Speed Camera Cut Down
Discussion
Pica-Pica said:
Debaser said:
Pica-Pica said:
Debaser said:
People who do this should receive a medal, but sadly they won't.
Just look at the second clip and reflect on what you wrote.ETA - If a small child didn't slow him down, a speed camera wouldn't.
(I don’t think a small child has the mass to slow a car down
)
Type R Tom said:
The problem is that this is only one step away from the idiots who cut down traffic signals with ULEZ cameras on top, leading to serious congestion and pedestrians' inability to cross the road.
Your assuming the TL's they cut down/damage even have ULEZ cameras on...IMHO when they do this a mandatory part of the response should be shut the road until repairs can be completed. Priority should be pedestrian safety; So if the lights support a pedestrian crossing we have to retain that and lose the road - it is a lot easier for drivers to take an alternative route...
qwerty360 said:
Type R Tom said:
The problem is that this is only one step away from the idiots who cut down traffic signals with ULEZ cameras on top, leading to serious congestion and pedestrians' inability to cross the road.
Your assuming the TL's they cut down/damage even have ULEZ cameras on...IMHO when they do this a mandatory part of the response should be shut the road until repairs can be completed. Priority should be pedestrian safety; So if the lights support a pedestrian crossing we have to retain that and lose the road - it is a lot easier for drivers to take an alternative route...
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/or...
There are quite a few examples around.
Forester1965 said:
What surprises me is why people bother? It's a potential prison sentence for an act that's not going to change public policy. It's all lose and no win.
Exactly this.The public could go out on a night of mass civil disobedience and cut every single one down, and they would all get replaced.
Pointless.
Mont Blanc said:
The public could go out on a night of mass civil disobedience and cut every single one down, and they would all get replaced.
Well that's almost certainly not true.For such extreme action to occur, the public must have realised that they had been lied to en mass.
In that case, officials could not simply re-erect all the cameras,
they would at least be forced to run scientific trials, as they should have done right at the start!
ps. I do not condone damaging speed cameras, even if they are leading to more deaths.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GqOm-keyss
ferret50 said:
The French are quite good at disabling scamras.
Farmers dig them up with a back hoe
Expanding foam and paint are used
And the good old plastic bag as well
Funnily enough, given that French speed cameras are mostly at ground level, I am surprised at the lack of action against them.Farmers dig them up with a back hoe
Expanding foam and paint are used
And the good old plastic bag as well
In my 40+ years of visiting and driving in France and other European countries, I have seen what I would describe as a complete transformation in driving standards. I saw the years when everybody drove flat out, and the national annual casualty rates were something to truly behold. I can remember the years when there was insanity in public behaviour, when we'd come back with tales of incredulity having witnessed driver behaviour.
The driver behaviour, patience and good manners we've experienced when cycling in France, Germany and Spain have been incredible, imo, in contrast to British drivers.
Things have changed completely; maybe people are happy with that, have no wish to return to the bad old days, and accept cameras for the greater good.
Maybe this rabid desire for the right to drive wherever and whenever, and sod everyone else, is a British thing now? We are certainly well behind the times imo.
qwerty360 said:
Your assuming the TL's they cut down/damage even have ULEZ cameras on...
IMHO when they do this a mandatory part of the response should be shut the road until repairs can be completed. Priority should be pedestrian safety; So if the lights support a pedestrian crossing we have to retain that and lose the road - it is a lot easier for drivers to take an alternative route...
That's demonstrably untrue. Cars by definition have to stick to roads, pedestrians can use roads, pavements, parks, fields, footpaths.IMHO when they do this a mandatory part of the response should be shut the road until repairs can be completed. Priority should be pedestrian safety; So if the lights support a pedestrian crossing we have to retain that and lose the road - it is a lot easier for drivers to take an alternative route...
Drawweight said:
Here in Scotland they’re shutting 100 of them off including most of them in my area, supposedly because driver behaviour has improved.
So have the cameras improved the behaviour? In which case why shut them down?
Or is it money as usual?
I see a lot of speed cameras around Glasgow with canvas hoods over them saying no longer in use or something like that. So why bother covering them up? Have they found they weren't catching many but causing a few with late braking?So have the cameras improved the behaviour? In which case why shut them down?
Or is it money as usual?
I would have thought leaving them uncovered would be a deterrent while costing nothing to process fines.
heebeegeetee said:
maybe people are happy with that, have no wish to return to the bad old days, and accept cameras for the greater good.
If speed cameras result in more death and serious injury here in Britain,it would seem unlikely that they're producing the opposite effect in France!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GqOm-keyss
Dave Finney said:
heebeegeetee said:
maybe people are happy with that, have no wish to return to the bad old days, and accept cameras for the greater good.
If speed cameras result in more death and serious injury here in Britain,it would seem unlikely that they're producing the opposite effect in France!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GqOm-keyss
I have seen a total transformation in Europe over the decades; I feel I have seen a complete U-turn in the way people behave and drive, so this is definitely not just down to car design.
Obviously the reasons for this are varied and complex, cameras will just be a part of a wider system.
I don't agree that cameras only have an effect at the site locations,I think they have a far wider effect than that. People know there are cameras about and are widespread, and behave accordingly.
I'm sure we're all familiar with seeing drivers and vehicles that are clearly unlicensed and unregistered and flout all rules and laws, the drivers behaving totally anti-socially. I do think that removing police from streets as the government has done has resulted in needlessly higher casualties.
I don't care about those unbelievably stupid and selfish people who killed themselves simply because they saw a camera; I mean guys, think about it, is there anyone here who can imagine that their driving would deteriorate so badly that they would *kill themselves* simply because they saw a camera?
I think all Dave's survey has done is highlight how incredibly stupid some people are, and there's never been a scientific study on allowing very stupid people to drive.
Mont Blanc said:
Exactly this.
The public could go out on a night of mass civil disobedience and cut every single one down, and they would all get replaced.
Pointless.
So we all become good boys and girls and do exactly what we’re told?The public could go out on a night of mass civil disobedience and cut every single one down, and they would all get replaced.
Pointless.
Sounds like you’d be happier in China or North Korea.
heebeegeetee said:
I don't accept that cameras cause more death and serious injury ...
Fascinating to see an entrenched opinion reacting against evidence.My evidence is in line with official reports.
On the odd occasion when official reports "estimate" the effect of site-selection (RTM),
they find it might be the largest effect at camera sites (far greater than the camera effect).
And even then, when you look at the methods they use, they under-estimate the site-selection effect.
https://speedcamerareport.co.uk/official-reports/
All I did was completely remove the site-selection effect to produce the most accurate report possible.
Never been done before,
A world first!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GqOm-keyss
heebeegeetee said:
Funnily enough, given that French speed cameras are mostly at ground level, I am surprised at the lack of action against them.
In my 40+ years of visiting and driving in France and other European countries, I have seen what I would describe as a complete transformation in driving standards. I saw the years when everybody drove flat out, and the national annual casualty rates were something to truly behold. I can remember the years when there was insanity in public behaviour, when we'd come back with tales of incredulity having witnessed driver behaviour.
The driver behaviour, patience and good manners we've experienced when cycling in France, Germany and Spain have been incredible, imo, in contrast to British drivers.
Things have changed completely; maybe people are happy with that, have no wish to return to the bad old days, and accept cameras for the greater good.
Maybe this rabid desire for the right to drive wherever and whenever, and sod everyone else, is a British thing now? We are certainly well behind the times imo.
That transformation in driving standards is more down to the standard of the roads than anything else. They are fast, safe and well maintained. Progress is rapid and comfortable so drivers can relax. Go into a congested city and watch it descend into chaos once again.In my 40+ years of visiting and driving in France and other European countries, I have seen what I would describe as a complete transformation in driving standards. I saw the years when everybody drove flat out, and the national annual casualty rates were something to truly behold. I can remember the years when there was insanity in public behaviour, when we'd come back with tales of incredulity having witnessed driver behaviour.
The driver behaviour, patience and good manners we've experienced when cycling in France, Germany and Spain have been incredible, imo, in contrast to British drivers.
Things have changed completely; maybe people are happy with that, have no wish to return to the bad old days, and accept cameras for the greater good.
Maybe this rabid desire for the right to drive wherever and whenever, and sod everyone else, is a British thing now? We are certainly well behind the times imo.
When I lived in Italy it was rare to see a camera that didn't have its lens spray painted. No idea why we don't do that in the UK. Quick, easy and almost impossible to catch.
Dingu said:
The other thing is the road in question is heavily residential, so this achieves nothing of benefit. If it was on a nice well sighted A or B road which is set to 40/50 then I would get it. But it isn’t so all that happens is tax money gets spent replacing it, which doesn’t feel like much of a “win”.
Speed cameras in residential areas overwhelmingly catch locals rather than those passing through. Chances are this was a local idiot who may have been caught more than once. 
I think the biggest issue is the general perception they are revenue raisers first and foremost with improving safety a distant second.
I don't know if the information is already published but the justification for putting up a camera should be published, lack of information about why it is there is the biggest problem.
People should easily be able to see the reason for the camera being needed.
I don't know if the information is already published but the justification for putting up a camera should be published, lack of information about why it is there is the biggest problem.
People should easily be able to see the reason for the camera being needed.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff