Jeez. Too early.
I of course meant, "Working. Aren't They?"
Sorry!
--
Adam
|
The only thing that surprises me about this is that despite ALL the news coverage, press articles, forum threads, etc. etc. etc., so many people are being caught. I mean their existance is hardly a state secret is it. Is there anyone in the UK who DOESN'T know that speed cameras exist and, aside from odd technical problems, only tend to go off when drivers exceed the speed limit?
What's the defence to speeding? I didn't know the limit; I couldn't control my car?
IMO the vast majority who get caught are either NOT paying attention to what they're doing (just a bit dodgy when behind the wheel of a car) or they're doing it deliberately and then start whining when they get caught. In all honesty I don't have much sympathy for either group.
|
I find myself in both camps VM .
I don't have a defence. Similarly, I know it's against the law and so, anyone doing it should be punished.
However, I don't like this "not paying attention and so can't see the camera" business. It's not cameras I have a problem with, it's the vans that annoy me. On the Thelwall Viaduct last year, they were operating out of a green Punto - hardly obvious.
I'm a subscriber to the theory that it's the proliferation of cameras coupled with the lowering of limits that has caused the problem. I think it the limits were as they were 10 years ago, people wouldn't have anywhere near as much as a problem.
That being said, the law is the law. Whether people obey it or not, doesn't mean they have to agree with it.
As a side note, surely if you can see the speed trap from miles away, (not literally), you're going to obey the speed limit. I don't understand what a hidden van is going to do - even after you get the letter 14 days later.
Oh well - I hadn't posted on cameras for a while. You didn't expect me to stay quiet did you?
;-)
--
Adam
|
|
If you examine policing you'll find that the authorities use a mix of covert and overt tactics. IMO there is a need for both. If every road was littered with bright orange cameras or traffic cops would the speed brigade be any happier? I doubt it. Given that so many people knowingly break the law the only practical alternative is to use a combination of both static cameras and mobile units - that way people know they might get caught wherever they are. Anyone with a brain and the right technology can easily find out where static cameras are and avoid them only to carry on speeding immediately thereafter. Surely relying entirely on static cameras for enforcement is a bit like relying on static policemen for crime prevention - ridiculous! Yes the Police need to be seen to discourage crime but they also need to be unseen at times in order to catch those who don't play by the rules.
|
|
The truth is that many people want to drive everywhere at or above the legal limit regardless of the prevailing circumstances. If any driver isn't sure what the speed limit is because, say, they haven't seen a sign why not just slow down to a speed they know is legal until they see a sign indicating otherwise? I totally agree speed limits are not always crytsal clear but the answer's obvious isn't it? Also, surely the concept that something like a fox can jump out at any time is even more reason not to drive to the lmit. I totally agree that speed limit signage could be better and don't much like the national limit sign. I do think though that speed limits could be painted bright red on every road in the UK at 10m intervals and people would still largely ignore them - you can see plenty of evidence of this in 20mph zones and major roadworks where the speed limit signage is always large, clear and frankly unmissable yet largely ignored unless cameras are present.
|
volvoman said:
'If any driver isn't sure what the speed limit is because, say, they haven't seen a sign why not just slow down to a speed they know is legal until they see a sign indicating otherwise?'
Not exactly the same thing, but it really is a nightmare where I live (Cheshire), with many camera's in 40, 60 & 70MPH limits where drivers (who are presumeably staring at the road 20 feet in front of their car) suddenly see the white lines and panic brake to 30!!
I used to think only slightly stupid people got caught, then I got zapped twice by covert mobile cameras. A friend of mine, who is the worlds most cautious driver, recently got caught 3 times in 2 wks. It's easy to be clever in your own area, but if you drive all over the place for a living, then different local authorities way of painting road layouts, signing etc makes it too easy to get caught out.
Separately, I recently saw our local camera partnership stats for last year and was surprised that only 60% of the FPN's issued where paid. That seems amazingly low??
|
|
|
|
|
Adam, lets face it, given the current state of your Focus, this is not a problem you have to worry about is it?
|
I don't agree with speed cameras on motorways. If you really wanted to stop people speeding on the motorway why not just limit the cars to 70?
I'm sure someone can inform me as to why this is an appalling idea...
|
I don't agree with speed cameras on motorways. If you really wanted to stop people speeding on the motorway why not just limit the cars to 70?
This is being worked on by the EU (some experiments where done in Leeds). Vehicles would be limited by GPS link to whatever was the current speed limit.
Wonder what the Government will then do to raise revenue instead?
The EU is determined that all new cars will have GPS - their latest reason is so that vehicles can be located after they've crashed. However the real reason is thought to be Road Pricing.
|
|
|
|
Speed limiters are a pain, As I spend a good part of my working day being limited to 56mph, even though legally I am allowed to do 60 on a motorway, I hope we never have them on cars. The people who want to speed still can, just look at any Irish registerd truck on the motorway!!! If they actually put the camera's in worthwhile spots then it would be ok, but how many do you see outside schools etc. They are all placed in areas that will give them maximum revenue, the sooner we get rid of them and start making the police work for their money the better.
|
I think this thread has missed the point.
