Undercover probe reveals the 'buckets of money' made from speed cameras

[herulach]

In that case fair enough, but 'if you knew my mum it was a mistake' sounds like an implication that she makes a lot of mistakes driving, obviously you meant she wouldnt do it on purpose.

If the spaces are poorly signed, write to the council, there should be little signs at the start and finish of teh diabled bits, and on lampposts in between, if it covers that distance, or at least i belive thats the standard marking.

[pp05]

I'm one of those who is only for them in areas where there have been an accident and therefore they help make roads safe, something that will benefit people and not treasury pockets.

The system is a huge injustice as road conditions best dictate how fast one should drive. Normally, we all have done it, you might be 2mph over when you go over camera markings and bam! £100.

Fact of matter is motorists are seen as an easy target to rip off. As if your taxes aren't enough, soon they will want to charge you per mile. The money isn't going back into roads or transport so it's benefits are practically nil.

If anything all speed cameras do is rob hard working people of a day or sometimes 2 days salary, on top of council tax, salary tax, tax on your savings and soon on your inheirtance and anything else thet can tax making appeal process equally long and tedious ensures this.

Have a general guideline for majority, but where your driving ona stretch of road that is empty of cars (possibly late at night) driving at few mph over the limit doesn't kill anyone.

[chicken]

'if you knew my mum it was a mistake' sounds like an implication that she makes a lot of mistakes driving, obviously you meant she wouldnt do it on purpose.

Yeah I read that as his mum's too upstanding to try and get away with parking where she shouldn't, but I could see after your post how you can read it the other way. It's a bit vague.


These comments of "oh but if you're not breaking the law by speeding you'd have nothing to worry about" really get on my nerves. It's such a "I'm morally better than all of you" way of talking without thinking.

The world is not black and white, if any of you drive I'll bet you have accidently broken the law more than once by drifting over the speed limit whilst you were watching the road rather than constantly checking your dashboard. It's these situations, and the fact that the cameras are often in places where it's more important to keep your eyes forwards, that rile people up about them. Not just because they want to get away with doing an extra 10mph.

[YorkieBen]

i hate it when people moan about parking fines and speeding fines, if its poorly signposted or something, then fair enough

why does it matter if they are poorly signposted or not?

speeding is against the law whatever

does a mugger complain when he gets arrested about the lack of 'no mugging' signs?

[Michael]

Speed cameras are great fun... make for a great "rolling start" line for a race

[Rack]

My main issue with speed camera's is they are advertised as a way to keep roads safe, when really they are just money making devices. "speed kills" I agree, but usually in conjunction with poor analysis of a situation, conditions, or doing something stupid. Doing 60 in a 50zone on a closed in dual carriageway with barriers with speedlimit on a bright sunny day is not the same as doing 40 in a 30mph residential area with cars parked on the road, kids playing in the area, etc. But there is no distinction made with a speed camera.

We don't need speed cameras, we need more police. Getting a speeding fine for said offence on dual carriageway in the post 2 weeks later is not a deterrent. Having local police officers giving you a bollocking on the side of the road with lights flashing and everyone staring IS a deterrent. If the money was used to fund more traffic or general policing I would be a little bit happier.

I totally agree with Micheals comment above ^^ for people who aren't worried about speeding, they are just a point to slow down before speeding up again. Although the same could be said about traffic police, at least they can intelligently look to see if someone is driving dangerously or not.

[frumpet]

I personally believe that with the current crowded conditions of our roads poor/dangerous driving is more of an issue than speeding.

[badass]

why does it matter if they are poorly signposted or not?

speeding is against the law whatever

does a mugger complain when he gets arrested about the lack of 'no mugging' signs?

So your argument is that essentially regardless of circumstances if someone breaks the law they should be punished according to the Max allowable under said law?

[capt_cornflake]

Basicly what it boils down to though, is that speeding is a lot easier to prosecute than dangerous driving.

Both contribute to accidents, and both should be discouraged, but it's easier and cheaper to stick up a couple of speed cameras than it is to have legions of traffic cops trawling the roads on the off chance that they catch someone in the act of dangerous driving.

why does it matter if they are poorly signposted or not?

speeding is against the law whatever

does a mugger complain when he gets arrested about the lack of 'no mugging' signs?

This isn't really comparing like with like though is it?
Mugging is illegal wherever it happens.
What counts as speeding on one road may be perfectly fine elsewhere, and the speed limit isn't always what you would expect.
Without adequate signage how can you be expected to know (ignoring anyone speeding over the national speed limit)

[Nemeliza]

I'm not trying to justify people that drive at 60 in a 30mph zone but take the motorways for example, in germany they have no speed limit and as far as I'm aware the motorways are very safe there.

Only some sections of the autobahn have no speed limit, otherwise the limit is generally ~50-75 mph. However the autobahn is a VERY efficiently run road network which is why it is so effective in its traffic flow. (we should learn from their example, our M25 for example is in dire need of some action)

I dont argue with the fact that if one doesn't speed then they have nothing to worry about but i do agree that 'safety cameras' are purely a scheme to bring in revenue. If they truely are designed in order to save lives then why have i NEVER seen one on residential or school roads, ESPECIALLY the ones with 20mph speed limits. Are these not the kinds of roads where that extra 10mph is most critical?

