Killed by Speed Camera...
Discussion
We know that speed cameras are a nightmare and a waste of time mainly because they contribute with no real drop in the death tolls however just out of interest does anyone know how many folks have been killed by directly crashing into a speed camera or say by hitting the brakes coz they saw one and crashed and died?
RE: the bike incident -
The police came out with the usual "If they hadnt of been speeding it wouldnt have happened"
Really.
We dont know that they were speeding, it could have been a usual panic reaction to seeing one. They could have been riding perfectly safely up until that point.
Also
If the speed camera hadnt of been there THEN THE ACCIDENT WOULD NEVER HAD HAPPENED!!!
The police came out with the usual "If they hadnt of been speeding it wouldnt have happened"
Really.
We dont know that they were speeding, it could have been a usual panic reaction to seeing one. They could have been riding perfectly safely up until that point.
Also
If the speed camera hadnt of been there THEN THE ACCIDENT WOULD NEVER HAD HAPPENED!!!
gh0st said:
RE: the bike incident -
The police came out with the usual "If they hadnt of been speeding it wouldnt have happened"
Really.
We dont know that they were speeding, it could have been a usual panic reaction to seeing one. They could have been riding perfectly safely up until that point.
Also
If the speed camera hadnt of been there THEN THE ACCIDENT WOULD NEVER HAD HAPPENED!!!
IIRC it was a highly visible camera in a 30 or 40 mph zone. If the bikers were not speeding it is very unlikely there would have been a fatality.
If the bikers had been travelling at or under the limit and knew that THEN THE ACCIDENT WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED.
I do agree the camera was a contributory factor, but it was not the cause of the accident.
Edited because it is Monday morning
>> Edited by kevinday on Monday 30th June 08:01
I disagree.
How many times have you seen people touch their brakes EVEN THOUGH they are going at the correct speed limits? Me, I have seen it enough times!
People are so scared of losing their licences to these godawful things that they now react just in case, regardless of what accident they may cause.
I got done for 33 in a 30!! My speedo is not as accurate as that! So to weigh out the options
Speed camera comes up, I touch the brakes for fear of being caught at some rediculously small amount possible over the limit, twat tailgating goes into the back of me.
Result - Accident caused with possibly serious injuries but I am not at fault since the driver went into the back of me
Conclusion - It is easier and less trouble for me to cause an accident in theory than to get caught on a camera since getting caught on the camera would mean loss of job, accident does not.
How many times have you seen people touch their brakes EVEN THOUGH they are going at the correct speed limits? Me, I have seen it enough times!
People are so scared of losing their licences to these godawful things that they now react just in case, regardless of what accident they may cause.
I got done for 33 in a 30!! My speedo is not as accurate as that! So to weigh out the options
Speed camera comes up, I touch the brakes for fear of being caught at some rediculously small amount possible over the limit, twat tailgating goes into the back of me.
Result - Accident caused with possibly serious injuries but I am not at fault since the driver went into the back of me
Conclusion - It is easier and less trouble for me to cause an accident in theory than to get caught on a camera since getting caught on the camera would mean loss of job, accident does not.
rrussell29 said:
..directly crashing into a speed camera ...
Camera posts are exempt from the regulations that cover all other road furniture to make them safe to crash in to. Camera posts do not deform in an impact like lamp posts, etc. This is an anti-vandalism feature.
Sounds bloody dangerous to me though.
rrussell29 said:
We know that speed cameras are a nightmare and a waste of time mainly because they contribute with no real drop in the death tolls however just out of interest does anyone know how many folks have been killed by directly crashing into a speed camera or say by hitting the brakes coz they saw one and crashed and died?
Not sure of the outcome, but on the A1 heading into Edinburgh three months or so ago at a camera under a bridge, there were a series of skid marks and the central reservation - stretched wire type barrier, not armco - had a big hole in it 20 yards after the camera.
