Which type are you? - Alwyn
I wrote a letter to my MP asking why, when the wonderful Gatso trial had been shown to be based on statistical chicanery, it was still being spread across UK.

He tells me he has passed my thoughts on to the governments John Spellar for a response on the study. He also enclosed a copy of the DETR document "The effects of speed cameras: how drivers respond" It seems they categorise us into four types : conformers; the deterred; manipulators and defiers. Mmmmm. I found the full document here;

www.roads.dtlr.gov.uk/roadsafety/research11/

If you lok at Chapter 3 under The 4 types of driver, you will see in which category they (you know who "they" are) have lumped you.

Me? I hate being lied to and have never known a time when so many people are trying to mislead us.
Re: Which type are you? - Mary Longford
His Lordship asks:

Is that the study which says that the anti speed camera brigade are also the conformers and the deterred;

Whilst for various deep and interesting psychological reasons the manipulators and defiers are the only ones who support speed cameras.

Now, could someone remind me: are notLabour for or agin the speed tax stealth cameras?

And which kind of politicians, councillors and cops keep getting hoist with their own petard??
Re: Which type are you? - Andrew Smith
That would make me a manipulator.

I note that an A-road that I use daily (40mph limit) has two speed cameras on it's mile of length and yet the police still regularly set up a speed trap at the end of the road. If the speed cameras had any effect on the speed of cars then the speed trap wouldn't be worth it would it?
Re: Which type are you? - John Slaughter
Andrew

Interesting isn't it. There's a stretch of 40 mile/hr limited dual carriageway in Swindon, with a camera in the middle of the stretch. There is the regular appearance of a mobile camera set up near the end.

Thing is it's rarely short of 'customers' - so probably swells the coffers well.

Regards

John
Re: Which type are you? - Alwyn
A policeman told me that the only productive site for a speed trap is where the speed is safe!
Re: Which type are you? - Dave Etchells
Just checked out my categorisation and it turns out that I am a manipulator and thus more likely to be involved in a speed related accident. So after 20 years accident free motoring does that make me very lucky or does it underline the thought that it is me who is being manipulated?
Re: Which type are you? - Derek
Oh, dear, we're into victimisation again. Forget speed cameras, think speed limits. You either agree or disagree with them, for whatever reason. If you agree, then you'll conform and speed cameras have no effect on you. If you disagree then CHANGE THE PROCESS, not the measurement.

For my part, I believe that speed limits are aimed at the 'lowest common denominator' and NONE of us fits that bill, do we? At most times, in most places, the motorway speed limit is a nonsense. Too low on bright days, out of rush hours, and too high on crowded roads on wet nights. On single track roads, a blanket 60 mph is similarly restrictive, making no differential between wet, dry, light or dark, and ignoring trees, bends, sheep or any other hazard you can think of.

Feel strongly about this? Good, so write to your MP. Change the government. What's that you say? No difference between the parties? Well, surprise, surprise!
Re: Which type are you? - Alwyn
Derek,

The Tories did say they wanted to raise the m/way limit to 80 mph and also halt the spread of speed cameras.

On speed limit setting, they are supposed to be set using the 85th percentile rule well known to highway engineers.

However, when politicians and police want to raise revenue from the driver they sometimes set them lower than the 85th percentile and that is when problems begin.
Re: Which type are you? - Independent Observer
"Oh, dear, we're into victimisation again."

If you are doing something legal and safe and the police set things up so tha though still safe it is illegal then book you for it that sounds pretty much like victimisation to me.

"Forget speed cameras, think speed limits."

Most drivers would prefer to be able to thing safety rather than having it pushed down to number three in the list.

Some people would rather that real safety came well down the list. Why?

"You either agree"

Didn't someone mention that for their own reasons the people who ignored the speed cameras, or slowed down for them, only to speed up again to dangerous levels, were the ones who supported them.

"or disagree with them, for whatever reason."

While the people who opposed speed cameras were the ones who actually conformed to them (then again that came from a government report, sou couldn't be true).

"If you agree, then you'll conform and speed cameras have no effect on you."

Only if you spend all your time watching your speedo, and looking out for hidden speed signs and stealth cameras. But then again: didn't someone mention that for their own reasons the people who ignored the speed cameras, or slowed down for them, only to speed up again to dangerous levels, were the ones who supported them.


"If you disagree then CHANGE THE PROCESS, not the measurement."

So those that oppose speed cameras do actually have your blessing to kick up a fuss about it.

Thank you bestowing the right to democracy on the majority.

Or do you really mean shut up until the next election, by which time there will be even more distorted statistics and propaganda insinuated into the public psyche.
Re: Which type are you? - communibus
I am the type that wishes to drive with my concentration on the road, not looking out for speed cameras. I rarely travel over 70mph on motorways or dual carriageways. I may travel at 35 mph in a 30mph area but on the whole I tend to observe the limits.

It concerns me that the introduction of cameras has brought a drastic reduction in police presence. Speed Cameras cannot catch drunken drivers who are definitely on the increase since the police presence decreased.

CCTV brought a cutback in police presence in the towns now we have the same on the roads.

Take a close look at the road surface approacing speeed cameras, the surface is black with skidmarks, often kneejerk reactions from drivers not even exceeding the limit.

Get rid of them!
Re: Which type are you? - Alwyn
Since speed cameras were introduced in 1991, road casualties have risen from 307,000 to 320,000.
Re: Which type are you? - Independent Observer
That's what they are trying to do.

The motorists I mean :-(
Re: Which type are you? - Independent Observer
Ahhhhhhhhhhhh

But since the new speed camera trials road deaths have gone down by 14, (despite the trials having been cynically intoduced the year after an upward blip in the figures in the relevant trial areas).

The pro speed camera crowd will now complain that I have only told half the story.

Okay, okay.

And deaths went up in the trial areas (despite the fact that they should have gone down regardless).

They don't call me Independent Observer for nothing.
Time for action - Jimbo
O.K so most people agree that speed cameras are not being used for their proper purpose (safety), and we (the motorist) are being exploited. The question is what can be done about it ?, lobbying MP's has been done by the abd to no avial, so the democratic avenue is closed because the powers that be are not willing to listen to their voting public for at least another 4 years. The only option I can see is for some direct action, maybe it's time to raise public awareness about safety statistics, revenue generation e.t.c.

Of course the only drawback is recruiting foot soldiers to spread the word, and to hit the government where it hurts to ensure they take notice. I suggest a day of disruption which would involve putting cameras that are obviously placed for maximum revenue generation temporarily out of use (by covering in some way), ensuring not to target sensibly placed cameras that are a real safety aid.

Who's up for it then ?!!

Jim
Re: Time for action - 555
It is time for action, there are various other forums on this subject, with many ideas. I understand the "covering" aspect, but find myself leaning towards something far easier, and to be honest, longer lasting and a far more difficult thing to remove. I feel Car Body Underseal, available in aerosol, reasonable range, so it can reach the lens and flash light glass, and I feel might be a pain to remove after it has dried nicley. If enough people have a go the government just might think again. 555
 

Value my car