speed cameras - yes or no?

[topgear]

Heres a topic which all of us are aware of, but do we agree with them, or hate everything they stand for? Yes, im talking about speed cameras... The goverment are now putting up thousands more to catch the speeding motorist, but why? Is it to save lives, or is it to earn more money from fines? Do speed cameras really make a difference, do they really save lives? What do you think? Tell us your opinion and your thoughts! But.. lets not get too heated!

Have fun.
Top Gear, Top... speed? No, that would be wrong! ;)

[Maria]

Yes, if it's PROVEN that high speed is the PRIMARY cause of a lot of accidents in one space, but too often they're like the ones round our place where the roads are so busy, the only time you can do anything like the speed limit is at times when there's no-on to injure!

Speed cameras are treating the symptoms not the disease - the money would be better spent teaching pedestrians not to walk blindly out in front of traffic, teaching boy racers not to play with lives, teaching the scared and the incompetent to drive properly, and getting the people who are just a hazard to themselves and others off the road and onto public transport!

Speed doesn't kill, stupidity kills.

[tony]

the idea is a good one when they are in accdent blackspots,in town centers and schools ,but more often than not they are on the motorway and duel carrigways. but it is more about getting money from the motorist than saving lives.

[malcsmaesty]

they must do some good in certain areas,especially accident blackpots,but i am totally against them on dual carrigeways and certian stretches of motorway as i find they become a real hinderance and can cause accidents ,with other motorists slamming their brakes on because they were speeding in the 1st place.
keep them to highly built up areas and keep them off our motor ways and dual carriageways as they take the pure fun out of motoring;)

[E_T_V]

I dislike most speed cameras, actually I dislike them all.

However where I live now is next the the so called "Road of Death" where there were numerous fatailties and it made the national papers when that woman and her 2 kids got killed about a year or so ago.

Well instead of doing the usual, lets put gatsos all over the place which they have done further up the road which don't work, they put them new SPECS cameras up, and made the road layout much safer.

Before most of the accidents were caused by people overtaking others and ofen were head to head crashes with a closing speed of 100mph plus, and the speeders who did most of the overtaking just braked for the Gatsos so got away with it. Now the SPECS caperas average your speed over say a mile and so there is no point speeding up between cameras as you'll still get got. The average speed of the fast overtaking cars on that road used to be 80+ on a two way road, now it is a more respectable 60 and there is much less overtaking because everyone is doing the same speed. There were 11 deaths on the 6 mile stretch per year before the cameras were put up last year. I haven't heard of one yet since they have been operational. Lets hope it stays like that.

[Alan the Vanner]

I read a story once about a speed camera sceme in Canada just like the one in this country. The plan failed. Why? Simple: Every single driver that got caught refused to pay the fine! Trouble is, there is no solidarity in this country!:mad:

[MaestroMatt]

My views pretty much coincide with the general consensus so far: They do a good job in 30mph zones where only the very irresponsible would break the limit. They are worthwhile in 40 mph zones as the risk of hitting pedestrians and cyclists is still high. I think they should only be used on 60 and 70mph roads in places that are known to be areas where many accidents are caused by speeding - there is no need for them on most stretches of dual carriageway.

My personal bete noir is speed bumps. I hate those things.

[Alan the Vanner]

Speed bumps? Don't get me started on speed bumps! Our street was the first in town to have them installed. All these ideas the powers that be have for so called "traffic calming measures" are going too far. What will they think of next? Having people carrying red flags walking in front of your vehicle? :mad:

That's 100+ years of progress for you!:rolleyes:

[tony]

there is speed bumps near use and every time a lorrie that is empty goes over them its like thunder going off at all times of the night ,they always wake us up at about 5 am every morning,worse now we have all the windows open:( :(

[Maria]

Not content with a blight of speed cameras round our way (including one in a 20mhp zone, just round a corner, down a fairly steep hill), they've also turned the secondary route out of Glossop into something like the Krypton Factor assault course! They have some full-width speed bumps, and then in some places there are small ones in the middle of each lane, which is fine, but then in other places there is one small one near each kerb, and one straddling the middle of the road. This is a thin, winding road, often with parked cars, and it's no surprise that everyone moves into the middle of the road to straddle the middle hump, which is the easiest way over them. One day, someone will be in the middle of the road as someone is coming round a corner the other way... not good :rolleyes:

[beetroot]

i've heard that they are called 'safety cameras' for the purpose of making people slow down in order to prevent accidents. there are lots where i live and some are in the most pointless of places. 3 points and a 60.00 pound fine. harsh or fair??

[e692wtt]

Don't forget David Blunkett's inane ramblings the other day, proposing a 'tax' of £35 on the 'basic' £60 speeding ticket, to help pay for the Government's 'criminal damages compensation' scheme...

£95 - now that 's a bargain!:laugh:

The other other Rich.

[Simon]

So what do people do? Slow down before the camera then speed up a little afterwards...I am a responsible motorist and for the most part keep to the speed limits. I drive gently to save fuel and to give my passengers a smooth calm ride. Why can't I be TRUSTED to carry on in the same manner? Police deploy far-and-away too many resources in trying to obtain results from the motorist - a soft target if ever there was one, instead of tackling some of the REAL crime issues such as violent attacks on women and the elderly in particular, antisocial behaviour, child abuse, drugs, weapons and all the rest of it.

I could go on, but I'd just get wound up. Sorry, but there you go.

:banghead:

[e692wtt]

Motorists are easy to criminalise because they normally admit their guilt by paying the fixed penalty fines... much easier than actually detecting and solving real crimes that affect real people .

I think it's hilarious that Chief Constables are choosing to take Traffic Feds off the road and getting them to target street crime.

The Gtr Manchester Chief Constable actually made an arrest very soon after becoming our Chief Constable, which can only be encouraged - he makes a lot of sense and is confident enough to talk such sense! He bemoans the lack of discretion that is available to his Officers when dealing with alleged traffic offences - basically the motorist will get 'done' whereas any other criminal may well get a caution at worst...


The other other Rich.

[Jonathan]

I think most motorists would share our views, I know I tend to side with most posted so far. Far, far too much police energy goes into catching speeding motorists while more serious crime goes on all the time because the purpetrators more often than not *know* they can do whatever they like and get away with it. I don't mind them in the 30 zones and places where travelling beyond the speed limit would be dangerous but speed isn't the cause of most accidents. I always try and keep on the right side of the law whilst driving or otherwise, but it's not right having motorists being penalised for using a bit of speed where it's safe to do so (80 on a quiet motorway is hardly fast or dangerous).

[Simon]

Yes, some interesting and valid points there. In actual fact since fitting 195/50-15 tyres the car is actually travelling at 27 MPH when the speedo says 30. I agree that some speed limits are too low (probably because they feel too low), others are of course eminently sensible. We've all heard the message that one is twice as likely to kill a child in a collision at 35 than 30MPH.

In general Gatso's snap your car from behind and use the bar code type lines on the carriageway, whereas Truvelo's snap invariably from the front and use the road sensors denoted by the 3 horizontal thin lines.