I'm assuming a lot, but it did look like a camera-brake-lose control-cross reservation.
gh0st said:
How many times have you seen people touch their brakes EVEN THOUGH they are going at the correct speed limits? Me, I have seen it enough times!
Agreed, however touching the brakes is a bit different from slowing from high speed. If the person behind who was travelling within the speed limit at a safe distance they would have enough time/room to avoid a collision. If they do hit you it would indeed be their fault for any or all of:
a) Lack of attention
b) Speeding
c) Following too closely
d) Driving a defective vehicle
It would still not be the fault of the speed camera.
I know this is a little tangential (surprise!).
A significant proportion of the population dont like gatsos etc.
As a function of our democracy this fact should be enough to get the damn thing removed.
It says a lot about the state of UKgov when the wishes of the people can be ignored. Remember dangerous dogs?
Legislation went through in nanoseconds 'cos some kids were savaged because the gov was in trouble majority wise.
I am troubled by the braking issue also. Its all very well being angelic and saying 'if you dont speed it wont happen'. Is this big bright world we are craping ourselves everytime we see a big metal box. And it's not the ones with wheels; you know, the ones we should be worried about. As has been pointed out already on other threads (see carZee on 'radar detectors') some of these traps are rediculously tight to the limit (who said that 30 in town is a 'safe speed'.Complete bollox, the only safe speed is driving to condition which could be 60 or 5 mph) resulting in people losing their licence thus job thus home for 34 mph FFS. Which can happen if you dont spend your driving time with your head down staring at your speedo. How bloody safe is that, eh.
As you may have spotted I am outraged by the current trend to policing by machine. These thing cant tell if you just came round a blind corner sideways. Get the BiB out in force, if we want to be judged properly let someone weigh up our actions with a practiced, rather that mechanical, eye.
Until then the heavy braking will continue.
A significant proportion of the population dont like gatsos etc.
As a function of our democracy this fact should be enough to get the damn thing removed.
It says a lot about the state of UKgov when the wishes of the people can be ignored. Remember dangerous dogs?
Legislation went through in nanoseconds 'cos some kids were savaged because the gov was in trouble majority wise.
I am troubled by the braking issue also. Its all very well being angelic and saying 'if you dont speed it wont happen'. Is this big bright world we are craping ourselves everytime we see a big metal box. And it's not the ones with wheels; you know, the ones we should be worried about. As has been pointed out already on other threads (see carZee on 'radar detectors') some of these traps are rediculously tight to the limit (who said that 30 in town is a 'safe speed'.Complete bollox, the only safe speed is driving to condition which could be 60 or 5 mph) resulting in people losing their licence thus job thus home for 34 mph FFS. Which can happen if you dont spend your driving time with your head down staring at your speedo. How bloody safe is that, eh.
As you may have spotted I am outraged by the current trend to policing by machine. These thing cant tell if you just came round a blind corner sideways. Get the BiB out in force, if we want to be judged properly let someone weigh up our actions with a practiced, rather that mechanical, eye.
Until then the heavy braking will continue.
kevinday said:
[Agreed, however touching the brakes is a bit different from slowing from high speed. If the person behind who was travelling within the speed limit at a safe distance they would have enough time/room to avoid a collision. If they do hit you it would indeed be their fault for any or all of:
a) Lack of attention
b) Speeding
c) Following too closely
d) Driving a defective vehicle
It would still not be the fault of the speed camera.
I have read a study on braking patterns, I was bored. Its interesting in a line of cars moving at similar speeds if one brakes, the cars behind often brake harder, the level of braking can get quite extreme 3-4 cars behind the one which braked first. Its not just careless driving but drivers over compensating as they are not sure how hard the car in front is braking. So its more than possible that if a car brakes when the driver see the speed camera, I do it some times, that in a queue of cars the car 4-5 cars back may be handing out anchors and changing underwear.
It's called a 'shockwave' and I've seen an amazing video of one happening.
For some reason some transport bofs were showing their Norwegian couterparts some Mway doohickey and someone on the Mway saw the camera and got defensive and slowed a bit. A shockwave developed and the Mway went from normal flow to a complete standstill in seconds.
And then some prat in a cav fishtailed.
He got away with it but caused the most almighty pileup. There must have been at least 30 cars totaled and loads more bent.
And all because someone touched the brake.
Completely amazing.
For some reason some transport bofs were showing their Norwegian couterparts some Mway doohickey and someone on the Mway saw the camera and got defensive and slowed a bit. A shockwave developed and the Mway went from normal flow to a complete standstill in seconds.
And then some prat in a cav fishtailed.
He got away with it but caused the most almighty pileup. There must have been at least 30 cars totaled and loads more bent.
And all because someone touched the brake.
Completely amazing.
Mmmm. Shockwaves.
I actually like BMWs idea. It seems silly that for everything between a light brush of the brakes to a full on emergancy ABS chattering stop, the only warning the car behind has is my brake lights.
BMW have a system where an increasing number of LED light up depending on the braking force being applied......
Seems a sensible idea. I'd like to hear if our residents boys in blue have an opinion on it though. It's probably massivly stupid/dangerous for some reason I've not considered.
I actually like BMWs idea. It seems silly that for everything between a light brush of the brakes to a full on emergancy ABS chattering stop, the only warning the car behind has is my brake lights.
BMW have a system where an increasing number of LED light up depending on the braking force being applied......
Seems a sensible idea. I'd like to hear if our residents boys in blue have an opinion on it though. It's probably massivly stupid/dangerous for some reason I've not considered.
planetdave said:I think I remember that video. It was a red cavalier right? he fishtailed across two lanes, managed to miss doing any major damage to his own car but brought carnage to the motorway. The car/driver was never found as they didn't get his registration on the film.
It's called a 'shockwave' and I've seen an amazing video of one happening.
For some reason some transport bofs were showing their Norwegian couterparts some Mway doohickey and someone on the Mway saw the camera and got defensive and slowed a bit. A shockwave developed and the Mway went from normal flow to a complete standstill in seconds.
And then some prat in a cav fishtailed.
He got away with it but caused the most almighty pileup. There must have been at least 30 cars totaled and loads more bent.
And all because someone touched the brake.
Completely amazing.
Interesting comments... I'm sure I saw that cavalier doing the Inspector Clueso live on TV…
The reason I was wondering what the stats might be is that it’s a similar story with the bus lanes… As it has been proved
that in some cases bus lanes can cause more deaths because of the higher speed/mass of the vehicles on the inside lane. It’s a simple calculation pedestrian death rates before and after bus lane.
In Glasgow the council wanted to put the bus lanes everywhere however they were stopped because it was proved that civilian deaths increase when the bus lanes go in! Amazing isn’t it?
Lets face it cars at a standstill on inner two lanes you try to cross the road bus fly’s up inner lane smack! Moreover, they aren’t a nice cushioned design either! Fatalities are extremely high as most folks end up underneath them because they take ages to stop.
Speed cameras / Public Transport / Bus Lanes / Hmmm
The reason I was wondering what the stats might be is that it’s a similar story with the bus lanes… As it has been proved
that in some cases bus lanes can cause more deaths because of the higher speed/mass of the vehicles on the inside lane. It’s a simple calculation pedestrian death rates before and after bus lane. In Glasgow the council wanted to put the bus lanes everywhere however they were stopped because it was proved that civilian deaths increase when the bus lanes go in! Amazing isn’t it?
Lets face it cars at a standstill on inner two lanes you try to cross the road bus fly’s up inner lane smack! Moreover, they aren’t a nice cushioned design either! Fatalities are extremely high as most folks end up underneath them because they take ages to stop.
Speed cameras / Public Transport / Bus Lanes / Hmmm
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff