Speed cameras actually work...............
Discussion
OK,
I have thought long and hard about posting this, as I know it is going to be very contentious
, but I believe Speed cameras actually work, that is they do the job that they are supposed to do........
This is not a troll post, so let me explain....
Since the introduction of the cameras in built up areas I am finding, because I don't want to become another partnership statistic I am very careful to drive at 30mph, or 40mph, whereas ten years ago, my speed might have been 25% higher, also I am very much aware of the surroundings because I have more time to look around....
Now, I am not talking about cameras that are sneakily hidden behind signs and trees, but ones where there are plenty of advance warning signs, are clearly marked and the actual speed limit on lamposts is clearly displayed, and are situated in danger areas like outside hospitals, schools etc....
Also they should definitely have 10% leeway, so at 50mph you only get prosecuted over 55 etc,....
Even the infamous hooded campaigner necklacer "Captain Gatso" says he has no problem with sensibly placed and signposted cameras...(See this weeks Motorcycle News)...
The first, and only time I was caught speeding was way back in May 1973 in Brightmet Bolton, by a radar trap hidden behind a low wall, 44mph in a 30
......, So at least with carefully signposted in advance cameras you only have yourself to blame.....
And please don't trot out the old excuse you are too busy looking at the speedo to see the road ahead, you know when you are doing 30 or 40 mph surely, or the one that they are simply revenue generators......
So to sum up, I am not saying cameras are good things, in fact I would rather they did not exist like most on here, but I am saying they actually work and slow people down, which is what they set out to do in the first place........
Tin hat firmly in place......
I have thought long and hard about posting this, as I know it is going to be very contentious
, but I believe Speed cameras actually work, that is they do the job that they are supposed to do........ This is not a troll post, so let me explain....
Since the introduction of the cameras in built up areas I am finding, because I don't want to become another partnership statistic I am very careful to drive at 30mph, or 40mph, whereas ten years ago, my speed might have been 25% higher, also I am very much aware of the surroundings because I have more time to look around....
Now, I am not talking about cameras that are sneakily hidden behind signs and trees, but ones where there are plenty of advance warning signs, are clearly marked and the actual speed limit on lamposts is clearly displayed, and are situated in danger areas like outside hospitals, schools etc....
Also they should definitely have 10% leeway, so at 50mph you only get prosecuted over 55 etc,....
Even the infamous hooded campaigner necklacer "Captain Gatso" says he has no problem with sensibly placed and signposted cameras...(See this weeks Motorcycle News)...
The first, and only time I was caught speeding was way back in May 1973 in Brightmet Bolton, by a radar trap hidden behind a low wall, 44mph in a 30
......, So at least with carefully signposted in advance cameras you only have yourself to blame..... And please don't trot out the old excuse you are too busy looking at the speedo to see the road ahead, you know when you are doing 30 or 40 mph surely, or the one that they are simply revenue generators......
So to sum up, I am not saying cameras are good things, in fact I would rather they did not exist like most on here, but I am saying they actually work and slow people down, which is what they set out to do in the first place........
Tin hat firmly in place......
kinda with you. Agree that we should be doing no more than 30 in built up areas. Arguably even lower in some areas, like where nippers could launch themselves in front of you.
Trouble is, they catch loads and loads of people, so they clearly don't make everyone slow down. There are other ways to slow traffic that don't cost us all money/points all the time, surely?
Trouble is, they catch loads and loads of people, so they clearly don't make everyone slow down. There are other ways to slow traffic that don't cost us all money/points all the time, surely?
Of course they work, I see people hitting the anchors quite regularly.
As I understand it, scams were only ever intended for accidnet blackspots, unfortunately the revenue is now more important than safety. If they're used intelligently and reduce casualties then I don't see why they shouldn't stay and become part of an overall policy to reduce accidents.
As I understand it, scams were only ever intended for accidnet blackspots, unfortunately the revenue is now more important than safety. If they're used intelligently and reduce casualties then I don't see why they shouldn't stay and become part of an overall policy to reduce accidents.
Like Deltafox said, every driver the Gatso catches is another failure in terms of that camera did not do its supposed job.
Also, most drivers will slow at the exact camera spot for 30 metres or so, then resume speed immediately after.
I've yet to see one Gatso that does not affect a line of passing traffic in this negative manner. Drivers become tense and cover the brake pedal even if they're already below the limit. Coupled with over attention to the speedo and mirror glancing to double check it didn't flash, their whole attention to the road ahead at this point has been lessened, their mind being otherwise occupied with the large yellow box. Not good.
Also, most drivers will slow at the exact camera spot for 30 metres or so, then resume speed immediately after.
I've yet to see one Gatso that does not affect a line of passing traffic in this negative manner. Drivers become tense and cover the brake pedal even if they're already below the limit. Coupled with over attention to the speedo and mirror glancing to double check it didn't flash, their whole attention to the road ahead at this point has been lessened, their mind being otherwise occupied with the large yellow box. Not good.
Edited by deeps on Tuesday 22 August 14:56
Your contention that the cameras slow motorists down may well be true (although I'm not convinced that it is anything more than a localised effect).
However, the more pertinent question is why should the Government want to slow vehicles down? I would suggest that improving the standard of driving would have a much greater effect on the safety of our roads.
However, the more pertinent question is why should the Government want to slow vehicles down? I would suggest that improving the standard of driving would have a much greater effect on the safety of our roads.
Edited by jeremyc on Tuesday 22 August 15:52
Gatso's do work. In terms of do they actually work, we must first define work?
At least, they go flash, and then the tax machine kicks in.
If by work you mean that they save lives, then I will beg to differ. One whose attention is on the road and looking out for hazards (that child running along the road, that person about to push the button to change the lights, the cyclist weaving around etc..) is surely a safer driver than one who has no idea what the nearest hazard is, but is confident s/he has driven at 28-31 mpg because they were checking their speedo all the time.
At least, they go flash, and then the tax machine kicks in.
If by work you mean that they save lives, then I will beg to differ. One whose attention is on the road and looking out for hazards (that child running along the road, that person about to push the button to change the lights, the cyclist weaving around etc..) is surely a safer driver than one who has no idea what the nearest hazard is, but is confident s/he has driven at 28-31 mpg because they were checking their speedo all the time.
Given that people are going to be inattentive, would't you rather they were incentivised to be slower?
What good is taking the gatsos away (or hiding them) going to be is people are still on the phone, looking at the world go by etc etc.
Why the big fuss about the cameras? Make a big fuss about driving standards (and then have a think about how they can practically be improved).
What good is taking the gatsos away (or hiding them) going to be is people are still on the phone, looking at the world go by etc etc.
Why the big fuss about the cameras? Make a big fuss about driving standards (and then have a think about how they can practically be improved).
7db said:
Given that people are going to be inattentive, would't you rather they were incentivised to be slower?
What good is taking the gatsos away (or hiding them) going to be is people are still on the phone, looking at the world go by etc etc.
Why the big fuss about the cameras? Make a big fuss about driving standards (and then have a think about how they can practically be improved).
What good is taking the gatsos away (or hiding them) going to be is people are still on the phone, looking at the world go by etc etc.
Why the big fuss about the cameras? Make a big fuss about driving standards (and then have a think about how they can practically be improved).
Unfortunately 'cos of the concentration of "speed kills" messsages a lot of people think that if they are below the posted limit then they are a good and safe driver.
7db said:
Why the big fuss about the cameras? Make a big fuss about driving standards (and then have a think about how they can practically be improved).
Durham seem to have the answer -can't see how they manage with no cameras ( perhaps it's those blokes in nice shiny police cars out and about)
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff