Speed Cameras - your thoughts...

Speed cameras....

  • Good. There to save lives.

    Votes: 5 12.2%

  • Bad. There to make money.

    Votes: 27 65.9%

  • Don't care as long as I don't get nicked.

    Votes: 9 22.0%
  • Total voters
    41
Welly

Welly

335D Driver :-)
Joined
Aug 5, 2009
Messages
10,703
Reaction score
141
Points
63
Location
Gloucestershire
I have been watching this:

[video]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10723343[/video]

A very interesting video about how, 1 year on from Swindon Borough Council removing all it's speed cameras, there has not been a rise in accidents in the county....

Discuss....
 
if a speed camera makes money then it aint working. also speed cameras dont catch drunk/drugged/unlicensed/stolen/etc.....
 
Not surprised at all. Speed is not the bee all and end all of accidents that you would be had to believe. It is however a great political tool and stupid people can be whitewashed into buying into the anti speed propaganda with relative ease.

Did anybody see the "Police Camera Action" the other night? What a load of tripe! It was so bad I turned it off and felt compelled to write to OFCOM to lodge a formal complaint on th etechnical inaccuracies of what was broadcast along with unrelevent clips of people fleeing from police in America. The scientific testing was beyond a joke!

Turn them all off and aim to improve the standard of driving rather than vitimise people who stary a few mph over the limit. A camer can't catch the uninsured, unroadworthy or just downright bad drivers out there. Put the job back in the hands of th etraffic police and stop with this quota BS for them to achieve.
 
genuinely i belive they could be used to save lives, but using them everywhere insteead of random polisce patrols is making them a blatent cash cow
 
This is the gist of an article in connection with Speed Caneras on Personal GPS website:

According to new research commissioned by motor insurance company LV, many drivers admit to "behaving erratically in front of speed cameras with thousands confessing to slamming on the brakes or looking at their speedometer as soon as a camera comes into view."

The research suggests that this behaviour could be responsible for 28,000 road accidents since speed cameras were rolled out nationally in 2001. According to LV's pollsters, ICM Research, the 1,532 drivers surveyed reported that in 1% of accidents, speed cameras were a contributory factor.

The Department for Transport's latest accident estimates reports that there have been 2.7 million vehicle accidents since 2001. ICM concluded (though we're not altogether sure how scientific this conclusion is!), that of these accidents, it is therefore likely that approximately 1% (27,900) accidents have been caused as a result of speed cameras.

The responses of the drivers polled were interesting:

* 81% said they instantly look at their speedometers instead of the road when a speed camera comes into view

* 5% admitted to braking suddenly when seeing a speed camera

* 31% said they had witnessed an accident or near miss as a result of other drivers’ erratic behaviour when faced with a speed camera

* 46% believe speed cameras divert attention away from other areas of their driving

* 11% believe that speed cameras increase their risk of an accident

* 46% believe speed cameras exist only to raise revenue for the Government

* 91% admit to exceeding the speed limit

* 15% speed on a regular basis

* 9% of drivers said they never speed

* 69% of motorists travel at an average speed of 81 miles per hour on motorwaysAccording to new research commissioned by motor insurance company LV, many drivers admit to "behaving erratically in front of speed cameras with thousands confessing to slamming on the brakes or looking at their speedometer as soon as a camera comes into view."
 
Now that is VERY interesting. It's nice to see genuine figures from the public rather than 'edited to comply' statistics from the government....
 
IIRC, when there's a serious or fatal (KSI) crash, the police have a number of boxes to tick on the form regarding possible contributary factors.

The Police county accident investigator that spoke at a conference I was at said that only a low percentage of reports have the excess speed box ticked as a factor. Think it was either 8% or 15%. So the professional investigators feel that excessive speed is only a factor in 1 in 6 serious accidents.

Still a factor in over 500 deaths a Year though...
 
To be honest, I am almost fanatical about sticking to the speed limit in builit up areas at 30/40mph. I save my fun for the National speed limit zones, both on the bike and in the car.

I would personally like to see speed cameras every 50yards in built up areas and all the F**king speed bumps and cushions dug up!

I regularly drive 16 miles each way on b-roads to my golf club, and it scares me the number of drivers who potter along at 45 between the villages clogging everything up, and then continue at 45 in the villages! Both old and 'mumsies'

I also rarely exceed 70 on the motorways now, as I refuse to pay the speeding tax, and it saves me a good 5-8mpg doing 68 as opposed to 80mph.

Cheers,
 
Are speed cameras good or bad??? Can't really apply a blanket answer to one or the other really.

They are BAD because they can make people brake suddenly, concentrate on the camera instead of actually driving, etc etc etc.

They are GOOD because they do slow down traffic in places where people do drive too fast.
e.g. There is a sharp bend on a dual carriageway near me and before there was a speed camera on the approach loads of people used to lose control by driving through it too fast (approx. 50mph). Since the camera has been installed the maximum speed you can go round it without getting a ticket is about 30-35mph.


So I guess I'm for and against them.
 
audi upgrades
aythreee said:
Are speed cameras good or bad??? Can't really apply a blanket answer to one or the other really.

They are BAD because they can make people brake suddenly, concentrate on the camera instead of actually driving, etc etc etc.

They are GOOD because they do slow down traffic in places where people do drive too fast.
e.g. There is a sharp bend on a dual carriageway near me and before there was a speed camera on the approach loads of people used to lose control by driving through it too fast (approx. 50mph). Since the camera has been installed the maximum speed you can go round it without getting a ticket is about 30-35mph.


So I guess I'm for and against them.
Click to expand...

That's fair enough, and for good reasons.

I am just interested to get people's thoughts.

I'd rather get nicked by a copper with a gun personally, than some yellow box on stilts, put there purely to increase revenue.

At least Police are passionate about what they are doing, although are more guilty of hiding in hedges....
 
Welly said:
I'd rather get nicked by a copper with a gun personally, than some yellow box on stilts, put there purely to increase revenue.
Click to expand...

I'd rather get nicked by a yellow box. At least they don't pull you over and ask you to get out of your car so they can tell you off like child.
Also, easier to appeal/get off of tickets issued by speed cameras (that's if you even receive the camera issued ticket).
 
sooner they are gone the better. How can it be safe to look at a down at a speedo in fear and not look at the road ahead. Money making at its best from the authorities! I have 9 points all for being 10mph over the limit!!! I have learned nothing from getting the points. Cars have changed and evolved - why cant the road laws?
 
I would like to see a statistic for the age range of people killed while speeding.

Clarkson said the way to stop people speeding is to put a 12" spike in the middle of the steering wheel then everyone would drive at 10mph.
 
It's simple realy, if you don't speed then you have no worries about speed cameras/guns etc etc. If you are going to deliberatly break the law and speed, then you should be willing to face the consiquenses when and if caught just my view on it

Stacey
 
Purple Princess said:
It's simple realy, if you don't speed then you have no worries about speed cameras/guns etc etc. If you are going to deliberatly break the law and speed, then you should be willing to face the consiquenses when and if caught just my view on it

Stacey
Click to expand...

Stacey do you always stick to ALL the laws relating to driving or just speed?

The authorities use speed cameras etc because it's so easy. Just a questions of numbers 50mph legal - 55mph illegal, and all because some bureaucrat has decided that 50mph is a safe speed and 55mph is not. I would much rather a driver being driving at 55 in a 50 limit and concentrating on the road in front rather that looking down at the speedo to make sure they don't get booked by a camera. Perhaps we should have some centre lane cameras that book everyone that drives in the centre lane when the inside lane is empty just so they don't have to carry out the complicated manoeuvre of changing lanes.
 
h5djr said:
Stacey do you always stick to ALL the laws relating to driving or just speed?

.
Click to expand...

Yup I do. Speeding is not big nor clever people will die and no, I dont check my speedo every single min when in a 50 but in a 30 yes and 40 because thats where children/pedestrians etc are the whole reason for speed limits in the first place.

And WTF are you on about the 'complicated manover of changing lanes'??

Stacey
 
i speed now & then, nothing big only a few mph... not in town or near any schools etc.

only on some quiet lanes out of the way or a few mph on the motorway.

most of the speed cameras are money banks for the mp's who like to have back handers.... ( i have never voted & i will not do unless clarkson gets in :) ).

also there is a main road 30 mph near me with get this 7 lazy cops on it ( speed cameras ) in a nice 1 mile all most staight road !!!! what the fu@k !! comeon.
& after that there is another 5 or more in a 2 miles road.

over the top me thinks big time, rob dogs all of them.

bring the power back to the traffic cops & let the make the rules...... not some mp who as drivers & can not drive them selves about.

well my £1 worth of info & that .... .
 
Purple Princess said:
Yup I do. Speeding is not big nor clever people will die and no, I dont check my speedo every single min when in a 50 but in a 30 yes and 40 because thats where children/pedestrians etc are the whole reason for speed limits in the first place.

And WTF are you on about the 'complicated manover of changing lanes'??

Stacey
Click to expand...

I assume that when you say 'manover' which may be complicated in some circumstances, you are referring to my remark about 'complicated manoeuvre' of changing lanes. I was be sarcastic as why else would drivers stay in the centre lane when the inside lane is empty. You can drive on almost any motorway in the UK and the inside lane will be empty apart from the occasional lorry. The middle lane will be quite full of traffic which just sits in that lane rather than move into the inside lane and the outside lane will be full of traffic all expecting the cars in front to vapourise. Perhaps if those in the middle lane moved into the inside lane then those in the outside lane would use it for what it was designed, an overtaking lane which you use to overtake a vehicle in the middle lane and then pull back in again. This is what the law, in the form of the Highway Code, says they should do.

I have just returned from a holiday in Austria, which involved driving 900 miles each way across France using the Autoroutes and across Germany using the Autobahns. In Germany in particular the traffic drives very fast as large stretches of the autobahn have no speed limit. But their lane discipline is so much better than ours. If you looked at a German autobahn from the air it would look much the same as a UK motorway except that the drive on the other side of the road. In the case of the autobahn the inside lane would be full of traffic, the middle lane would be busy but not full and the outside lane would be almost empty apart from cars passing other traffic and then pulling in again. This is how it should be.

Also on the whole of the journey I only saw one or two speed cameras on the French autoroutes and none at all in Germany. Unlike the UK when their do roadworks on the autobahn and impose a speed limit they do not put up Average Speed Cameras.

With their lack of cameras and limited speed limits on the autobahns you might expect the number of people killed on their roads to be higher than the UK but in fact it's slightly lower. What Germany does have is much more thorough driving training which includes a minimum of 225 minutes on highways and country roads, 135 minutes of driving on the Autobahn and 90 minutes of driving at night and all this must be completed with a registered driving instructor before being allowed to even attempt the driving test. The driving test in the UK is farcical in comparison and our authorities seem to think you can solve the majority of driving ills with speed cameras and make money at the same time. But now those same authorities can no longer keep the money received in fines from speed cameras and central government will no longer fund the cameras many are ditching them fast. But, of course, they are their purely for road safety reasons and not to make money!!!!

Bring back the Traffic Police and let our roads be policed properly.
 
Personally I have never thought speed cameras would save lives I believe it has been a continuous stream of revenue for the government.Big brother tactics from the start I am glad they are to be removed.
 
Speed cameras are a pointless exercise for the reasons already discussed.You slow down for them, and then speed up after them.Built up areas aside which should be hammered by speed restrictions (could you live with killing a kid), there should be minimum speed limits, and severe punishments to the albert tatlocks and those that cant see over the steering wheels.I dont drive by the speed limits, i drive by the road conditions.If its 20mph its 20mph.If its over a ton its over a ton.
 
id rather have a speed camera in my satnat database than a copper parked up waiting with a speed gun.

They have their places, every school shold have them either side of the gates imo
 
most of the reports will be made to suit the mp's needs or quotes so they get in next term.

all fake or made up me thinks, sorry to say but the uk sucks at times as us the pubic get little repest or truth about things.

oh well just watch your speed & where you do it if you do......
 
johnnythepie said:
Speed cameras are a pointless exercise for the reasons already discussed.You slow down for them, and then speed up after them.Built up areas aside which should be hammered by speed restrictions (could you live with killing a kid), there should be minimum speed limits, and severe punishments to the albert tatlocks and those that cant see over the steering wheels.I dont drive by the speed limits, i drive by the road conditions.If its 20mph its 20mph.If its over a ton its over a ton.
Click to expand...

Not all speed camera are pointless. See my post above about the one just before a bend. Seen plenty more in places like that also.

Its good that you can drive by the conditions and not the limits, but plenty of people can't or don't because they misjudge the conditions or just like speeding.

Again, some speed cameras are pointless and are obvious money-makers, but some are very worthwhile and do a very good job of making dangerous roads less dangerous.

You just can't apply one opinion to all of them, IMO.
 
Drivers slow down then speed up after them so pointless for me
 
voorhees said:
Drivers slow down then speed up after them so pointless for me
Click to expand...

...and what about the speed cameras that are located just before places like bends, crossings etc, where after slowing down for the camera there isn't enough distance to accelerate to a "dangerous" speed again, at least until past that "dangerous" spot??
 
aythreee said:
...and what about the speed cameras that are located just before places like bends, crossings etc, where after slowing down for the camera there isn't enough distance to accelerate to a "dangerous" speed again, at least until past that "dangerous" spot??
Click to expand...

I think you'd slow down for bends/crossings anyway,never seen a camera on or near them to be honest.
 
voorhees said:
I think you'd slow down for bends/crossings anyway,never seen a camera on or near them to be honest.
Click to expand...

I would, but I've seen plenty who don't:

aythreee said:
They are GOOD because they do slow down traffic in places where people do drive too fast.
e.g. There is a sharp bend on a dual carriageway near me and before there was a speed camera on the approach loads of people used to lose control by driving through it too fast (approx. 50mph). Since the camera has been installed the maximum speed you can go round it without getting a ticket is about 30-35mph.
Click to expand...
 
Here's a classic example of what I am on about. This is a speed camera (you can see the markings on the road) just before a crossing near to where I live.
This road used to have people speeding down it all the time. Loads of times I saw people almost getting wiped out on the crossing, but ever since they stuck this camera there it's a pretty safe crossing.

mapyz.jpg
 
Last edited:
And here is one that is at the end of a long straight just before a bend.
Also used to be a real bad spot for accidents and near accidents as people would continue their speed from the straight around the bend. Hardly happens now that there is a speed camera there.
There's a zebra crossing just after the bend also.


map2ad.jpg
 
Last edited:
Speed cameras have their places. They are best placed to slow traffic where there are vunerable users (peds, cycles etc) but if placed wrongly can be seen as useless but even these can still cut speeding issues. They are also a good collision reduction tool (again if used correctly).

People also need to remember that a proportion of the money received in fines is used in a partnership with local councils to do local safety schemes to reduce collisions where there has been evidence found of high numbers of KSIs. These schemes are vital to help improve sites with a number of engineering measures or educational measures to ensure our roads are safer.

But I agree there are alot of useless ones or maybe useless drivers who just dont care about other road users including school children.....
 
Last edited:
The rise in speed cameras is probably due to the decline in driving standards. It seems like they have dumbed down the driving test to make it more politically correct and fair.
The amount of drivers I see in my street in a small car unable to get into a big parking space is unreal.

Thats why I would like to see statistics showing the age range of drivers killed while speeding, and another showing the road conditions at the time.
My guess? Age range of 18 - 25 in the wet have the most speed related crashes. And all the speed cameras in the world will not stop a young kid showing off to his mates.
 
agree with a lot of stuff here. every accident i've had has been when i was pratting about and showing off to mates within a year of passing my test. not speeding, but pratting about...
and defo agree the driving test needs to be harder. ok, so some people will probably never drive, but thats a good thing!! not everyone has the devine right to fly a plane, so why expect it for a car.
i'd make the test harder (drive at night, on motor ways, more parking!!!) and if someone failes more than once, they have to pass more than once. i mean, if some old dear fails 20 times then passes, surely that pass was just a fluke!! not like you do much driving during a poxy 45 minute test is it! i'd also get rid of the hazard perception test, this should be done during your actual practical test by way of conversing with the instructor...
dont they have harsh penalties in germany for tail-gaters too??!
 
1. Speed cameras work, you slow down for them if you don't then you are pretty stupid. Anyone who slams there brakes on for them is not doing the speed limit in the first place and also driving without due care and attention.

2. Impact is relative to mass AND speed, Im doing 30 in my audi and a 18 tonne truck is also doing 30, both are legal speeds but if a child walks out in front of me 80% chance of living, if the child walks in front of the truck... *Squish* and dead.

hence speed limits are a joke.
 
lincoln_dj said:
if someone failes more than once, they have to pass more than once
Click to expand...

LOL agree this should be the case with the old biddy that has failed 20 times already but I failed a few times myself and if this was a rule I'd be on the bus with the Peckham Terminator.... :)
 
how many times did you fail? most people can pass most things if they have enough goes!!
i reckon i could hit a 180 in darts if i had 1000 attempts, dont make me a good darts player does it!!

i'd also make people take another test after, say, 2 years, and if they havent shown a significant improvement then they should give up!!! i see quite a few people (sorry girls, but it is mostly females) that drive the same way now as they did when they passed their test. hands at ten to two, shuffling steering wheel, taking ages to park, stopping behind a car parked on their side of the road even though the road is plenty wide enough to pass, STILL not knowing where their washer fluid goes, etc.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ste-Martin
M1 Speed Cameras
Replies
5
Views
766
Steve!
Steve!
robbrivio
average speed cameras
Replies
12
Views
2K
Luke2.0tdi2010
Luke2.0tdi2010
motorbikez
Mobile Speed Cameras
Replies
16
Views
1K
motorbikez
motorbikez
beaker
Average Speed Cameras
Replies
11
Views
1K
Japper
J
B
MOVED: Speed Cameras
Replies
0
Views
669
BerkshireFlipper
B
Top
Back