An anonymous vigilante in Rovaniemi, Finland destroyed a speed camera with military-grade explosives on Wednesday. Video of the assault uploaded to YouTube showed the remote detonation of a 700g charge cleanly blew the head off an automated ticketing machine on a deserted road (watch video below). The assault appears to be the most professionally executed attack recorded on tape. In 2006, a British man used thermite to damage what he thought was a speed camera, but turned out to be a police surveillance device.
Attacks on photo enforcement devices have grown increasingly common in the UK as Wales, with a population of three million, reported at least 102 camera attacks in the past few years. The Western Mail newspaper used a freedom of information request to discover that 29 cameras have been attacked in South Wales since January 2006, 21 in North Wales in the past five years and 52 in Gwent in the past seven.
Dyfed-Powys officials refused the request, insisting that the agency must hide all such figures from the public. The above numbers do not include incidents in which drivers crashed into the accident prevention devices. In 2006, Welsh speed cameras issued 160,126 tickets worth £9,607,560 (US $15,355,860).
In Rychnowach, Poland, vigilantes burned and destroyed a speed camera on Wednesday night, Glos Pomorza reported. The Czluchow municipality said it would have to spend 120,000 zloty (US $42,000) to replace the device. Last year alone, three other speed camera sites in the area were destroyed by fire. Police have never found any suspects.
[courtesy thenewspaper.com]
And most governments don’t understand why their citizens would do this.
in Sydney, Australia criminals or freedom lovers (depending on how you see it) set a camera on fire
the camera was melted inside its armored box
Civil disobedience is such a great thing, for it governs the government.
Remember, remember, the fifth of November…
“Remember, remember, the fifth of November…”
Yes, and the conspirators were hanged, drawn and quartered…
Playing with explosives to destroy public property is likely to attract stiff penalties. Throw in a few alleged terrorism links for good measure.
Wasn’t the American Revolution founded by an angry mob of people throwing the Boston tea party? Without people with integrity, claiming freedom from opression, there would be no United States. One mans terrorist is another mans fight for justice.
Even though that´s a waste of taxpayers’ money, public endagerment and so forth, I support such attacks on speed cameras. Too bad most Finns consider scameras a good thing, there’s no nationwide protests against them.
I wouldn’t use the term terrorist in association with those who are disabling speed/traffic cameras through force. Terrorism, by it’s definition, is to instill fear and terror in order to advance an ideal. If Al-Qaeda had decided to vandalize or destroy some empty airliners inside of the hangars and taken steps to make sure no one was hurt, it would have been a very different act than the act of terrorism that they undertook.
I might go so far as to apply the word terrorist to the man who shot and killed the speed camera operator inside of his van several months ago, but for those who are simply disabling these cameras and not doing any harm but to the pocketbooks of speed camera operators and the municipalities that use them, protesters or civil activists are more appropriate terms.
Blowing up speed cameras is actually a pretty good display of civil disobedience. The issue of speed cameras has unilaterally been enforced by the governments over the heads of the people. I can’t imagine any country anywhere in the world, where speed cameras would be praised, if the people was asked in a public poll during election.
It’s a perfect example where representative democracy doesn’t work, as the people who represents, doesn’t represent the wishes of the people. The remedy is either showing the governments by force that they are wrong, or if needed be, overthrowing the governments if they insist. A democracy that by and large doesn’t follow the people is not a democracy, but opression.
It’s a perfect example where representative democracy doesn’t work, as the people who represents, doesn’t represent the wishes of the people.
By that logic, a single issue party would sweep the election. They don’t. The law abiding majority understand they are not targeted by these devices.
I don’t doubt the revenue raising, BUT it’s raising revenue from the stupid, irresponsible few, that also cause the majority to have suffer such invasions.
“The law abiding majority…”
What is that? Is that the same thing as the famous “silent majority”? Those who are too afraid to state their mind and say the obvious truth? Those that haven’t the guts and integrity to stand up and fight the unjust? You sound more and more like Nixon. What’s up next? “They are not crooks”?
“irresponsible few… cause the majority to suffer”. The point is, all this is a slippery slope down to 1984. Today, it’s speed cameras, tomorrow, what? The “law abiding majority” will have tons of laws to abide to tomorrow. What’s up next? You can’t smoke cigarettes in your own car? And then? Tomorrow it will be another freedom vanished, perhaps even something that you will find worth fighting for?
Random destruction and replacement is going to skew the profit curve a bit. No worries, just raise the fines or tack on a camera replacement surcharge. Since there isn’t a free market limit on fines or any real opposition to government action just double the fines and call it a day.
I think a pipe cutter would be ideal, a few quiet turns and it’s off. then cut the wires and take the camera to the nearest body of water. Cut the pipe again close to the ground so it can’t be repaired easily.
Think of the government jobs this will create, boo yaaa.
I support the destruction of speed cameras. Especially with explosives!
Tomorrow it will be another freedom vanished, perhaps even something that you will find worth fighting for?
Turn Faux Noise off or change the channel. I’d recommend Comedy Central.
NulloModo :
You might go so far as to say that the shooting and killing a speed camera operator is terrorism? Does a death have to touch your family before it’s terrorism?
Yes! Wooooo!
Oh, if there was only reciprocity, i.e. surveillance cameras trained on politicians….
So many things that are inflicted on the general public would change in a heartbeat if they were applied equally to the professionals and gummint people inflicting them. You know, the list starts with cold bedpans and goes on to wholesale wiretapping…………
Oh, if there was only reciprocity, i.e. surveillance cameras trained on politicians….
So many things that are inflicted on the general public would change in a heartbeat if they were applied equally to the professionals and gummint people inflicting them. You know, the list starts with cold bedpans and goes on to wholesale wiretapping…………
I have been feeling like doing this to those illuminated billboards. Those things are worse than a blight upon the land; blights don’t flash and glare at night.
As far as speed cameras, I don’t understand. People would never accept the idea of a police officer ticketing them for speeding without pulling them over; why are machines able to ticket people without any check?
Clutchcargo:
In defense of NulloModo, you might look up the definition of terrorist/terrorism or just read the one he provides in his post. he isn’t saying that the shooting of a speed enforcement officer is legal or should be, he is just questioning if it is terrorism. You could say that it is an act of terrorism towards government employees though not towards the nation as a whole. It could be interpreted as the use of fear in government employees to effect a change in government behavior.
People like to throw words and phrases around for effect with no consideration of actual meaning. Terms like hate crime, Nazi, and terrorist seem to be popular now, and they are rarely applied correctly or ae completely nonsensacle (hate crime? is there a criminal act driven by love of the victim?).
Gas powered chop saw w/metal cutting blade would be very effective at felling these things.
The State Department defines “terrorism” as “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.” That’s a fairly commonly accepted definition in diplomatic circles.
Someone who shot a speed camera operator in order to make a political point would, by definition, be a terrorist. Someone who committed the same act because he was in a bad mood or just didn’t want to pay the fine would not be. The intentions determine whether or not the act is terrorism.
Here is a website devoted to destroyed Gatsos (speed cameras) in the UK. Fire seems to be a popular method.
http://www.speedcam.co.uk/gatso2.htm
Angle-Grinder Man to the rescue!
Thanks for the State Department definition PCH101. I would say that eliminates torching a speed camera as an act of terrorism since it is an inanimate object, unless objects can be “noncombatants.” Then, kids from the local highschool defacing thier rivals mascot in the middle of the night could be called terrorism not just plain vandilism. Where does it stop? What crime isn’t terrorism?
By the way, Webster’s defines terrorism as the systematic use of terror (intense fear), especially as a means of coercion.
I would say that eliminates torching a speed camera as an act of terrorism since it is an inanimate object, unless objects can be “noncombatants.”
The definition of “non combatant” can vary, but an attack on a building could be classified as a terrorist act. The camera is a gray area, but if there is no risk of a non-combatant getting hurt, I’m guessing that it wouldn’t be considered terrorism.
If the speed cameras were operated by the military, then it definitely wouldn’t be terrorism because those in the military are combatants. But civilian police are considered to be noncombatants under this definition.
Overkill…
When you start using firearms, explosives, and poisons, you cross the line into some truly dangerous area.
Why not just cover the lens with a paint gun or a can of spray paint? No risk of blowing yourself up, or being mistaken for a real terrorist.
Hell, just superglue some cardboard over the lens since you have to get up there to mount the explosives.
“The law abiding majority…”
Sorry Mr Moran, but speed cameras have been put to a vote six times in the US. There will be three more votes next month.
Cameras lost in all six cases, most recently by an 86-14 margin. The majority in the US has demonstrated that it is not on the side of scameras, contrary to what the industry spin doctors want you to believe.
The whole goal of terrorism is the generation of terror. When you destroy a speed camera, you annoy Redflex and receive huzzahs from other motorists. Doesn’t seem like terrorism to me.
If only Robin Hood were here to put an end to unjust taxation by the government…
Cut one down and use it for a birdhouse.
Lumbergh21 :
Yes, motivation and context are critical to understanding anti-social acts. But even by NulloModo’s definition (to instill fear and terror in order to advance an ideal), unless the shooter knew the operator, or chose the operator as a random victim, the act qualifies in my mind as terrorism. While I don’t know the details of the case sited by NulloModo, an effort by the shooter to instill fear in camera operators seems to be the most likely motivation. I also think that the level of action is significant. Defacing property (cameras or mascots) is in a very different league than taking a life.
THAT VIDEO WAS FUCKING EPIC !
That made my day. Awesome.
@ RichardD
Really. Every single one succeeded?
UTPE – Universal Traffic & Parking Enforcement
“Since the wide use of speed cameras and the inherent inefficiencies with this technology, we are proposing the mandatory use of tracking devices on all new vehicles. These units will enforce speed limits working in conjunction with GPS/UTPE programs. Driving above the posted speed limit is a serious threat to all citizens, along with other traffic violations. That’s why our system is also linked with traffic lights, stop signs, and one-way streets. Parking violations will also be tracked. The system will cut cost for law enforcement, plus ensure the safety of our law abiding citizens. This technology will also reducing insurance costs for most drivers.”
@PeteMoran
I think he was referring to the fact that “Every time it has actually been put to a vote, speed cameras have been ousted.” Not that every petition drive has been successful in getting the issue on the ballot.