richie001

iTrader: (3)

My problem isn't with speed camera per se but where they are located.For example,The speed camera locations I know of in Gloucestershire are on road's which haven't had any accidents on them but there is road(A417 near Birdlip)which as a lot of fatal accidents and no speed camera

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

One last time.

If it were truly for safety, then the following would be in place;

Cameras sited near schools etc.
Cameras in full view to slow drivers down, NOT catch them.
ALL cameras able to catch ALL vehicles, NOT just aimed at the majority of vehicles on the road.

Instead, what happens is this:

Cameras sited hidden where traffic is likely to speed, yet often, no danger. (Wide, clear motorway etc).
Forward facing cameras: (ACPO guidelines now prefer these), to target cars, whereas MOTORBIKES, which make up only 4% of the traffic on the roads, yet are involved in 38% of the fatalities, and serious incidents, cannot be caught by a forward facing camera Why not target bikes, if it's REALLY for safety?

Now YOU tell ME...what's it done for? Safety? Or revenue for the govt. and maintaining targets for the cops? At least TWO poorly performing forces to my knowledge make their figures look better by concentrating on speeding

And then please go on to explain why several camera partnerships were disbanded as soon as they stopped getting the revenue...suddenly, it's NOT the way to do it????

Meanwhile, over in France, cameras are popping up like mushrooms. THEIR government show a graph to show that deaths on French roads have been coming down since they started with speed cameras.

What they DON'T tell us is that it's a VERY small part of a graph showing that deaths have been falling at THE SAME RATE since 1971: better brakes, tyres, suspension, roads, junctions, stronger cars, airbags, seatbelts, side protection, crumple zone, less drink-driving, etc etc...but do they tell us that? Nope, just cameras......

IT'S A SCAM.........

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

Probably nowhere to hide one.

Round here, they have two favourite spots. Both are hidden until you are on top of them. One is on a motorway. The ONLY accident on said motorway EVER was a stupid bint that drove the wrong way down it during roadworks

But hey, it makes £thousands from folk heading for the coast.

The other is sited on a 30 limit that OUGHT to be 40, or even 50.
The ONLY accident nearby was when a young lad took his mum's car without permission, drove without a license and turned it over, killing the girl in the front passenger seat. She KNEW he had no license.

There is one school in town on a major thoroughfare, loads of heavy lorries to and from the local steelworks.
Speed cameras? Don't make me laugh.... You couldn't HIDE one.

tony de wonderful

The sooner they put GPS enabled speed limiters in cars - or at least full GPS tracking/logging - the better. We can scrap these money scamming cameras.

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

They won't fit limiters.

They WILL fit tracking, making enforcement even easier.

scoobynutta555

My biggest gripe is the way speed limits are constantly changing downwards. There's been several roads local to me that have been reduced from 70 mph and 50 mph to limits 20-30 mph below their original limits. Look at the circus that was rolled out when they even mentioned raising motorway limits to 80 mph. Anyone that I come into contact with who operates one of these vans or cameras can expect to be ignored by me.

Leslie

Its so much cheaper,and less of a worry to just drive at the speed limits. Fast cornering is far more interesting and satisfying than just exceeding the speed limits anyway!

Les

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

Agreed.

but even that can get you into conflict with some coppers, as can accelerating away from lights etc "too fast".

I got stopped by a French copper for accelerating "too fast" out of a junction across a busy road.
I saw a gap, pulled out and accelerated smartly up to traffic speed so as not to slow anyone down.

On being stopped, I asked him first off at what rate I had accelerated, and how he knew it was "too fast". then I asked him what the law allowed as a rate of acceleration?

Then I pointed out that my car SOUNDS to be going fast because it's powerful.

He eventually accepted what I said and told me to drive carefully.

BLU

iTrader: (27)

Interesting thread with some good answers and some silly answers.

Alcazar, you have some good points but what you said to the copper, in your OP, certainly isn't the most sensible thing you've done..... it is quite amusing though

I'm completely with you though on most of your points.

I've been a victim of one of these cameras that are positioned in such a way as they can't be seen, a stones throw away from where the limit changes from 60-30. They are there to make money catching out people who haven't quite slowed down enough when entering the new limit area. In my case I was less than 15m into said limit change and was clocked at 33 mph!! Talk about shooting fish in a barrel!
I was 'lucky' as I was offered the [highly useful and great revenue generator ] speed awareness course!

The only useful thing to come from the course was the ability to answer the questions in my works mandatory driver refresher course (which used the same content as the speed awareness course!!)

tony de wonderful

Princess Parkway in Manchester is really bad for weird speed limits. It goes from a motorway to a 50 to a 40 and stays a tripple carriageway. Hardly anyone slows and there are special lay bys for the mobile speed camera/ANPR vans to hide in. I always slow to 40, it's not safe though as everyone else roars past like you are an OAP.

tony de wonderful

Could counts are reckless driving or careless or something here? Lay down a 30 foot 11 and you might get in trouble.

Torquemada

I'm with you on that.
I pretty much drive at the speed limit everywhere but then, often on the way to work, I spend the whole time getting riled up because of all the numpties going 40 in a thirty, 40 in a 60, 50 in a 40, 80 in a 60, not using mirrors or indicators etc. but the police don't appear to give a rats-asse about that, they'd sooner catch someone doing 35 in a 30 on a big wide road where some joy rider did us all a favour and wiped himself out, oh yeah a camera would've really helped....

Speaking of the above, I'm amazed at how many people do not know what national speed limit or de-restricted limits mean. I'd say that about 80% of people think national speed limit on a single carriageway means 50, 40 or just don't know.

Still too many automatic tax collectors on our roads though!

scunnered

iTrader: (1)

Speed camera's are dangerous. They've caused many more accidents than they supposedly prevent. A drivers takes his eyes off the road to look at his speedo. The driver behind does the same just as the one in front hits the brakes, oops!
Speed camera's around my area (and I suppose everywhere) are only ever set up in places where its safe to go faster than the posted speed limit. I just look at it as another tax. If you want to go faster then you pay the tax.

I was talking to someone from Canada a few years ago. He said the speed limits in his area were just suggested limits. Its not unlawful to go faster, but if you have an accident as a result then the punishment is severe. It encourages drivers to drive at a speed appropriate to the conditions. We could never have that here as there are far too many idiots on our roads that would abuse it.
Personally, I always drive (or ride) at what I consider a safe speed. I seldom look at my speedo. The only time I take my eyes off the road to see my speed is to make sure I won't be caught by a speed tax camera.

Leslie

I have never found it to be difficult or dangerous to drive perfectly safely and check my speed on my speedo from time to time as well.

Les

JGlanzaV

iTrader: (3)

I think I got had accelerating out of the 50mph speed cameras into the national speed limit at bristol the other day.

I made a break for it too early to and they were parked on the "on" slip road near the top so no one would see them until you look in your mirror! But too late by then so I'm just waiting for it to arrive through the door.

And if the speedlimit was really there for safety the last speed camera would be at the limit changing to ensure that no one broke the 50 limit all the way to the end of the road works!

scoobynutta555

This is something like what I said on here years ago. Abolish speed limits as they're in effect pointless and place the onus on the driver. If the driver causes an injury, death or an accident then they should be severely punished. That's not the case now. I'd also have a soft retest every 5 years, proper annual eyesight and competency checks on anyone over 70 and bring in something to curb teenage driving deaths and accident rate.

Leslie

Do you think that pedestrians,cyclists and other road users should be protected from those who feel they have to break the speed limits in a dangerous manner?

What sort of an invitation would abolishment of speed limits offer?

Les

cster

I like this idea - have the same thing for drunk driving as well!

hodgy0_2

So in effect people can drive as fast and as drunk as they like until they kill someone, then they are severely punished

Sounds about right for scoobynet

hodgy0_2

Dp

Leslie

You can bet on the fact that the official view is that the speed cameras have actively reduced the chances of an accident!

Les

scoobynutta555

I'm a pedestrian and cycle hundreds of miles a month myself. Careless driving is my biggest bugbear as a cyclist, not speeding. Speed limits are a complete waste of time. How many NSL limits across the country do you see that are dangerous to drive at 40 mph in good conditions? Loads. They blanket covered a lot of single country lanes with nsl limits which have certain stretches that would be impossible to do 60 mph. What they did was leave the driver to ascertain what speed was applicable for the myriad of factors to take into consideration. Continually lowering speed limits is not the answer, neither is some twonk in a mobile speed trap. The speed limit is broken millions of times without consequence. Introducing a system where the driver is severely punished for causing death or injury is the answer something that does not happen now along with other measures I'd like to see in place.

As to hodgy, that comment is almost as moronic as your other obtuse comment about poor being worse off here than anywhere else in the world.