[Mike Fishcake]

If they truely are designed in order to save lives then why have i NEVER seen one on residential or school roads, ESPECIALLY the ones with 20mph speed limits. Are these not the kinds of roads where that extra 10mph is most critical?

Exactly what I was going to say.

[Gerrard]

I think everyone would be happier if it was shown that the money being brought in from the cameras was being used to help road safety, but I think everyone is now cynical that it's just being used as an extra income for the government.

In addition to the comments above, where I live has the most deaths per mile in Britain but ironically, one of the least amount of accidents. If you haven't been to Lincolnshire, it's all pretty much flattish straight single carriage ways. I heard a report recently on the radio that the main cause of these deaths were not speeding, but people not looking out when overtaking, the result being 120mph head on collisions. There are plenty of speed cameras around, but in most cases, it's dangerous, impatient drivers that cause the accidents, and only having police on the roads is going to reduce that, not cameras.

[kalniel]

You also have to remember in Germany the driving culture is quite different - they are almost paranoid. You never pull out into the overtaking lane unless you are literally on the person you're over taking, then you immediately pull back in again (sometimes a little too immediately).

A lot of British drivers seem content to pootle along in overtaking lanes even when they aren't overtaking anyone.

FWIW, I think average speed check systems are fantastic, and should be used more often. They allow for little variations in speed, so you don't have to watch the speed dial excessively, and even allow you to accelerate out of trouble if neccessary. I've only seen them used for roadworks so far, and they're incredibly effective. It'd be nice to see them at other danger spots such as junctions joining onto motorways etc.

[5lab]

Only some sections of the autobahn have no speed limit, otherwise the limit is generally ~50-75 mph. However the autobahn is a VERY efficiently run road network which is why it is so effective in its traffic flow. (we should learn from their example, our M25 for example is in dire need of some action)

that is true, but having driven a fair whack on the autobahn (at least 1,000 miles in the last 2 years) i'd say they're a lot less safe than motorways. generally they're only 2 lanes wide (which is fine), but if you're tootling along at 70, come up behind a lorry, check there's no car within 100 yards behind you and move to overtake, you'd be very shocked at how quickly a bimmer/merc will appear behind you. some of the speeds they do are incredible, and the SOLE reason there arent more accidents is due to the alertness of the drivers - i'd say the germans are far more alert and obidient than our drivers on the whole. an 80mph speed differential is huge, and it also makes it bloody difficult to merge with the faster traffic if it gets a tiny bit crowded..

I dont argue with the fact that if one doesn't speed then they have nothing to worry about but i do agree that 'safety cameras' are purely a scheme to bring in revenue. If they truely are designed in order to save lives then why have i NEVER seen one on residential or school roads, ESPECIALLY the ones with 20mph speed limits. Are these not the kinds of roads where that extra 10mph is most critical?

i see what you're saying, but on school roads, speedings not so much of a problem when the kids are about because generally, the roads are all clogged up with chelsea tractors. and who said 4x4s were a bad thing?


onto speeding, yeah it doesnt cause accidents on it's own, but it'd be very difficult to proove dangerous driving otherwise on such an automatic way. speed cameras DO slow traffic down, and as a traffic calming device i think the average speed jobs do better than anything else around - they're far better than speed humps or road narrowings.

i think it'll be interesting to see what happens when gps comes into every car (as it invariably will). you'd be able to proove tailgating by measuring the average distance someone's driving behind someone for large distances - something cameras can't do (you couldnt have a single tailgating camera as someone may have just pulled out in front of you). it'd also reduce hit-and-runs, as if someone declares an accident at 'x' spot, the police could track who was there at the time.

you've nothing to worry from being tracked, if you've done nothing wrong..

[Rack]

but it'd be very difficult to proove dangerous driving otherwise on such an automatic way.

Which is why they don't discourage dangerous driving. They encourage you to slow down for 50meters. More police on the road (who actually enforce traffic safety) would be able to prove dangerous driving.

Why are there fewer police on the road today than there were 20 years ago, when traffic has increased year on year??

http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/news/ne...-lawless.phtml

Currently, there are 692 traffic officers in London - a fall of around 50% over the last 20 years - that police the capital’s 3 million or so drivers.

^^ I know it's london, but the tories did this for everyone in the UK, so it's probably pretty consistant across the nation.

*Quoted from the same article:

Home Office figures show that last year there were 7104 traffic officers in Britain compared to 8084 10 years ago.

[Rack]

Another article about automated penalty systems over actual policing:
http://www.bmf.co.uk/briefing/police...forcement.html

The results are to create a culture that anything goes as long as you're within the speed limit; to rely on increased speeding prosecutions to boost the prosecutions of road traffic offences while drink drive, due care and dangerous driving prosecutions decline; to lead to traffic divisions being downsized or abolished entirely; and to disguise the decreasing effectiveness of the police in their road safety role.

And another good quote from that article:

Although lip service is paid to inappropriate speed, which plays a greater part in accident causation than excess speed, it is not given specific consideration and remains a muddled part of statements on speed. A subsidy of prosecutions for excess speed will do nothing to make road users more aware of the issues associated with appropriate speed choice.

I think the point is that cameras are supposed to make the roads safer, and they can have a part of a much larger system of road safety, but the way things are going we are left with a culture of 'if you don't speed, you're OK' which is far from the truth.