In the first post, Adam appeared to me to be pointing out that, if their supposed aim is to slow people down, speed cameras are not working.
The rest of the thread has then gone on to whether they're a good or bad thing, whether people should speed, etc. etc.
The point still stands that, according to the statistics Adam has quoted, the cameras simply are not working. Regardless of the reasons behind it, they're not slowing people down.
|
The point still stands that, according to the statistics Adam has quoted, the cameras simply are not working. Regardless of the reasons behind it, they're not slowing people down.
All those statistics show is they haven't slowed everyone down, which shouldn't suprise anyone. Very few measures have instant 100% effect.
I agree, though, that there are still lots of drivers who routinely exceed the limits. That's partly because making the cameras visible allows drivers to just slow down when they pass the cameras, partly 'cos too many of the cameras are single-point types rather than SPECS cameras, and partly 'cos it's still early days.
It's probably going to take a few more years before the effects of cameras become more widespread.
|
It's probably going to take a few more years before the effects of cameras become more widespread.
Oh really, NW. They've been around in serious numbers for 8 years. If they were going to have an effect, they should have by now.
It is funny how to some people, the cure is more speed cameras, whatever the symptom.
|
Oh really, NW. They've been around in serious numbers for 8 years. If they were going to have an effect, they should have by now.
It takes time at critical mass for a measure such as this to bite, though I don't know what critical mass will be in this case. Cameras have been around for a while, but it's only in the last three years that any appeared on my side of town, two years they made it to more than one location, and only this year that they started to appear in some of the other speeding zones.
It'll take time for folks to get used to the idea that all the main roads around here are monitored. So far, cameras have been a rarity affecting only a small part of some journeys.
It is funny how to some people, the cure is more speed cameras, whatever the symptom.
Some folks don't agree that widespread breach of speed limits is a problematic symptom, but if that's the symptom, then cameras are a part of the cure. I think we'd agree that we also need more traffic police etc.
|
It takes time at critical mass for a measure such as this to bite...
Nope. Not convinced!
|
|
|
|
>> It's probably going to take a few more years before the >> effects of cameras become more widespread. >> Oh really, NW. They've been around in serious numbers for 8 years. If they were going to have an effect, they should have by now. It is funny how to some people, the cure is more speed cameras, whatever the symptom.
It would be nice if we knew the statistics for accidents that were caused by either people dedicating so much of their attention to keeping an eye out for cameras and crashing, or alternatively for rear-end shunts due to violent braking, having spotted a camera at the last minute ?
I don't think we will ever see truthfull statistics from the speed camera tsar's as they will always distort the figures to suit their own ends, ie LOOK HOW MANY LESS ACCIDENTS THERE WERE AFTER THE CAMERA blah blah blah !!
|
|
|
|
I think the main reason I speed (and really only ever on the motorway) is because I very rarely seem to travel at a decent speed. My average MPH on a trip from the M4, J7 to the end of it in Wales was 52mph - and that was with me driving up to 85 when I was able to.
If I'd of stayed at the legal limit the whole time, I don't know what my average speed would have been, but I'd imagine it would be a few MPH less. If I knew that I could maintain 70mph the whole way there I don't know if I'd speed as that average seems acceptable, but when you average 40ish on the motorway, it takes forever to get anywhere.
Still I know I shouldn't speed, but I do.
|
I carried out a few experiments on this Chris. In "normal" commuter traffic (between the hours of 07:00 and 09:00 and 16:00 - 18:30) I limited myself to 70 for a week on a run from Poole to Reading. Previously I had made use of every chance to gun the car into the horizon. The difference? A couple of minutes at best. Reason being that the guy doing 70 that you overtake at 85 will catch you when you get caught behind the inevitable 55mph rolling roadblock at or near every junction on the motorways. At best you'll get a couple of cars ahead for every junction passed and when you hit the bottleneck (there is always a bottleneck) he will probably pass you using the inside lane at 35 whilst you move at between 20 and 45 in fits and starts.
Wonderful fuel economy and very relaxing.
A totally different matter if you set off at 04:30...... Horizon, I'm coming to get you! }:o>
|
Don't mention fuel economy to me. Just got a new car and it's the first time I've ever had a trip computer... I'm now obsessed with looking at my current MPG and trying to find out really how gently I can press the accelerator to keep my current speed up whilst keeping a healthy MPG.
Never mind mobile phones, screaming kids, annoying passengers etc... this is by far the most distracting thing I've ever found in a car!
|
|
|
ive done leeds to newcastle on 2 occasions in the last week and I tend to sit at 80 when have the 2 second gap and push to 90 when it gets clear (horizon only) and i shaved 30 mins off the 2hrs it took a collegue who WILL NOT SPEED COS ITS EVIL. By overtaking I have found that you jump a couple of the bottlenecks and that can save ages.
The traffic i was driving in was not commuter more like 4pm but if you keep a 2 second gap and keep vigilant its ok if not dont speed.
|
"if you keep a 2 second gap and keep vigilant its ok"
Yeah, it's fine, until you get caught. Or have a smash. Then who'll be complaining?
Given that your average speed is somewhere around 68mph I suspect you spend a fair bit of the journey somewhat over 80?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
