Safer roads ?

[anonymous-user]

Good news:

The Great British Speed Camera CASH IN: 6,300 drivers are snared every day as number of fines hits record high... while police conduct fewest roadside breath tests for nearly two decades

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/cars/article-888...

Jail those 35 in a 30 maniacs!

[irc]

Are speeding tickets not largely a stupidity tax though? Given almost all fixed camera locations are on satnav or Waze etc databases. Driving locally you should know where your cameras are. They are mostly painted in bright colours and have early warning signs. Even if you are caught you often get a speed awareness course.

May vary locally but police cuts mean roadside speed checks are few and far between. The last one I saw was a couple of months ago and was very prominent and easy to spot.

I've been speeding for 40 years without a ticket. (touches wood).

[Centurion07]

Missing the point by a LOOOOOONG way there^ bud.

[Mr Whippy]

irc said:

Are speeding tickets not largely a stupidity tax though? Given almost all fixed camera locations are on satnav or Waze etc databases. Driving locally you should know where your cameras are. They are mostly painted in bright colours and have early warning signs. Even if you are caught you often get a speed awareness course.

May vary locally but police cuts mean roadside speed checks are few and far between. The last one I saw was a couple of months ago and was very prominent and easy to spot.

I've been speeding for 40 years without a ticket. (touches wood).

You obviously don’t live in N.yorks where they’re all mobile and no static.

And the mobile are often ‘near’ accident black spots, but not where they’ll prevent accidents through being visible and reducing speeds at specific bad sections of road... usually bits of road that could be vastly improved with the proceeds of the fines, but aren’t.


Not been caught myself.

I’d rather a few trafpol cruise around. I had a car and an LGV drift into my lane and swerve back out today.
Lots of people distracted at the wheel on ‘safe’ boring roads

[coolg]

Something isn’t working here.

For 6300 people to be caught breaking the law every day suggest the law in this instance isn’t fit for purpose / doesn’t work

[Ian Geary]

coolg said:

Something isn’t working here.

For 6300 people to be caught breaking the law every day suggest the law in this instance isn’t fit for purpose / doesn’t work

Or, that some driver's just choose not to obey the country's rules, and are facing the consequences?

Personally I've not got a problem with camera enforcement.

Were there ever any halycon days of benign trafpol cruising round, ever ready to have a friendly word with speeders and wave them on their way with "a talking to"?

Not convinced.

However, I would prefer more trafpol to focus on crappy driving. But it's not an "either /or"...cameras can still police speed adequately, and frankly if anyone thinks there's public money spare for this, they're deluded.

(Ps I speed at some point on pretty much most journeys, and have had only 3 camera points in 20+ years,so this isn't coming from a car hater)

[rdjohn]

irc said:

Are speeding tickets not largely a stupidity tax though? Given almost all fixed camera locations are on satnav or Waze etc databases. Driving locally you should know where your cameras are. They are mostly painted in bright colours and have early warning signs. Even if you are caught you often get a speed awareness course.

May vary locally but police cuts mean roadside speed checks are few and far between. The last one I saw was a couple of months ago and was very prominent and easy to spot.

I've been speeding for 40 years without a ticket. (touches wood).

It is really a fine for driving without due care and attention.

[take-good-care-of-the-forest-dewey]

Mr Whippy said:

You obviously don’t live in N.yorks where they’re all mobile and no static.

And the mobile are often ‘near’ accident black spots, but not where they’ll prevent accidents through being visible and reducing speeds at specific bad sections of road... usually bits of road that could be vastly improved with the proceeds of the fines, but aren’t.


Not been caught myself.

I’d rather a few trafpol cruise around. I had a car and an LGV drift into my lane and swerve back out today.
Lots of people distracted at the wheel on ‘safe’ boring roads

Yup. I was done last year coming out of Thirsk. 45 in a 40...about 300m from the NSL sign. Police bike...officer was dressed in a black t-shirt and the bike was parked in a field entrance so partially visible. No high viz.

No accidents at that stretch - I checked because I thought it was an odd place to cite a camera for anything other than pure revenue generation. But a couple of fatal accidents about a mile down the road.

Pretty much everyone I know who drives has been on a SAC now.

NY Police really aren't doing themselves any favours with this approach. So many locals now loathe them as they're only visible when it comes to manning a traf camera. Made worse by the shambolic policing in general.

[Murph7355]

Ian Geary said:

...

Were there ever any halycon days of benign trafpol cruising round, ever ready to have a friendly word with speeders and wave them on their way with "a talking to"?

Not convinced.

...

Speed limits were introduced between 1934 and 1965. So one might argue in that zone

I have no issue with speed limit enforcement per se, but do wish the stringent enforcement stuck to areas that most warrant it - built up areas, outside schools/hospitals, genuine accident blackspots etc.

In modern cars, for example, I'm not sure a 70mph limit is relevant today on motorways, and I suspect people constantly watching their speed can have detrimental impacts elsewhere.

But I only see limits going one way more in the name of the environment than causalities (which seem to have flatlined).

[coolg]

Ian Geary said:

coolg said:

Something isn’t working here.

For 6300 people to be caught breaking the law every day suggest the law in this instance isn’t fit for purpose / doesn’t work

Or, that some driver's just choose not to obey the country's rules, and are facing the consequences?

Personally I've not got a problem with camera enforcement.

Were there ever any halycon days of benign trafpol cruising round, ever ready to have a friendly word with speeders and wave them on their way with "a talking to"?

Not convinced.

However, I would prefer more trafpol to focus on crappy driving. But it's not an "either /or"...cameras can still police speed adequately, and frankly if anyone thinks there's public money spare for this, they're deluded.

(Ps I speed at some point on pretty much most journeys, and have had only 3 camera points in 20+ years,so this isn't coming from a car hater)

6300 people a day choose to ignore the rules, and they are the ones that get caught.

Something is wrong with the rules / law, or the threshold is too low.

Cameras outside every school in the UK, is ok, difficult to see static cameras on fast flowing roads are not

[rxe]

Mr Whippy said:

You obviously don’t live in N.yorks where they’re all mobile and no static.

And the mobile are often ‘near’ accident black spots, but not where they’ll prevent accidents through being visible and reducing speeds at specific bad sections of road... usually bits of road that could be vastly improved with the proceeds of the fines, but aren’t.


Not been caught myself.

I’d rather a few trafpol cruise around. I had a car and an LGV drift into my lane and swerve back out today.
Lots of people distracted at the wheel on ‘safe’ boring roads

Do these not get reported on Waze?

I have to say, I drive with scant regard to speed limits. I have Waze running constantly. I’ve given up this particular commute, but last year I did 30K miles, kept it to about 29 over on the motorway, no points.

I have a few simple rules:

- Try not to be the fastest on the road.
- Drive well - don’t tailgate, don’t get into arguments, drive in the correct lane on the motorway.
- Look out of the big pane of glass for marked cars. Scorching past a liveried car is basically saying “I’m not paying attention”. Ditto speeding past a marked static camera.
- Have Waze on all the time.

Edited by rxe on Wednesday 28th October 10:20

[Fatherdougal]

Murph7355 said:

Speed limits were introduced between 1934 and 1965. So one might argue in that zone

I have no issue with speed limit enforcement per se, but do wish the stringent enforcement stuck to areas that most warrant it - built up areas, outside schools/hospitals, genuine accident blackspots etc.

In modern cars, for example, I'm not sure a 70mph limit is relevant today on motorways, and I suspect people constantly watching their speed can have detrimental impacts elsewhere.

But I only see limits going one way more in the name of the environment than causalities (which seem to have flatlined).

I agree with this - I don't understand why the root causes of this aren't being looked at rather than 'shock' at the numbers. Speed limits are too low generally - given the advances in car technology and therefore people are presumably driving at what they believe safe speeds to be. If speed limits were 90 on motorways, 70 on good A roads and 60 on B roads, with 20 near schools and residential areas, I think there would be a massive increase in adherence to the law. Hell, I'd even be happy for there to be cameras in the 20 areas.

Something is wrong with the law if it is being broken by so many so frequently - people are generally sensible (famous last words..)

[Murph7355]

Fatherdougal said:

....

Something is wrong with the law if it is being broken by so many so frequently - people are generally sensible (famous last words..)

I guess the argument goes that people demonstrably aren't/weren't which is why limits were introduced in the first place

Reassessment would be a good thing. Sadly it will only result in changes one way

[Derek Smith]

Fatherdougal said:

Something is wrong with the law if it is being broken by so many so frequently - people are generally sensible (famous last words..)

Such a statistic is open to other, rather obvious, interpretations.

Harking back to the days when one could speed with little chance of being caught is a pointless waste of nostalgia. It was fun. It was dangerous, particularly for others. It is gone.

