Kent and Medway Safety Camera Partnership
Discussion
Chaps - go to this site, and fill in the questionaire with all the right answers.....they ask lots of good questions including ones about whether Cameras catch dangerous drivers and whether cameras are just about revenue raising.
www.kentandmedwaysafetycameras.org.uk
Put down that you're from Medway....my friends live down that way, and they've put loads of the bloody things up recently.
Cheers,
J.
www.kentandmedwaysafetycameras.org.uk
Put down that you're from Medway....my friends live down that way, and they've put loads of the bloody things up recently.
Cheers,
J.
jezzaaa said:
Put down that you're from Medway....my friends live down that way, and they've put loads of the bloody things up recently.
My BIL lives there, bloody Cameraworld it is he says.
I wonder what (he said cynically !) the question about having ever been involved in any accident at all at any time is for.
The cynic in me says that'll be used to correlate accidents to objections to scameras ; because the tiny few that haven't ever been hit will hardly ever drive.
jezzaaa said:
Chaps - go to this site, and fill in the questionaire with all the right answers.....they ask lots of good questions including ones about whether Cameras catch dangerous drivers and whether cameras are just about revenue raising.
I travel a fair bit on the M2 and M20 and I find the standard of driving to be much below average in most of Kent, finding the worst drivers within ten miles of Faversham. I think it is the brewery.
Also, plenty of old folks doddering around in twenty year old cars at 50 mph on the motorway.
Given that the safety partnership have only one golf club in their golf club bag, which golf club would you suggest ?
They can't realistically recall every driver and retrain them.
Not sure what your angle is there......surely any means we can come up with to tell the partnerships what motorists think of cameras should be employed. I'm not saying falsify your answers (I didn't), but they should have respondents from motor enthusiasts as well as others to balance the results.
As to their golf clubs....I would suggest they take up a different sport and abandon their current swing because it is completely ineffective.
J.
>> Edited by jezzaaa on Tuesday 9th August 14:22
As to their golf clubs....I would suggest they take up a different sport and abandon their current swing because it is completely ineffective.
J.
>> Edited by jezzaaa on Tuesday 9th August 14:22
I live in Kent and had a little bit of an issue with some speed cameras recently placed about a mile from where I live. They are badly positioned (right at the dip of a hill to catch people trying to keep the momentum going 
), and simply encourage people to speed further down the road where the other school is!
Give them their dues, I got a reply. But it was one of those we're right, you're wrong things.
I commend you for your sentiment, and wish you the best of luck trying to convince them that scameras are bad in many instances...
), and simply encourage people to speed further down the road where the other school is! Give them their dues, I got a reply. But it was one of those we're right, you're wrong things.
I commend you for your sentiment, and wish you the best of luck trying to convince them that scameras are bad in many instances...
Just downloaded their "report" 
It's mainly trying to statistically prove things are better after cameras, but the data set they are using must be tiny. It is also backfiring...
There has been a:
1. 193% increase in people who exceed a 50mph speed limit.
2. 350%
increase in people travelling 15mph over the speed limit in a 70mph limit.
Good job Kent & Medway Scameraship
It's mainly trying to statistically prove things are better after cameras, but the data set they are using must be tiny. It is also backfiring...
There has been a:
1. 193% increase in people who exceed a 50mph speed limit.
2. 350%
increase in people travelling 15mph over the speed limit in a 70mph limit. Good job Kent & Medway Scameraship
parrot of doom said:
They can't realistically recall every driver and retrain them.
Yes they can, its normal in just about every walk of life to have continuous assessment in whatever you do.
True, but this is the UK Government we are talking about here. Almost everything is impossible.
I'd love to be proved wrong, and I'd be happy to pay for it all.
Start off with re-training for those on 9-12 points, then those on six points, then three points etc.
Also try to prioritise those that haven't had any training for ten or more years.
After about five years, we might reach the European average driving standard. A very worthwhile goal, in my view.
Re-training those with points would mostly just re-train the better drivers. An RAC (or RAC Foundation, I can't remember) study showed that it was mainly the accident-free driver with newer well-maintained cars who were getting caught exceeding the stupid limits we have in the UK.
So re-training the better driver would just about sum up the d1ckhead government / camera partnership thinking currently in vogue.
So re-training the better driver would just about sum up the d1ckhead government / camera partnership thinking currently in vogue.
TangoAlpha said:
There has been a:
1. 193% increase in people who exceed a 50mph speed limit.
2. 350%
Good job Kent & Medway Scameraship
Well, the M2 (one of only two real 70mph roads in the county) has been dug up for the past four or five years ..... and it's now finished.
autismuk said:
Well, the M2 (one of only two real 70mph roads in the county) has been dug up for the past four or five years ..... and it's now finished.
I thought the A299 along the North Kent coast was a 70 mph limit.
I'ts only been in about 4-5 years. Used to be a nightmare getting the ferry from Ramsgate before.
Well the Kent and Medway Scamera Partnership only use marked camera vans. The only problem is they are always parked so there is no way you can see the markings until you have been done. Either because they are hidden on the wrong side of a bridge, or because the markings are on the side of the van and it is parked with its rear to the driver.
Leaving aside the fact that I have severe doubts about the statistics they use to justify their cameras.
Leaving aside the fact that I have severe doubts about the statistics they use to justify their cameras.
That's not quite true. I've seen the van parked on a bridge overlooking the junction by Maidstone, clocking vehicles approaching Maidstone from the north. Quite clearly visible when you approach, so if you happen to be making much more progress than happens to be legal, you might just be able to hit the anchors before being clocked.
james_j said:
I've just completed the survey.
I suspect the survey is only to gauge opinion against cameras and alter their bullsh1it in an attempt to address the opposition.
Good point, you made me think there.
They will never publish the results of their survey as 70 - 80% of respondants will be against them, so lets not give them the info they want. Independant surveys only from now on!
Like you say , they'll merely use the results to design their next advertising campaign.
Whatever question is met with least resistance is what they will work with and promote.
dcb said:
Start off with re-training for those on 9-12 points, then those on six points, then three points etc.
That's okay in theory, but in practice it doesn't stack up.
Like James has said, someone on nine points is not necessarily a worse driver than someone with none.
It sounds like you're assuming that the people who get punished with penalty points were driving dangerously?
You've only got to be in the wrong place at the wrong time these days to get caught by a sneaky scam for five mph above the limit and three points here they come.
deeps said:
That's okay in theory, but in practice it doesn't stack up.
Like James has said, someone on nine points is not necessarily a worse driver than someone with none.
Perhpas I have failed to explain clearly.
I was suggesting that the ordering I gave might well be the way that the UK Gov chooses to do it.
UK Gov sees stacking points up as synonymous with bad driving - I know they are wrong, you know they are wrong, but that's how they look at the problemm.
What ordering would you choose ? Someone's got to be first tested.
dcb said:
That's okay in theory, but in practice it doesn't stack up.
Like James has said, someone on nine points is not necessarily a worse driver than someone with none.
Perhpas I have failed to explain clearly.
I was suggesting that the ordering I gave might well be the way that the UK Gov chooses to do it.
UK Gov sees stacking points up as synonymous with bad driving - I know they are wrong, you know they are wrong, but that's how they look at the problemm.
What ordering would you choose ? Someone's got to be first tested.
I'm very much in favour of re-testing, or at least a periodic re-assessment of drivers, so should we start with those who have a record of recent shunts?
Best wishes all,
Dave.
To be honest, I don't think re-testing or re-training would make a great deal of difference to the accident rate. It sounds good in theory, but in practice it would just be another chore to many people. Do it then forget it!
I deffinately think we need a tougher driving test to start with though.
IMO, most accidents happen because people aren't concentrating on what they're doing. They may be competent drivers but fall foul of concentration lapses, or maybe some just don't cocentrate at all!
Can you teach someone to concentrate at all times? You can lead a horse to water...
As an example, I think HGV drivers are well trained professional drivers, but I've heard of many accidents involving HGV's, usually through nodding off at the wheel, possibly contributed to by the monotonous slow speeds they're limited to.
Also, highly trained and tested police drivers have accidents, albeit in less ordinary circumstances.
If I may think out loud for a moment... possibly if we could run a little test for one month, whereby any driver not involved in an accident could claim a reward of £1000 from the government, the accident rate for that month would plummet dramatically!
I know it's fiction and could never happen, but it would prove a point that actually making the effort to concentrate on the road when you're driving is what is needed!
People who don't usually care would find themselves taking their driving alot more seriously, taking an extra look at junctions, pulling back and not tail-gating, looking ahead further and reading the road etc. because they don't want to risk losing the 1K reward!
I deffinately think we need a tougher driving test to start with though.
IMO, most accidents happen because people aren't concentrating on what they're doing. They may be competent drivers but fall foul of concentration lapses, or maybe some just don't cocentrate at all!
Can you teach someone to concentrate at all times? You can lead a horse to water...
As an example, I think HGV drivers are well trained professional drivers, but I've heard of many accidents involving HGV's, usually through nodding off at the wheel, possibly contributed to by the monotonous slow speeds they're limited to.
Also, highly trained and tested police drivers have accidents, albeit in less ordinary circumstances.
If I may think out loud for a moment... possibly if we could run a little test for one month, whereby any driver not involved in an accident could claim a reward of £1000 from the government, the accident rate for that month would plummet dramatically!
I know it's fiction and could never happen, but it would prove a point that actually making the effort to concentrate on the road when you're driving is what is needed!
People who don't usually care would find themselves taking their driving alot more seriously, taking an extra look at junctions, pulling back and not tail-gating, looking ahead further and reading the road etc. because they don't want to risk losing the 1K reward!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff