Alternative to speed limits and cameras?
Discussion
Esceptico said:
Apparently there are 42 million people with driving licences in the UK
Source? I have 31.8 million. Which obviously would put it even higher.Esceptico said:
2.4 million currently have points on their licence
I make it 2.8 million, (so again, a higher percentage). Of which 2.2 million (80%) have 3 points. And that's not including those on speed awareness courses.i.e. catch a lot of people, take money off them and do bugger all else. Like any other racket.
0000 said:
I make it 2.8 million, (so again, a higher percentage). Of which 2.2 million (80%) have 3 points. And that's not including those on speed awareness courses.
i.e. catch a lot of people, take money off them and do bugger all else. Like any other racket.
If people are careless enough to get caught be fixed cameras why do you have sympathy with them? For the vast majority of people almost all their car journies are on roads that they use frequently. Yes there are professional drivers (HGV etc) and some people that travel as part of their work (eg salesmen) but most people use their cars to get to and from work, drop children off at school, go shopping. On top of the usual trips there will be longer journies for visiting friends and relations and holidays but most of the time, most people are driving on roads they know. So why are they being caught? And if you are driving on roads you don't know (so don't know where the fixed sites are nor where there are sometimes mobile units) then why aren't you either not speeding or if speeding then being extra vigilant? i.e. catch a lot of people, take money off them and do bugger all else. Like any other racket.
Esceptico said:
If people are careless enough to get caught be fixed cameras why do you have sympathy with them? For the vast majority of people almost all their car journies are on roads that they use frequently. Yes there are professional drivers (HGV etc) and some people that travel as part of their work (eg salesmen) but most people use their cars to get to and from work, drop children off at school, go shopping. On top of the usual trips there will be longer journies for visiting friends and relations and holidays but most of the time, most people are driving on roads they know. So why are they being caught? And if you are driving on roads you don't know (so don't know where the fixed sites are nor where there are sometimes mobile units) then why aren't you either not speeding or if speeding then being extra vigilant?
These numbers aren't just for fixed camera sites, I don't know the proportion but I doubt most are from fixed sites these days.I don't believe you can say most people get them on roads they use frequently, they last for three years during which surely most people are making trips on roads they don't know?
Speed limits are usually set too low at the sites where mobile cameras operate, indeed it seems to be why they operate where they do.
Good luck being vigilant at a distance of 4500 feet.
Digby said:
grumpy52 said:
Motorway speed limits cause bunching and then irritation.
In experiments of no limits the average speeds only raised very marginally and bunching and lane discipline vastly improved .
As a regular user of the M25, as I reported some time ago, one morning, all of the variable limits were off for the first time I can remember since they were introduced. I assume there was a problem as nothing was lit.In experiments of no limits the average speeds only raised very marginally and bunching and lane discipline vastly improved .
It was the best journey during rush hour I have had on that section in years. The following day, they were all back on and it was back to the usual stop start affair we all know and love..
As for the street furniture comment, I am convinced this is one of the issues at the Dartford tunnel when going South to North. They aimed to make things free-flowing and installed traffic lights, cameras at those lights and so much colourful crap everywhere that drivers slow down just to be sure either the lights are not about to go red, or that they are not breaking the rules.
The result? Job losses, millions spent and often as much congestion as there was before during peak times. Brilliant.
The next crossing will help but I would not expect that to be completed for 10 years .
Digby said:
As a regular user of the M25, as I reported some time ago, one morning, all of the variable limits were off for the first time I can remember since they were introduced. I assume there was a problem as nothing was lit.
It was the best journey during rush hour I have had on that section in years. The following day, they were all back on and it was back to the usual stop start affair we all know and love..
As for the street furniture comment, I am convinced this is one of the issues at the Dartford tunnel when going South to North. They aimed to make things free-flowing and installed traffic lights, cameras at those lights and so much colourful crap everywhere that drivers slow down just to be sure either the lights are not about to go red, or that they are not breaking the rules.
The result? Job losses, millions spent and often as much congestion as there was before during peak times. Brilliant.
AFAIK the variable speed limits only apply when traffic is heavy and becomes stop/start. Isn't it more likely that traffic was unusually light that day? Traffic flow management is complex but is backed by maths and computer modelling (like much else of modern life). Apologies if I put more faith in specialists that spend their life working on it than some random anecdotes on the Internet.It was the best journey during rush hour I have had on that section in years. The following day, they were all back on and it was back to the usual stop start affair we all know and love..
As for the street furniture comment, I am convinced this is one of the issues at the Dartford tunnel when going South to North. They aimed to make things free-flowing and installed traffic lights, cameras at those lights and so much colourful crap everywhere that drivers slow down just to be sure either the lights are not about to go red, or that they are not breaking the rules.
The result? Job losses, millions spent and often as much congestion as there was before during peak times. Brilliant.
blank said:
They have quite a good system in (I think) Portugal as an alternative to cameras.
A set of traffic lights with no junction, crossing or any hazard.
If you approach above the speed limit they go red and you have to stop. If you're not speeding they stay green.
So if a speeding car overtakes a line of cars coming up to one of these lights, and gets to the front of the queue, then the traffic lights spot him and go to red, causing him to have to wait?A set of traffic lights with no junction, crossing or any hazard.
If you approach above the speed limit they go red and you have to stop. If you're not speeding they stay green.
What about all the people who were overtaken the speeding car? - Do they get to go around the speeder to carry on their journey at the speed limit?
No, when the speeder gets stopped, so does everyone behind who obeyed the limit, so they all get punished for one drivers speeding (okay, it's only costing a bit of time rather than any money, but they still pay a price for someone else breaking the Law).
At least with speed cameras it's only the person breaking the Law who has to pay a price!
And to Make the traffic light system work properly, you'd need to install them every 100 yards in order to make the journey a real pain in the arse if you speed, with all the stop starting.
And in the same way as with fixed speed cameras, if you know where the traffic lights are, you just speed along until you're close to the lights, slow down to the limit as you approach the lights, and then speed up again once past the lights!
4rephill said:
So if a speeding car overtakes a line of cars coming up to one of these lights, and gets to the front of the queue, then the traffic lights spot him and go to red, causing him to have to wait?
What about all the people who were overtaken the speeding car? - Do they get to go around the speeder to carry on their journey at the speed limit?
No, when the speeder gets stopped, so does everyone behind who obeyed the limit, so they all get punished for one drivers speeding (okay, it's only costing a bit of time rather than any money, but they still pay a price for someone else breaking the Law).
At least with speed cameras it's only the person breaking the Law who has to pay a price!
And to Make the traffic light system work properly, you'd need to install them every 100 yards in order to make the journey a real pain in the arse if you speed, with all the stop starting.
And in the same way as with fixed speed cameras, if you know where the traffic lights are, you just speed along until you're close to the lights, slow down to the limit as you approach the lights, and then speed up again once past the lights!
Clutching at straws a bit there. How often do you overtake people as you approach traffic lights? Saying that a system doesn't work based on a hypothetical situation or bad driving hardly undermines the general idea.What about all the people who were overtaken the speeding car? - Do they get to go around the speeder to carry on their journey at the speed limit?
No, when the speeder gets stopped, so does everyone behind who obeyed the limit, so they all get punished for one drivers speeding (okay, it's only costing a bit of time rather than any money, but they still pay a price for someone else breaking the Law).
At least with speed cameras it's only the person breaking the Law who has to pay a price!
And to Make the traffic light system work properly, you'd need to install them every 100 yards in order to make the journey a real pain in the arse if you speed, with all the stop starting.
And in the same way as with fixed speed cameras, if you know where the traffic lights are, you just speed along until you're close to the lights, slow down to the limit as you approach the lights, and then speed up again once past the lights!
I've come across a similar system but not sure where (perhaps the US?) lights turn green. If you go at the speed limit then the next set of lights will be green. If you speed then you have to stop as they are still red.
Esceptico said:
4rephill said:
So if a speeding car overtakes a line of cars coming up to one of these lights, and gets to the front of the queue, then the traffic lights spot him and go to red, causing him to have to wait?
What about all the people who were overtaken the speeding car? - Do they get to go around the speeder to carry on their journey at the speed limit?
No, when the speeder gets stopped, so does everyone behind who obeyed the limit, so they all get punished for one drivers speeding (okay, it's only costing a bit of time rather than any money, but they still pay a price for someone else breaking the Law).
At least with speed cameras it's only the person breaking the Law who has to pay a price!
And to Make the traffic light system work properly, you'd need to install them every 100 yards in order to make the journey a real pain in the arse if you speed, with all the stop starting.
And in the same way as with fixed speed cameras, if you know where the traffic lights are, you just speed along until you're close to the lights, slow down to the limit as you approach the lights, and then speed up again once past the lights!
Clutching at straws a bit there. How often do you overtake people as you approach traffic lights? Saying that a system doesn't work based on a hypothetical situation or bad driving hardly undermines the general idea.What about all the people who were overtaken the speeding car? - Do they get to go around the speeder to carry on their journey at the speed limit?
No, when the speeder gets stopped, so does everyone behind who obeyed the limit, so they all get punished for one drivers speeding (okay, it's only costing a bit of time rather than any money, but they still pay a price for someone else breaking the Law).
At least with speed cameras it's only the person breaking the Law who has to pay a price!
And to Make the traffic light system work properly, you'd need to install them every 100 yards in order to make the journey a real pain in the arse if you speed, with all the stop starting.
And in the same way as with fixed speed cameras, if you know where the traffic lights are, you just speed along until you're close to the lights, slow down to the limit as you approach the lights, and then speed up again once past the lights!
I've come across a similar system but not sure where (perhaps the US?) lights turn green. If you go at the speed limit then the next set of lights will be green. If you speed then you have to stop as they are still red.
How many people overtake and speed past speed cameras because they didn't realise the cameras were there? (And then come on PH b
tching about getting caught speeding!)Let's look at another possible situation then with no overtaking involved: If two cars approach the traffic lights, the front one travelling just fast enough to trigger the lights, and the one behind travelling at a speed just below the speed required to trigger the lights, the car travelling within the limit, having done nothing wrong, will still have to stop at the red light that they did not trigger, so again, a driver who has not broken the Law pays the price along with someone who did!
(OF course, I'm sure you'll argue that that would never happen either!
)As I understand the US system in some cities, the traffic lights in are timed so that when they turn green, if you travel at the speed limit then you can hit all of the lights on green.
However, they are purely based on a timer, not on the approaching cars speed, and they are junction traffic lights, not traffic lights placed purely to stop speeding cars.
Those lights are set that way to improve both safety and traffic flow through the city, more than to stop people speeding.
4rephill said:
So My hypothetical situation couldn't ever occur then? - Especially as the traffic lights are (apparently) not located at junctions, but at a random part of the road?
How many people overtake and speed past speed cameras because they didn't realise the cameras were there? (And then come on PH btching about getting caught speeding!)
Let's look at another possible situation then with no overtaking involved: If two cars approach the traffic lights, the front one travelling just fast enough to trigger the lights, and the one behind travelling at a speed just below the speed required to trigger the lights, the car travelling within the limit, having done nothing wrong, will still have to stop at the red light that they did not trigger, so again, a driver who has not broken the Law pays the price along with someone who did!
(OF course, I'm sure you'll argue that that would never happen either! )
As I understand the US system in some cities, the traffic lights in are timed so that when they turn green, if you travel at the speed limit then you can hit all of the lights on green.
However, they are purely based on a timer, not on the approaching cars speed, and they are junction traffic lights, not traffic lights placed purely to stop speeding cars.
Those lights are set that way to improve both safety and traffic flow through the city, more than to stop people speeding.
Almost anything that can happen will likely happen. But your scenarios are not going to happen often enough to not make them worthwhile. Why would someone speed up to the lights if they know by doing so they will make them change to red? A bit like arguing that someone would see a speed camera and accelerate rather than brake. Perhaps the person who posted this should tell us how it works in practice in Portugal.How many people overtake and speed past speed cameras because they didn't realise the cameras were there? (And then come on PH b
tching about getting caught speeding!)Let's look at another possible situation then with no overtaking involved: If two cars approach the traffic lights, the front one travelling just fast enough to trigger the lights, and the one behind travelling at a speed just below the speed required to trigger the lights, the car travelling within the limit, having done nothing wrong, will still have to stop at the red light that they did not trigger, so again, a driver who has not broken the Law pays the price along with someone who did!
(OF course, I'm sure you'll argue that that would never happen either!
)As I understand the US system in some cities, the traffic lights in are timed so that when they turn green, if you travel at the speed limit then you can hit all of the lights on green.
However, they are purely based on a timer, not on the approaching cars speed, and they are junction traffic lights, not traffic lights placed purely to stop speeding cars.
Those lights are set that way to improve both safety and traffic flow through the city, more than to stop people speeding.
As an aside, nice to see that someone reads my posts and remembers them - even if they aren't appreciated!
Esceptico said:
AFAIK the variable speed limits only apply when traffic is heavy and becomes stop/start. Isn't it more likely that traffic was unusually light that day? Traffic flow management is complex but is backed by maths and computer modelling (like much else of modern life). Apologies if I put more faith in specialists that spend their life working on it than some random anecdotes on the Internet.
Someone on these very forums who works in that industry admitted these systems can be triggered for all sorts of reasons; even a few slow-moving vehicles in the right situation on an otherwise empty road can trigger them etc. He probably made it all up, though..More likely the traffic was light? 20 years of using that road and I don't know the difference? Hidden agenda springs to mind, especially as the "Tin hat" joker was played so early on.
As for putting faith in those who seem to regularly fk up sections of road, feel free. You tried some Carol Vorderman-esque maths earlier and missed out millions of pounds worth of generated fines and suggested all cameras are bright and easy to spot, so for me, random anecdotes are a much, MUCH better option.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I think you missed the whole thrust of my argument, which is that as an enthusiast I am not sure I want limits to be enforced more intelligently. Being more intelligent the authorities could just force upon us a GPS enabled speed limiter or black boxes or use hidden cameras so that you never feel safe speeding. As an enthusiast I am happy to trade yellow fixed cameras and even mobile vans on motorway, dual carriageways and long straight roads if that means that limits are not enforced on all roads -particularly the ones that are fun to drive fast.
As to being sanctimonious a lot on here should look in the mirror first. They seem to have a huge sense of entitlement about speeding. It is illegal. There are no real arguments for doing it.
It is irrelevant whether it is dangerous. If you think the limits are wrong then in a democracy you have the right to fight to have the laws changed. You don't have a right to pick and choose which laws you want to obey just because you personally disagree with them. That way lies anarchy. If you do choose to break the law then you have to accept the risk of being caught and the consequences.
I personally would not gloat about others being caught. I tend to sympathise and empathise with those caught. However that is not automatic and if someone has done something both crass and potentially dangerous then I'm not going to support their actions just because they are on PH.
Esceptico said:
It is irrelevant whether it is dangerous. If you think the limits are wrong then in a democracy you have the right to fight to have the laws changed. You don't have a right to pick and choose which laws you want to obey just because you personally disagree with them. That way lies anarchy.
That's just a matter of philosophy. Some would argue one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.0000 said:
Esceptico said:
It is irrelevant whether it is dangerous. If you think the limits are wrong then in a democracy you have the right to fight to have the laws changed. You don't have a right to pick and choose which laws you want to obey just because you personally disagree with them. That way lies anarchy.
That's just a matter of philosophy. Some would argue one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.0000 said:
Esceptico said:
It is irrelevant whether it is dangerous. If you think the limits are wrong then in a democracy you have the right to fight to have the laws changed. You don't have a right to pick and choose which laws you want to obey just because you personally disagree with them. That way lies anarchy.
That's just a matter of philosophy. Some would argue one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.Are you equating speeding with those cases of injustice?
I did ask in my first post whether anyone had an argument for having no speed limits but didn't get a response.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff