purpose is a proportionate measure, yes. They are already used for the central London congestion charge and outer borough LTN enforcement
Good. Fuck surveillance.
If you object to surveillance you should have objected about 20 years ago.
This is nothing to do with surveillance and everything to do with people wanting to go to drive their massive 4x4 around in a city.
I get why they’re not happy about it, but at the same time sod them and their NIMBY attudes. The reason that these laws are necessary is because people will insist on buying stupid massive cars that do 8 miles to the gallon.
OR drive Diesels without particle filters fitted. There is zero evidence that the information stored by ULEZ is anything more than the registrations of cars that are more dangerous than is acceptable. If you are part of the 90% of people who drive cars within the standard then there is no need to keep the information on file.
That could be done quite easy by just increase the tax on more wasteful and polluting cars. No need to put up cameras at each corner.
@echodot @CookieJarObserver
Also to there being more people.
ULEZ is about particulates, not gas guzzling. Unfortunately, it won’t take many SUVs off the road. It affects petrol cars registered before 2006 and diesels before 2015.
90% of cars (and 95% of trips) are already compliant. There is a scrappage scheme to help people switch to a compliant model.
Yes, fuck surveillance. Driving is licensed and regulated. If you don’t want to be tracked, leave your phone at home and wear suitable clothing. Ride a bike or walk.
deleted by creator
That could be more easily achieved by increasing the taxes on polluting cars in general. There is no need for cameras at every corner.
deleted by creator
Less fuel-wasting cars anywhere would be a win-win over CCTV everywhere.
deleted by creator
Or just forbidding them in general… But no, cameras! The awnser for all your
SurveillanceClimate Change questions.This is like being against encryption of private messages because pedophiles could use that…
I’m honestly amazed you’re being down voted. It’s actually scary to me that people are ok with, and defending surveillance like this.
I’m amazed your are defending the use of old, polluting vehicle that contribute to chronic ill-health
You think mass surveillance of the London area is the only way to handle pollution? You honestly think that?
I think that if you are looking to reduce vehicle pollution, using number-plate readers for that specific purpose is a proportionate measure, yes. They are already used for the central London congestion charge and outer borough LTN enforcement