London Speed Cameras Being Reduced

[scathing]

Speed cameras in the UK have the same reputation as down in Australia; sneaky revenue raising exercises placed on dead straight road with good visibility as opposed to an actual safety measure.

It is nice to see that, in London, they're getting rid of a lot of the stupid things. I'd love to see that happen in Sydney, but fat chance of that happening:

The number of speed cameras across London is being dramatically cut back following a public outcry.

In a second retreat, the number of sites at which mobile speed cameras can be used by police is being slashed from 127 to about 25.

The cutback was ordered by Met Commissioner Sir John Stevens following mounting criticism from drivers and motoring groups who said police were using cameras to raise revenue.

A police spokesman said today: "The Met is fed up with people saying cameras are there just to take money from motorists. They are not. We care about road safety and want to use cameras where there is a safety problem.

"From now we will only use cameras at sites with a serious accident record, not where people are simply going a few miles per hour over the limit."
Source: This is London (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/9287684?source=Evening%20Standard)

[Grizzlee]

OK, now don't get wrong, I hate speed cameras. Having 3 speeding tickets and an awful feeling a 4th incoming does not increase the love for them.

But an outcry from motorist, who I'm assuming, are speeding has caused a reduction of cameras, this gets me thinking.:grr:

The point of these cameras is to reduce speeding therefore lessen the chances of accidents.

So these upset motorist who are breaking the law by going over the posted speed limit are complaining that the cameras busting them, are just there to make money...well...how about to avoid them making money, you slow down to say...Oh I don't know...the speed limit?

[scathing]

Originally posted by Grizzlee
The point of these cameras is to reduce speeding therefore lessen the chances of accidents.

Sure, and invading Iraq was fighting the war on terror(tm) and "taking WMDs out of the hands of a madman"(c).

And, just like apparently evidence may have been incorrect and there weren't any WMDs (as well as some misunderstanding on the public about al Quaeda's link with Saddam Hussein) the death toll on Australian roads has remained static while fines from "these life saving devices" have increased dramatically, which in turn is funding the installation of more cameras (while very little of it is done to improve the goat tracks we call roads), so perhaps there's a misunderstanding of the "point" of those cameras too...?

Lets also consider the location of many of these speed cameras, like my favourite near The Spit that's at the bottom of a pretty long hill with a 60km/hr speed limit, that's over a kilometre away (i.e out of visible range) from the actual accident black spot. Or perhaps the ones on the M4 that are in the middle of a dead straight for several kilometre stretch of dual carriageway that stretches for several kilometres. Both are very well sealed, of course.

Definitely environments where you're likely to get a lot of accidents. Those deceptively straight, smooth, and high visibility roads are a veritable death trap! Someone should, I suppose, put some 90 degree off camber bends (blind ones because they've planted the kind of trees that drop copious amounts of leaves all year round right on the edge of the road), dig some potholes right on the apex of the corner, remove the lane-wide shoulders, and build a primary school next to them to make them safer for motorists. You know, places where you don't see these "accident reducing" fixed speed cameras.


Yeah. Thinking. Right.

[plext]

The outrage against these things is really gaining momentum over here.

The number of accidents and deaths has actually increased for the first time in years, since the introduction of these grubby little devices.

Note to the stupid: I am not saying the cameras caused the increase, merely that they are not working.

Probably the worst thing to come out of all this is that this country, in stark contrast with Australia has always enjoyed a largely mutual respect between the police and the public. The cameras and increased police measures such as unmarked vans with laser equipment on (obviously dangerous) three lane motorways is degrading that respect. People are seeing the police as uniformed Inland Revenue collectors.

This is a real shame. Having dealt with police at both ends, I can state that the UK variety is vastly easier to deal with than the typical arrogant NSW copper. They do not talk down to you, and will not go out of their way to make life hard.

Car magazine in the UK has a number of Australian writers and the plea from them is always the same: "Lets not end up like Australia"

[Hired Goon]

Victoria is the worst in Aus - nearly all the speed cameras are in low speed low accident risk areas - which is why the reduction in the road toll is levelling out now. This is of course, because contrary to what the TAC ads tell you - driving down the street at 63km/h does not pose a high risk of you losing control of your car and ploughing into a pole.

[Grizzlee]

Ok so what I should have said was.
Instead of getting rid of the cameras, move them to a more appropiate place.

But think about it, ppl who are breaking the law are complaining that they are getting busted to often. So they get rid of the cameras.

Does that mean if I rob a place and get busted by a camera, I can complain that it was invading my privacy and they should reduce the amount of cameras?

[jambo]

Originally posted by Grizzlee
But an outcry from motorist, who I'm assuming, are speeding has caused a reduction of cameras, this gets me thinking.:grr:

The point of these cameras is to reduce speeding therefore lessen the chances of accidents.

I've found that because motorists have to drop to the speed limit (when they see a camera), once they've passed it they go faster to compensate.

This could cause an increase in accidents.

[Lurgen]

I was snapped a while back going downhill at 63km/h in a 60 zone. On a motorbike. It was a steep hill, and managing your speed to such a fine degree on a bike means you spend at least half your time looking down at the speedo.

That's not safe, not by a long-shot. How can it be safer to travel slowly while not looking at the road than it is to travel at a few kms over the limit?

This speed camera blitz is getting out of control, and the above example is just one case where it really offends me.

The most offensive part though is the Victorian governments insistance that it's a safety measure. Why can't they just admit it's enforcement for the sake of revenue? Sure, we'd still hate them for it but at least they'd be telling the truth for once. I have a lot of trouble accepting certain things our government does, but that's what they're there for - to make decisions on our behalf. Lying though, that isn't part of the deal.

Incidentally, despite being worried most of the time about being caught speeding the ridiculous number of cameras has had zero success making me slow down. I'm not saying I speed (who me?), I'm just saying that I don't respect their efforts and as such don't go out of my way to change my habits.

[scathing]

Originally posted by plext
Probably the worst thing to come out of all this is that this country, in stark contrast with Australia has always enjoyed a largely mutual respect between the police and the public.

Apparently the rest of the police force call the highway patrol guys "jury wreckers", since the ill will generated by that department is showing when it comes to trying criminals.

[Benwah]

Speaking of Jury wrecking, have you been to court lately! it's so busy because of people contesting speeding fines there is no time for justice.

----------------------------------------------------------

BUY MY STUFF : http://forums.zgeek.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=16279

[scathing]

Originally posted by plext
The number of accidents and deaths has actually increased for the first time in years, since the introduction of these grubby little devices.

Note to the stupid: I am not saying the cameras caused the increase, merely that they are not working.

The government likes to use simple statistics with no consideration of the myriad of other factors in any accident to demonstrate that "speed kills", so why can't you take a similarly specious line? :)


As an aside, I'd argue that its quite plausible that people who spend all their time watching the side of the road for speed cameras or cop that are conveniently hidden behind trees / walls / lines of parked cars, or dropping their eyes to the speedo to make sure they're not 3km/hr (2mph) over the limit, are causing accidents because they're not watching where the fuck they're going.

[SamBo]

Originally posted by scathing
As an aside, I'd argue that its quite plausible that people who spend all their time watching the side of the road for speed cameras or cop that are conveniently hidden behind trees / walls / lines of parked cars, or dropping their eyes to the speedo to make sure they're not 3km/hr (2mph) over the limit, are causing accidents because they're not watching where the fuck they're going.

exactly the reason why I think having double-demerit points on holiday periods is a bad thing. I mean, everyone is so paranoid about getting booked that they look at everything (speedo, other cars, and looking for cops) but the road ahead of them. Accidents will happen no matter how many points they threaten to take away from people. The thing is, the people who get booked for say speeding for example, aren't the ones causing the accidents, it's usually the fatigued driver whos spent 8 hours on the road driving his/her family to their holiday destination. Of course, we then hear that they lost their lives (or caused someone else to lose theirs), but no one seems to stop and say, "hey, shouldn't we be making more of an effort to stop this from happening instead of threatening people with double demerits?"
It seriously shits me to tears when double points are on cause you know your trip will take almost twice as long due to EVERYONE driving at atleast 10kph under the posted limit.
Sorry for wondering off topic.... but I just think that the govt and the cops prefer to raise revenue rather than stop accidents from happening.