I'm anti pointless speed limits. However, I driver infrequently on motorways, especially this year, and have been more or less limited to those that have been 'upgraded' with average speed cameras. I have found that they are much more comfortable to drive on. The speed differentials are lower, much lower, and this makes judging gaps so much easier. Equally, I reckon, hold ups excluded, journey times are more or less the same, this from someone who regularly tuned the cruise control to 85.

I've twice been pulled for speeding since becoming an adult, around 35. One time I was out of order, but the police officer had not clocked my registration number. The second time, there was a fault with signage and the case was pulled. I used to speed for the majority of time, but as my driving skills have improved, my speeds has dropped.

Speed cameras have proved effective in reducing speeds - what should be their prime function. It means that more drivers stick to around the limits.

I've been in cars that have exceeded speed limits by a considerable amount. 145 on a motorway is the fastest I've been on a road, but in excess of 70 in a 30 limit has not been that unusual. It's very much like tuning one's engine; you always want more, right up until it goes bang.

I've attended accidents where the driver of the speeding car has explained that it wasn't his - always his - fault as the other driver misjudged his speed. One out of two aint bad.

Unjustifiably low limits are, I think, unjustifiable as drivers tend to go faster so bringing the whole system into disrepute. However, that's no excuse for getting caught.

[Fatherdougal]

Derek Smith said:

Such a statistic is open to other, rather obvious, interpretations.

Harking back to the days when one could speed with little chance of being caught is a pointless waste of nostalgia. It was fun. It was dangerous, particularly for others. It is gone.

I'm anti pointless speed limits. However, I driver infrequently on motorways, especially this year, and have been more or less limited to those that have been 'upgraded' with average speed cameras. I have found that they are much more comfortable to drive on. The speed differentials are lower, much lower, and this makes judging gaps so much easier. Equally, I reckon, hold ups excluded, journey times are more or less the same, this from someone who regularly tuned the cruise control to 85.

I've twice been pulled for speeding since becoming an adult, around 35. One time I was out of order, but the police officer had not clocked my registration number. The second time, there was a fault with signage and the case was pulled. I used to speed for the majority of time, but as my driving skills have improved, my speeds has dropped.

Speed cameras have proved effective in reducing speeds - what should be their prime function. It means that more drivers stick to around the limits.

I've been in cars that have exceeded speed limits by a considerable amount. 145 on a motorway is the fastest I've been on a road, but in excess of 70 in a 30 limit has not been that unusual. It's very much like tuning one's engine; you always want more, right up until it goes bang.

I've attended accidents where the driver of the speeding car has explained that it wasn't his - always his - fault as the other driver misjudged his speed. One out of two aint bad.

Unjustifiably low limits are, I think, unjustifiable as drivers tend to go faster so bringing the whole system into disrepute. However, that's no excuse for getting caught.

A couple of things - first is this doesn't really address my key point, which is that in a significant number of speed limits don't accurately reflect the safe driving limit on that road. I think people use their discretion - as they would when raining when they may drive well below the speed limit.

The second is I completely disagree on the average speed cameras on motorways making things more comfortable. I think it makes it too easy to set cruise control, become bored and pay less attention. Again, though, my point about what the speed limit should be stands - if you and the majority find this relaxing then ok - let's put average speed cameras on, but with the limit at 90. Why would that make a difference?

I'm not some loony who always wants to drive 20mph over the speed limit - your analogy of tuning an engine doesn't work for me. I'll drive at the speed limit if it's sensible and not been set artificially low due to the earnest hand-wringing "speed kills" brigade or "driving no more than 50mph will save the polar bears" brigade.

I've been driving for 30 years, been caught speeding once, for doing 65 on the A361, which is part of the "speed kills" pressure applied to Oxfordshire Council. A lovely, broad road, with visibility for half a mile, and nothing in front of me. I got caught, fair enough and took the fine and points, but nothing is explicable as to why the speed limit on that road is 50mph.

[Red 4]

Point of order. The article is rabitting on about automated speed detection. Speed cameras in other words.

If you can't see the big, brightly coloured box at the side of the road and you travel past it, in excess of the limit, then you really aren't paying attention and you may not be as good a driver as you think you are.

In other news, my Missus has just been nabbed for speeding. Again. By another static camera. In mitigation, this one is sited at traffic lights so it looks like an automated traffic signal camera. It isn't. It's a speed camera. I asked her if she saw it and she refused to answer. That's because if she said she didn't see it she'd be admitting to not paying attention.
I've tried to train her and even spot whether or not the box has a camera inside but it's futile.
You've only got yourself to blame.

[hiccy18]

I find the easiest roads to drive on by far are the French autoroutes where the combination of a sensible limit, low traffic volumes and a zero tolerance approach to speeding mean that everyone basically drives at the limit. I would favour a zero tolerance approach to speeding in this country introduced in conjunction with a sensible review of speed limits that allowed reasonable progress to be made on roads that allowed it. Unfortunately in this country our focus on enforcement rather than engagement and consensus means we have blanket 50mph limits put onto stretches of NSL road enforced by average speed cameras causing everyone to bunch up whilst focussing on the speedo rather than the road, which cannot aid safety.

The UK approach to road safety involves dumbing down to the lowest functional level rather than educating and improving standards and the lack of policing on the roads coupled with a reliance on technology encourages flouting laws where the technology is not present. Until such a time that technology can detect tailgaiting, phone usage, aggressive driving, drunk & drug driving and centre laning then investment should be in cops in cars rather than cameras on posts. Emphasis should be on improving safety by better behaviour, however I feel this is rather wishful thinking as there is a general lack of interest in the skill involved in controlling a motorised vehicle. Perhaps in the future the "standard" licence can allow people to function as backup to automated vehicles and an "advanced" licence will be required to actually control the vehicle yourself permitting sensible behaviour regardless of speed.

[Centurion07]

I love driving in europe.

As you say, French autoroutes are fantastic and the second you get back into England it's like a dark cloud descends and you're surrounded by idiots on the roads again.

[Derek Smith]

Fatherdougal said:

A couple of things - first is this doesn't really address my key point, which is that in a significant number of speed limits don't accurately reflect the safe driving limit on that road. I think people use their discretion - as they would when raining when they may drive well below the speed limit.

The second is I completely disagree on the average speed cameras on motorways making things more comfortable. I think it makes it too easy to set cruise control, become bored and pay less attention. Again, though, my point about what the speed limit should be stands - if you and the majority find this relaxing then ok - let's put average speed cameras on, but with the limit at 90. Why would that make a difference?

I'm not some loony who always wants to drive 20mph over the speed limit - your analogy of tuning an engine doesn't work for me. I'll drive at the speed limit if it's sensible and not been set artificially low due to the earnest hand-wringing "speed kills" brigade or "driving no more than 50mph will save the polar bears" brigade.

I've been driving for 30 years, been caught speeding once, for doing 65 on the A361, which is part of the "speed kills" pressure applied to Oxfordshire Council. A lovely, broad road, with visibility for half a mile, and nothing in front of me. I got caught, fair enough and took the fine and points, but nothing is explicable as to why the speed limit on that road is 50mph.

I agreed that some limits are unjustified and that they can have a negative effect in encouraging offending due to the transfer of contempt.

I answered your specific point with regards the number of offenders.

There was a lovely little bit of road where I used to live where a 50 limit was reduced to 30 despite there being no houses either side. The locals campaigned because of teenagers having to cross the road as there was an annex to a school for 6th formers and evening classes. The limit reduced speed, although not to 30, and then a traffic light controlled pedestrian crossing was installed. If you didn’t know the road, you’d view it as a classic 50mph. Before the imposition, it was quite common to be overtaken along a certain short straight, at the end of which was a bend and then a crossing point.

In other words, there are often – I’d agree by no means always – reasons for speed limits being introduced, one of the most popular being that it reduces the likelihood of speeding in an adjacent speed limited section.

I would like to see traffic management instead of speed limits being employed. There was a stretch of 60 mph single-carriageway road near me that had cliffs on one side and seaside on the other. It was twisty, and had a terrible record for serious accidents. There were frequent marked police patrols and speed traps, all of which did bugger-all. The county council road dept put in traffic islands at strategic points and speeding dropped, as did the accident rate. It was remarkable. Also the measures did exactly what the engineers said they would.

The accidents were all down to drivers overtaking where it was not safe to do so. Read the reports and it was clear enough. Probably well over 95% of drivers drove sensibly. Most of the dangerous ones were locals, so it wasn’t as if they were surprised by corners.

[Vipers]

coolg said:

Something isn’t working here.

For 6300 people to be caught breaking the law every day suggest the law in this instance isn’t fit for purpose / doesn’t work

Surely 6300 is a tiny percentage of those who manage not be caught, some are just thick, in Aberdeed daily some drive through a bus gate and wonder why they get fined.