Speed cameras: Are we interested in evidence?
Discussion
bigothunter said:
5s Alive said:
Impatient divers aren't safe, neither are those who treat public roads as their own personal race track however I don't imagine this is the default approach adopted by most of us on PH. Hardly a contentious comment so I'm surprised to see you respond as above BH.
Subject of this thread is evidence to justify speed cameras not impatient drivers. Clue is in the title.I agree that impatient drivers are not safe and that roads cannot/should not be used as race tracks. But neither are relevant to this thread.
After all there is no point having speed limits if you don't enforce them.
Speed cameras doing the enforcement also means that Roads Policing officers can target other offending, because the cameras are taking care of the speed enforcement part.
If the allegation is that an unintended consequence of the visible camera themselves, is an adverse effect on driver behaviour/safety, then try making them invisible so they can't see them.
If you aren't going to enforce speed limits, then remove them & just have advisory signs or none at all.
vonhosen said:
Cameras enforce limits.
Limits exist for multiple reasons.
Safety, Environmental control (noise/pollution), Traffic flow reasons, Social reasons etc.
They don't exist for any of those reasons unless there's a publicly available evidential justification. Without that they're just putting cameras up, taking money and offering excuses.Limits exist for multiple reasons.
Safety, Environmental control (noise/pollution), Traffic flow reasons, Social reasons etc.
768 said:
vonhosen said:
Cameras enforce limits.
Limits exist for multiple reasons.
Safety, Environmental control (noise/pollution), Traffic flow reasons, Social reasons etc.
They don't exist for any of those reasons unless there's a publicly available evidential justification. Without that they're just putting cameras up, taking money and offering excuses.Limits exist for multiple reasons.
Safety, Environmental control (noise/pollution), Traffic flow reasons, Social reasons etc.
They just all get them for whatever reason. It isn't only safety.
Enforcement (whether it be a Police officer in a car or a camera) exists simply due to the existence of those speed limits. There is no legal evidential safety breach requirement or need in order for enforcement to take place. It can happen anywhere anytime.
No limits = no legislated speeding offence/enforcement.
Limit = a legislated offence of speeding/enforcement.
vonhosen said:
768 said:
But if you don't know which, it's not there for any of them.
It doesn't make any difference to the end user & the individual intention in that limit doesn't have to be justified to them.They simply have to observe & comply or face sanction.
Edited by vonhosen on Saturday 25th November 07:47
See my earlier example where you failed to give any justification for the change at the county line.
blueg33 said:
vonhosen said:
768 said:
But if you don't know which, it's not there for any of them.
It doesn't make any difference to the end user & the individual intention in that limit doesn't have to be justified to them.They simply have to observe & comply or face sanction.
Edited by vonhosen on Saturday 25th November 07:47
See my earlier example where you failed to give any justification for the change at the county line.
You aren't asked to only comply with limits that you personally think are appropriate & see a reason for.
You are told not to exceed them with threat of sanction if you do.
If the reason you shouldn't go faster there was obvious, then there'd be no need for a speed limit in the first place.
Speed limits are generally very conservatively set, because they are one limit that's permanently set & doesn't vary as conditions vary.
As such, by their very nature, a safe speed can often be far in excess of that speed limit. You are forbidden from going there though.
It's not a defence to say "I didn't think the limit was appropriately set".
It's a political/social control mechanism.
If it's only safe to do 20, it doesn't matter that the limit is 40 because it's not going to affect me it's irrelevant.
If it's safe to do 60 & the limit is 40 it does affect me, because I have to comply or face sanction.
Limits only come into effect when you think it's safe to go faster than them, but there isn't a legal justification to go faster than them.
vonhosen said:
768 said:
But if you don't know which, it's not there for any of them.
It doesn't make any difference to the end user & the individual intention in that limit doesn't have to be justified to them.They simply have to observe & comply or face sanction.
768 said:
vonhosen said:
768 said:
But if you don't know which, it's not there for any of them.
It doesn't make any difference to the end user & the individual intention in that limit doesn't have to be justified to them.They simply have to observe & comply or face sanction.
Greendubber said:
I am
And yes, speed can kill as can lots of other things that are given rules, regulations etc to try and prevent bad things happening. Speeding is no different to lots of things we cant simply 'do'
But is it speed per se that kills or inappropriate speed for the circumstance whether that be above or below the speed limit? And yes, speed can kill as can lots of other things that are given rules, regulations etc to try and prevent bad things happening. Speeding is no different to lots of things we cant simply 'do'
Phil. said:
Greendubber said:
I am
And yes, speed can kill as can lots of other things that are given rules, regulations etc to try and prevent bad things happening. Speeding is no different to lots of things we cant simply 'do'
But is it speed per se that kills or inappropriate speed for the circumstance whether that be above or below the speed limit? And yes, speed can kill as can lots of other things that are given rules, regulations etc to try and prevent bad things happening. Speeding is no different to lots of things we cant simply 'do'
Whether it increases incidence is debatable. It is likely that it can play a part, but it will affect the severity of the outcome.
So if you want to minimise severity & incidence it's not something you'd ignore.
vonhosen said:
Phil. said:
Greendubber said:
I am
And yes, speed can kill as can lots of other things that are given rules, regulations etc to try and prevent bad things happening. Speeding is no different to lots of things we cant simply 'do'
But is it speed per se that kills or inappropriate speed for the circumstance whether that be above or below the speed limit? And yes, speed can kill as can lots of other things that are given rules, regulations etc to try and prevent bad things happening. Speeding is no different to lots of things we cant simply 'do'
Whether it increases incidence is debatable, but it is likely that it can play a part, but it will affect the likely severity of the outcome.
So if you want to minimise severity & incidence it's not something you'd ignore.
The point is, mistakes, bad luck, bad driving, bad weather, they all kill. Speed is just a consequence multiplier. Speed itself is not the bad guy. That's why so many of us find " Speed kills" a touch too simplified.
Griffith4ever said:
vonhosen said:
Phil. said:
Greendubber said:
I am
And yes, speed can kill as can lots of other things that are given rules, regulations etc to try and prevent bad things happening. Speeding is no different to lots of things we cant simply 'do'
But is it speed per se that kills or inappropriate speed for the circumstance whether that be above or below the speed limit? And yes, speed can kill as can lots of other things that are given rules, regulations etc to try and prevent bad things happening. Speeding is no different to lots of things we cant simply 'do'
Whether it increases incidence is debatable, but it is likely that it can play a part, but it will affect the likely severity of the outcome.
So if you want to minimise severity & incidence it's not something you'd ignore.
The point is, mistakes, bad luck, bad driving, bad weather, they all kill. Speed is just a consequence multiplier. Speed itself is not the bad guy. That's why so many of us find " Speed kills" a touch too simplified.
Of course it's unlikely that the government could get away with a 5mph on all roads everywhere limit.
They have to find a compromise & current limits are an expression of what to them is currently an acceptable compromise.
Edited by vonhosen on Saturday 25th November 09:23
Griffith4ever said:
Dave Finney said:
Greendubber said:
I've seen first hand plenty of people killed by excess speed thanks very much.
So that must be due to your line of work. Are you a Police officer involved in collision investigations?Of course speed CAN kill. So can many many other things.
there was a campaign save the 60 about 10 years ago or so – it’s the loss or reduction of nsl for thin reasons that pisses me off, particularly when there is no change in the highway estate. A new road near me built to m’way standards but has a 60 then a slight curve and its 50 limits why? No issue doing 70, good views straightish road, central reserve, well built.
There are very few roads in the county I live in that are still 60/nsl all reduced to 50 40 and 30 but nothing physical has changed – no new school, housing, business estates that make the road “dangerous”
the rot started with red conservatives and the excessive nanny state mentality and the pathetic elements of the GB public lapped it up and believed everything they were told never got over it (including launching missiles in 45 mins), and those of us who push against it are simply patronised by the Mumsnet brigade that are now on here as ‘driving gods’ and ‘hooligans’ – no we just want limits to go back to where they were before President Blair came to power so we can just get along
not bothered about cameras really, they can be spotted and vans are little different to pigs at the roadside with a hairdryer – sorry policeperson at the highway edge with a measuring device
it’s their location, I saw two yesterday the A64 – neither were at accident hotspots both on dual carriageway sections hardly dangerous as the road is well made and straight
one was at the end of the dual section for a time before moving so it was there to get people who just try and nip past the bedroom driver or the weekend gypsy nothing dangerous slight over speed but would be punished with a fine and points - no one wants to be stuck for several miles behind a camper van at 30 as the traffic disappears into the distance even HGVs make better progress
we all need to get on, we don’t have no where to go and all day to get there and I don’t subscribe to the you’ll be there 30 seconds later at 50 than at 60 so there’s no difference, that may work on models and spreadsheets but my experience you aren’t in the real world
I’m 100% a more dangerous driver now with the ridiculous speed limit camera enforcement.
With motorways changing constantly and inconsistent limits across the country the driver has to be aware of the current restriction on the current road. It’s not possible to just drive naturally and safely as that often results in going too fast, since modern cars are above the speed limit in a second of over application of power.
So there is now a significant cockpit workload scanning signs, gantries and road types for limits and changes. It’s even got to the point of trying to work out not only if an overtake is safe, but if doing so will put you in violation of the average speed for the zone you’re driving in.
The mantra is “stick to the limit then cameras are no problem” but it is simply undeniable that doing so takes attention off other hazards, because nobody has more than 100% capacity. Since self preservation of your license comes at the top of everyone’s list the first sector of attention is spent on speed and everything else makes up the remaining percentage of whatever attention is left.
If you have ever driven on the autobahn on a derestricted section or on the track you will have felt the amazing feeling of control of the car and situation that you get from not obsessing over that needle every second of every minute.
With motorways changing constantly and inconsistent limits across the country the driver has to be aware of the current restriction on the current road. It’s not possible to just drive naturally and safely as that often results in going too fast, since modern cars are above the speed limit in a second of over application of power.
So there is now a significant cockpit workload scanning signs, gantries and road types for limits and changes. It’s even got to the point of trying to work out not only if an overtake is safe, but if doing so will put you in violation of the average speed for the zone you’re driving in.
The mantra is “stick to the limit then cameras are no problem” but it is simply undeniable that doing so takes attention off other hazards, because nobody has more than 100% capacity. Since self preservation of your license comes at the top of everyone’s list the first sector of attention is spent on speed and everything else makes up the remaining percentage of whatever attention is left.
If you have ever driven on the autobahn on a derestricted section or on the track you will have felt the amazing feeling of control of the car and situation that you get from not obsessing over that needle every second of every minute.
Julian Thompson said:
I’m 100% a more dangerous driver now with the ridiculous speed limit camera enforcement.
With motorways changing constantly and inconsistent limits across the country the driver has to be aware of the current restriction on the current road. It’s not possible to just drive naturally and safely as that often results in going too fast, since modern cars are above the speed limit in a second of over application of power.
So there is now a significant cockpit workload scanning signs, gantries and road types for limits and changes. It’s even got to the point of trying to work out not only if an overtake is safe, but if doing so will put you in violation of the average speed for the zone you’re driving in.
The mantra is “stick to the limit then cameras are no problem” but it is simply undeniable that doing so takes attention off other hazards, because nobody has more than 100% capacity. Since self preservation of your license comes at the top of everyone’s list the first sector of attention is spent on speed and everything else makes up the remaining percentage of whatever attention is left.
If you have ever driven on the autobahn on a derestricted section or on the track you will have felt the amazing feeling of control of the car and situation that you get from not obsessing over that needle every second of every minute.
You see I've always found speed limits restrictive (believed it was safe to exceed them a lot of the time).With motorways changing constantly and inconsistent limits across the country the driver has to be aware of the current restriction on the current road. It’s not possible to just drive naturally and safely as that often results in going too fast, since modern cars are above the speed limit in a second of over application of power.
So there is now a significant cockpit workload scanning signs, gantries and road types for limits and changes. It’s even got to the point of trying to work out not only if an overtake is safe, but if doing so will put you in violation of the average speed for the zone you’re driving in.
The mantra is “stick to the limit then cameras are no problem” but it is simply undeniable that doing so takes attention off other hazards, because nobody has more than 100% capacity. Since self preservation of your license comes at the top of everyone’s list the first sector of attention is spent on speed and everything else makes up the remaining percentage of whatever attention is left.
If you have ever driven on the autobahn on a derestricted section or on the track you will have felt the amazing feeling of control of the car and situation that you get from not obsessing over that needle every second of every minute.
It's no different now than years back.
I had to drive slower than my natural speed for circumstances back then to avoid losing my licence & I do now.
It's not something new & my driving hasn't deteriorated as a result of it.
I don't find it any harder sticking to the limit now than before, if I'm minded to do it.
On the autobahn I'm as aware of the speed I'm travelling at (number on the dial) as I am in the UK.
I don't look at the dial more in the UK, or less in Germany.
vonhosen said:
Julian Thompson said:
I’m 100% a more dangerous driver now with the ridiculous speed limit camera enforcement.
With motorways changing constantly and inconsistent limits across the country the driver has to be aware of the current restriction on the current road. It’s not possible to just drive naturally and safely as that often results in going too fast, since modern cars are above the speed limit in a second of over application of power.
So there is now a significant cockpit workload scanning signs, gantries and road types for limits and changes. It’s even got to the point of trying to work out not only if an overtake is safe, but if doing so will put you in violation of the average speed for the zone you’re driving in.
The mantra is “stick to the limit then cameras are no problem” but it is simply undeniable that doing so takes attention off other hazards, because nobody has more than 100% capacity. Since self preservation of your license comes at the top of everyone’s list the first sector of attention is spent on speed and everything else makes up the remaining percentage of whatever attention is left.
If you have ever driven on the autobahn on a derestricted section or on the track you will have felt the amazing feeling of control of the car and situation that you get from not obsessing over that needle every second of every minute.
You see I've always found speed limits restrictive (believed it was safe to exceed them a lot of the time).With motorways changing constantly and inconsistent limits across the country the driver has to be aware of the current restriction on the current road. It’s not possible to just drive naturally and safely as that often results in going too fast, since modern cars are above the speed limit in a second of over application of power.
So there is now a significant cockpit workload scanning signs, gantries and road types for limits and changes. It’s even got to the point of trying to work out not only if an overtake is safe, but if doing so will put you in violation of the average speed for the zone you’re driving in.
The mantra is “stick to the limit then cameras are no problem” but it is simply undeniable that doing so takes attention off other hazards, because nobody has more than 100% capacity. Since self preservation of your license comes at the top of everyone’s list the first sector of attention is spent on speed and everything else makes up the remaining percentage of whatever attention is left.
If you have ever driven on the autobahn on a derestricted section or on the track you will have felt the amazing feeling of control of the car and situation that you get from not obsessing over that needle every second of every minute.
It's no different now than years back.
I had to drive slower than my natural speed for circumstances back then to avoid losing my licence & I do now.
It's not something new & my driving hasn't deteriorated as a result of it.
I don't find it any harder sticking to the limit now than before, if I'm minded to do it.
On the autobahn I'm as aware of the speed I'm travelling at (number on the dial) as I am in the UK.
I don't look at the dial more in the UK, or less in Germany.
Julian Thompson said:
When I say “obsessing over the needle” I mean everything to do with the speed - so both the actual speed of the vehicle as reported by the instrument and looking around me to work out exactly how fast I should be going. That action costs attention, whether it’s yours or mine. I will accept that driving in familiar surroundings it is not necessary, but everywhere else, it is.
Yes. It is a requirement now to use Waze on every journey as the new 20 limits, not to mention the placement of revenue vans in places were you would ordinarily be slowing are trying to catch drivers out. Those that must be obeyed want you to drive by the numbers, sod driving standards…it’s a binary position for them. I did try and find the method to complain about a recent revenue van placement as it was blatantly obvious it was there for one reason. Gave up in the end, life’s too short to worry about it.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff