Speed Cameras part 17

Stuart McB · Post by **Stuart McB** » 04 Jan 2005, 00:10

"HA,HB,or HC then???"
Isn't that the coding on pencils? or am I thinking of some thing else. [:D] Yes. like the blackest of black pens used to wright out my speeding ticket August 2003 [}:)] How does it feel 43Mph in a 40Mph zone.

Homer · Post by **Homer** » 04 Jan 2005, 13:08

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by turbolag

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Several million other people are now doing exactly the same as you. Staring at their speedometer, completely oblivious to everything going on outside the car.
Even the government's own research into speed cameras noted that rear-shunt type accidents increase at camera sites.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Well, that's a wide ranging reply.
OK, lets be looking the looking at the speedo one. All drivers have a responsibility to monitor their speed, as well as look out the windows & scan for other roads users, signs, hazards etc. It's a multi tasking thing and we all have to do it. Some are careful, alert and considerate drivers and are able to do this, although to do it effectively requires some discipline and practiceto achieve fully and maintain.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
But the presence of speed cameras is diverting driver's attention to their speedometer. You can argue they don't have to all you like, the fact is they are.
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">There is little doubt that overall speed detection systems have saved lives.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Actually there is very great doubt that any lives have been saved. Road deaths rose last year for the first time since the 1960's.
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">For example, a notorious stretch of road I police (The A43 dual carriageway) was averaging 3 deaths a year along its 2 mile length. In the 3 years since 4 cameras were installed the death rate has been zero and injury RTCs have fallen by 2 thirds.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I shall have to dig out the actual figures for that road but in most cases the years on which the pre-camera figures are based are a blip and what you see is actually regression to the mean. i.e a road has an average KSI rate of 1, it has two bad years with 2 KSIs, a camera is installed and there are no KSIs for a couple of years. The average is still 1 and would in all likelyhood have been the same without the camera.

ACTIVE8 · Post by **ACTIVE8** » 04 Jan 2005, 19:21

Originally posted by ACTIVE8 quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree so why do we now see less patrols than we used to.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by bxbodger
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Yes, I realise that it's a question of economics, but the cameras are cash cows milking large sums from the motorist.
C.S.O's are not trained like police officers, they are not as skilled as a police officer.
A proper traffic officer in an area car, has more knowledge of traffic regulations than a normal panda car driver.
Yes, everything costs money, but the cameras are generating extra funds from the fines. These funds should enable us to have more traffic police, but NO it seems to get used to fund even more cameras. [:(!] It also is being taken by the government to spend on completely unconnected unrelated projects.
It should be ring fenced, and used to fund the extra police that we are informed they cannot afford !
Where will it stop with these cameras ?
They have spread far, and wide around the U.K.
How can you justify one that I know of that is fixed, and pointing up a hill, as a driver climbs this steep hill they are hard pressed to climb the hill, the physics of the hill will slow you down.
Locations that make absolutely no sense, and overuse of the technology really does F**K**G annoy most people, and breeds contempt for the cameras, and authorities that use them to excess.
We have more cameras than any other country.
I like other drivers do not want to see too many police, we don't want to live in a police state, but currently it's clear there are not enough.
Road rage is a problem of recent times, cameras are not as versatile as people, they may be cheaper etc, but even more accidents are prevented by a police presence. A human life is priceless, more emphasis needs to be placed on bringing the accident rate down, and with more patrols, the road rage incidents along with accidents would decrease.
It's not rocket science, using the financial resouces properly, and more appropriately would also have other benefits, with more patrols the burglary rate would go down.
Currently when you need the police it's difficult to get them to attend, and response times are poor.
Recent figures show that the police have also had too many accidents when responding to an emergency call. A lot of these are with normal patrol vehicles, and not fast response vehicles.
So, the police might not have as many accidents, if they had a proper presence out on the road, instead of racing around at too high a speed with inappropriate patrol cars, from too far away !