New Speed Cameras

[teejay]

I think what the mail was complaining about was the fact that these cameras are linked together and track your route and of course that data will be on a nice 'government database' tucked away somewhere.

The problem with reliance on speed cameras is that they only measure one factor of dangerous driving, which is speed, they don't tackle the plethora of other causes of dangerous driving which need human assessment in the form of police to assess properly.

[LeMarchand]

I think what the mail was complaining about was the fact that these cameras are linked together and track your route and of course that data will be on a nice 'government database' tucked away somewhere.

 

Fair point, and it is a worry, though they also complain about "normal" speed cameras spoiling the fun of those who feel themselves above the law.

 

The problem with reliance on speed cameras is that they only measure one factor of dangerous driving, which is speed, they don't tackle the plethora of other causes of dangerous driving which need human assessment in the form of police to assess properly.

 

True, and something does need to be done about those other causes, but at least that one factor could be dealt with.

[GrumbleDook]

I believe that speed cameras don't offer much, they don't make certain areas safer.

 

I know a few coppers and they've even said to me "there a waste of time and money", says it all really.

 

I know a few coppers of the same opinion. I know other coppers that would prefer to see limiters and a nationwide average speed camera network.

 

Personally, I cannot see the issue with the idea that you break a law you pay a penalty. If you disagree with the law (as in how the speed limit has been set in your particular area) then challenge it. The issue of a nationwide tracking system (big brother) is another matter. There are a lot of concerns to be had about that.

 

In the UK there is a link between speed and the increased chances of being involved in a collision likely to cause serious injury or death. That is why limits change around certain junctions.

 

The issue about variable speed limits on major roads is slightly different though. The use of variable speed limits varies from road safety (due to weather conditions, traffic collisions, road debris or high traffic volume) to keeping a steady flow of traffic moving at all times (ranging from road repairs or road improvement works through to high volumes of traffic). There is evidence that for general road usage by reducing the speed can keep traffic flowing smoother. We have all seen the bunching effect you get in high traffic volumes but the stop start causes more problems at higher speeds ... and yes, it is made even worse when you get lane swappers, intent on getting a few more metres ahead than everyone else .... often not caring that the person who has left enough stopping distance to the car in front of them (which has been filled by a lane swapper) now has to slow down to keep a safe distance, causing the car behind to slow ... and so the ripple continues.

 

Speed kills. Some people are better drivers than others and are less likely to be involved in collisions at higher speed ... but this is an area where we do have to stick to reasonable limits.

 

It was quite interesting to listen to Jezza on Wossy on Friday ... Jezza was moaning that Hamster was terribly law-abiding and stuck to the speed limit when coming back from Europe during the week. Thumbs up to Hamster and boo hiss to Jezza. Jezza may be a fantastic driver but others will try to follow his example about do stupid stuff ... he may not care that much about the environment but I wonder what his position would be if someone who has mown down a family turns round and say, "well Jezza says it is ok to speed!"

[GrumbleDook]

I think what the mail was complaining about was the fact that these cameras are linked together and track your route and of course that data will be on a nice 'government database' tucked away somewhere.

The problem with reliance on speed cameras is that they only measure one factor of dangerous driving, which is speed, they don't tackle the plethora of other causes of dangerous driving which need human assessment in the form of police to assess properly.

 

I'm trying to dig out who is doing the research at the moment ... but I had been told that last year and over the next 2 years research is going on to examine links between those caught using mobiles whilst driving and those who have more than 6 points within a 5 year period for speeding or those who have been tested positive for driving under the influence of drink or drugs.

 

The idea (as I understood it) was to see if there is true correlation rather than just supposition that you sometimes hear touted by some media groups, and to make it UK based rather than US / European based (different styles and approaches to driving).

[mossj]

Only reason to have issue with nationwide speed cameras is if you are planning on breaking the law.

 

As for not educating you, I think taking your license off you if you do it a few times is education enough, which also saves yourself from darwins law (and taking others around you with you).

 

P.S this comes from someone who has 6 points thanks to the things...

[teejay]

Only reason to have issue with nationwide speed cameras is if you are planning on breaking the law.

 

Well, apart from them being used as a national surveillance database by using the NPR to store all car movements in another government database, then no. /Tin foil hat mode off

[sippo]

All speed camera's are used to make money. Since the camera's have been removed here in Swindon, accident levels have actually dropped.

[SteveBentley]

As the road has a system of streetlights, "the law" says that they cannot install 30mph repeaters, but neither did they install any other signs saying "new speed limit in force". Of course all the (many) GATSOs were re-calibrated to the lower limit to enforce "the law".

 

There is nothing stopping the speed limit being shown on speed camera signs. There are several showing 30 near me. In fact, this should be mandatory in my opinion, if the Government wants to prove that the cameras are about slowing people down rather than collecting revenue.

[Martin]

There is nothing stopping the speed limit being shown on speed camera signs. There are several showing 30 near me. In fact, this should be mandatory in my opinion, if the Government wants to prove that the cameras are about slowing people down rather than collecting revenue.

 

I know that, you know that, the council knows that - but they didn't install any such signs, and as a consequence lots of people got points and a penalty because they were unaware of the new limit!!

 

I also think that it should be mandatory to put a speed limit sign on the back of every speed camera, so that you can be absolutely sure what the limit is.

 

mb

[CHR1S]

I have no issues with upholding the law, I have a problem with cold rigid your either speeding or not! No other crime is judged on a ridgid guilty not guilty base. If I am driving 40 ish mph (I say ish because every speedo is different) and I have to overtake a lorry tootling along at 20 mph, I accelerate to 50 mph to make the pass quicker and safer but now my average speed is lets say 44 mph. Im now a criminal and should I be punished accordingly?

[localzuk]

No other crime is judged on a ridgid guilty not guilty base. If I am driving 40 ish mph (I say ish because every speedo is different) and I have to overtake a lorry tootling along at 20 mph, I accelerate to 50 mph to make the pass quicker and safer but now my average speed is lets say 44 mph. Im now a criminal and should I be punished accordingly?

 

As with all cases in the UK justice system, you have the right of appeal.

 

Also, just to point out - there are many laws which are judged in a 'guilty/not guilty' way. Pretty much all by-laws for example. Not filing taxes on time, when you're a business. There's loads of them. They all come with the right of appeal.

[Guest theeldergeek]

As with all cases in the UK justice system, you have the right of appeal.

 

Also, just to point out - there are many laws which are judged in a 'guilty/not guilty' way. Pretty much all by-laws for example. Not filing taxes on time, when you're a business. There's loads of them. They all come with the right of appeal.

 

And, as I understand it, current legislation will now not award you costs if you do appeal and win. So, get a ticket and either pay the fine and shut up, or appeal, spend a few hundred proving you were in actual fact innocent, and take the hit out of your bank balance.

 

Seems a fair and just legal system to me...

[localzuk]

And, as I understand it, current legislation will now not award you costs if you do appeal and win. So, get a ticket and either pay the fine and shut up, or appeal, spend a few hundred proving you were in actual fact innocent, and take the hit out of your bank balance.

 

Seems a fair and just legal system to me...

 

I think you'd be wrong on that. If you are entitled to legal aid, it would also cover something like this as far as I know, as it would be brought before a magistrates court, just like any other low level crime.

[CHR1S]

As with all cases in the UK justice system, you have the right of appeal.

 

Also, just to point out - there are many laws which are judged in a 'guilty/not guilty' way. Pretty much all by-laws for example. Not filing taxes on time, when you're a business. There's loads of them. They all come with the right of appeal.

 

Ok, my point was badly made but you get the jist right? Its cold hard and just makes you think god sake im just a sheep now with no free will! If I choose to speed its a risk I take and I sould be punished, but I dont wish to have a fine drop through my letterbox for exceeding the average speed limit for the day by 4mph!

[Guest theeldergeek]

I think you'd be wrong on that. If you are entitled to legal aid, it would also cover something like this as far as I know, as it would be brought before a magistrates court, just like any other low level crime.

 

RE: 'Not Guilty' Motorists Face Court Costs

 

I'm not sure if it is legislation yet, I don't have time to check, but I recall there being a No 10 petition against it, which was rejected.

Of course, if Legal Aid was introduced into the equation, then that is an entirely different matter altogether. I wasn't considering this aspect in my reply.

 

As I understand it, if you successfully defend yourself in court, you can be awarded costs but only up to what you would have received under the Legal Aid scheme.

 

Cite : http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/CostsRecovery/

"If a defendant wishes to clear their name, they often have to take their case to the Crown Court. This can be an expensive process for which legal aid is unavailable so many will not embark upon this route with the knowledge that even when they win their appeal, they will lose the majority of the legal fees they spend in the process"

Edited April 26, 2010 by theeldergeek
Updated information

[localzuk]

Ok, my point was badly made but you get the jist right? Its cold hard and just makes you think god sake im just a sheep now with no free will! If I choose to speed its a risk I take and I sould be punished, but I dont wish to have a fine drop through my letterbox for exceeding the average speed limit for the day by 4mph!

 

4mph would be within the tolerances allowed by most areas AFAIK. Usually it is +10% + 2mph in most areas, so in a 30 zone, you can go 34MPH without being slapped, but 35 will nobble you. And really, being that far outside a speed limit is not acceptable to most people.

[Guest salan]

We have many speed cameras on the A556. Some I can understand. But some, well (to the best of my knowledge) in the last 20 years, there has never been an accident! So what are they there for?

And before some one says to enforce the speed limit yes but they always say that (and i think government guidelines state ) cameras are only supposed to be on 'black spots'.

Also a road off the A556 that goes down the side of a primary school. No accidents in 20 years(thats how long we have lived here). That was until they put speed bumps on the road. Now there have been three accidents in the last three years.

So how has this made things safer??

Alan

[CHR1S]

4mph would be within the tolerances allowed by most areas AFAIK. Usually it is +10% + 2mph in most areas, so in a 30 zone, you can go 34MPH without being slapped, but 35 will nobble you. And really, being that far outside a speed limit is not acceptable to most people.

 

Rubbish, if you spend that much time monitoring your exact speed then your not paying enough attention to the road! This is my exact point, I predict a massive increase in accidents where people are too busy making sure they dont go over the speed limit on fear of death from the tax collectors....erm police!

[localzuk]

Rubbish, if you spend that much time monitoring your exact speed then your not paying enough attention to the road! This is my exact point, I predict a massive increase in accidents where people are too busy making sure they dont go over the speed limit on fear of death from the tax collectors....erm police!

 

So you think it is ok to go 35mph in a 30 zone? Or 46 in a 40 zone? Knowing that an extra 5mph can be the difference between a pedestrian living and dying if hit? If you can't control your speed effectively, you shouldn't be driving...

[CHR1S]

So you think it is ok to go 35mph in a 30 zone? Or 46 in a 40 zone? Knowing that an extra 5mph can be the difference between a pedestrian living and dying if hit? If you can't control your speed effectively, you shouldn't be driving...

 

And having poor concentration in a 30mph school zone is any better? Im not going to get into this argument where we just keep repeating ourselves, I just dont see speeding as the main reason behind road accidents there are other factors involved too.

[JJonas]

I dont consciously make an effort to speed I try to drive at a speed that is safe for the road conditions but I do feel I am less safe than I was before the speed camera days as I am now spending much more time watching what speed I am doing. If they want to stop people speeding fit limiters and gps systems in all new cars so the car cannot exceed the speed limit. Then put a big red button on the dashboard to alllow the driver to override the system if they wish. Then throw the book at anyone caught using it to exceed the speed limit. Edited April 26, 2010 by JJonas

[sippo]

BBC News - No crash rise after Swindon speed camera turn-off

[ICT_GUY]

It has never been about safety, its about revenue. I would rather have a governor in my car that kept the speed below 30mph and a blanket speed limit of 30mph nationally then have the constant stress of speed limits changing every 200 - 300 yards. In Dorset it is not unknown for the speed limit to change 10times in 5 miles on fairly straight roads which are clear.

[Sarconia]

That speed camera system sounds really dodgy to me, I'll have to get an automatic number plate swapping system installed as well as some inconspicious colour changing chameleon style paint. I just don't really like being tracked, I've got nothing to hide but I feel that the amount of times I'm caught on CCTV whether in my car, in a shop, on the train, pretty much everywhere is getting to be a bit ridiculous, there's one road I drive down round here and it's got about 15 cameras for recording various things in the space of a mile - this is too much!

 

It could have it's uses but it would only really catch speeding offenses, not all of which would be justified anyway. It probably wouldn't have much effect on dangerous driving as a whole as not all dangerous driving offenses are always related to speed, a lot of the time it's just pure idiocy. Tailgating, for example virtually never gets caught by "the law", niether does dangerously overtaking around a blind corner and as such, I'm not sure why so much emphasis is placed on speed. It would stop the whole "break for the speed camera and then speed up again" issue which about 99% of people I know engage in but that's about it.

 

In regard to regular speed camera's being a cash cow, I do believe that they are. Some may have been strategically positioned in order to attempt to prevent accidents, however, surely if they were just supposed to deter drivers... we'd just get the 3 (or 6 if you're a new driver) points on our licenses... rather than the £80 fine which also goes with it. That means it's 4 speeding offenses and your license is gone... not really a lot when you consider how much some people drive.

 

On a side note, I've never been caught speeding as it's not something I generally tend to do. I usually try and err on the side of caution as it's better to be safe than sorry.

Edited April 26, 2010 by Sarconia
Side note

[Guest TheLibrarian]

Until the UK goes fully average speed monitored I'd like to see regular signs warning that you are in / entering an average speed monitoring area.

 

I do think that there should be some government body that controls the ANPR database though, last I read it was up to the police to govern themselves and they weren't doing a fantastic job of it.

IIRC they used it to stop a private citizen on his way to a demonstration - the man hadn't got a criminal record, wasn't a security threat either - the terror squad tracked and stopped him!