Are speed cameras being over used?
157 Comments | Add Comment | Blog entry posted 6th September, 2006
Lots of PetrolPrices.com users have written to us recently with complaints about speed cameras.
{poll=9}Jake in our office certainly thinks that the police do not use speed cameras appropriately. He just received a ticket for driving at 39mph in a 30mph limit. While he agrees that speeding can be dangerous, he was driving on a wide road with little traffic in clear, dry conditions. Jake thinks that the police picked this spot because it is one of many locations where a 30mph limit is too conservative.
Jake said: “We need to use common sense a lot more in our policy making and law enforcement. If the police used speed cameras in a sensible manner, they would gain the backing of the public. The British public does not want to be treated like children or criminals, yet this is what happens due to the way in which the police uses speed cameras.”
Here are some recent emails from PetrolPrices.com users:
- “There is an excessive use of speed cameras on our roads, especially Motorways.” Jeff Davis, South Wales
- “I spend more time watching that darn spedo than I do the road sometimes. I have a 37 years clean licence and live in fear of losing that. Yet all around you see drivers on mobiles, drivers who are a danger, drunk drivers, a camera can’t catch them. I dream of seeing every camera gone.” June Fraser, Surrey
- “I was driving to London and I got caught speeding on a deserted stretch of motorway near Carlisle. I was doing 87mph. I feel this is petty and only done to raise money.” Asif Ali, Glasgow
What do you think?
Replies to Are speed cameras being over used?
Gerallt Griffith February 10, 2009
my sister in law was done for doing 36 in a 30 zone when i went to see the area it had a 40mph limit they set up the camera for 30 in a 40 area they are nothing but crooks
Phil Ashton December 4, 2008
Unfortunately the law is the law and we have to abide by it however petty the 'crime' seems to be.
If a way could be devised of correctly assessing the road conditions and assessing how responsibly the driver is driving then we could entertain fully variable speed limits.
I also think that the highways agency should regularly review speed limits. A couple of examples of limits which could be (and have very recently been) modified can be found.
Near my home town, the police have just reduced the speed limit on a single carriageway road from 60 to 40 mph past a school! About time.
On the opposite side of the coin there's a stretch of the northern perimeter road round Heathrow which is 30mph, why, it's 3 lanes wide on the east bound carriageway and two on the westbound, just a couple of car parks.
Paul July 26, 2008
I just received a NoIP in the post. No signature, no pictures, no calibration information or reference. (I was caught speeding at 75mph once when I was 18, I am now 43. I have driven a Porsche safely for ten years without being pulled over once). I was driving back from work in Oxford at 1:20am on the A40 and apparently was caught doing 50mph in a road works zone temporarily reduced to a 40mph zone. I did not see a single flash, and nor did my girlfriend who was with me in the car. In fact I had stuck religiously to the speed limit which varies a lot with roadworks as one drives into london. When the cameras start criminalising people like me who make a huge effort to drive safely; the result is we move abroad, as I am doing in two weeks. I am taking my Patent invention with me.
John July 18, 2008
I have recently been caught doing 48 in a 30 zone. The police said it would be a £60 fine and three point, I had lost the paper part of my license so could not produce it in the required time perod. Thefefore it had to go to court. The police man said they could issue more than three points in a 30 zone as long as you were under 50. I've just got the court decision back and been give 4points and £120 plus expenses £175. Have i any ground for appeal?
E Curtis September 25, 2007
Can anyone explain why Police vehicles can park illegally on the public highway? They regularly do this to park their speed camera, vans, cars etc to catch out members of the public. I have seen them parked on public footpaths, grass verges etc which would have meant them mounting the pavement to park.
If it would would be illegal for a member of the public to park illegally why do the police think they are above the law and can park anywhere?
S Stratton September 25, 2007
Cameras are for money making .
Catching people doing a few miles an hour too fast is all the police can do. Other than that they are use less .
When the odd occasion arises that you do need them you're lucky if they even turn up because they're stood at the side of a road with speed gun.
Total Loony August 17, 2007
I'd be quite happy driving at 60 mph out of town, but I end up speeding most of the time, as I constantly have to overtake people who think it's okay to drive at 45 mph. Also, these selfish incompetent drivers usually have a big long snake of cars stuck behind them, but they carry on chugging along, oblivious to the frustration they cause. The people in the snake are no better, they can't overtake because their cars are crappy turbo diesels or 2.0l Mondeos, but they never leave a gap, thereby preventing people driving more competent vehicles to overtake - read the Highway Code people. Then, when I finally zing past, they have the cheek to blow their horns - incredible.
Another annoying thing is people (most) who don't understand how the speed cameras work. Gatsos only work in the direction they're facing, you can do 90 mph going the other way with impunity! Why then, when people pass a Gatso camera, even when they aren't on the detection side do they brake? Because they're thick, that's why!
BTW I also smoke and I don't recycle anything - Global Warming - bring it on.
Mark June 26, 2007
I got flashed by a speed camera 8 days ago how long do you have to wait for ticket or penalty notice
Ray John Mew. June 22, 2007
How do these police sleep at night.They are so underhanded,that they do a mobile speed camera just below a brow of a hill,so you go up hill in a 40mph zone and hit the top of the hill where theres a 30mph zone and you start to go downhill and they clock you there.This was also at 20.30 at night,no traffic around and i was slowing down ,he clocked me at 38mph hardly formula one stuff and as i was saying i was slowing down.And one last thing there is no warning of up and coming speed cameras.Like i said how do these police sleep at night.
George June 8, 2007
If digital cameras are NOT accepted in a court of law. Why are almost invisible digital TAX/PUNISHMENT (speed) cameras being installed?
Sean March 29, 2007
i was doing 35 in 30 zone through a speed camera will i get done ??
Ben Troth March 14, 2007
Speed is undoubtedly a factor in unsafe driving but just mull over these facts:
At just below the UK threshold for drink driving you are 6 times more likely to have a collision, at double it this rockets to 50 times more likely. Any ammount of alcohol impares driving and i'm sure whether we like to admit it we know someone who drove after a couple and felt fine...............and got away with it and will do it again.
You are 4 times more likely to die in a collision if you don't wear a seatbelt.
As many as 1 in 10 veichles using the motorway have a defect such as a bald tyre or brakelight out.
In terms of stopping distances + reaction times: its safer to be pissed than on a handheld mobile. (i don't condone either)
Its possible to be set loose having had twenty hours pratice and pass a test first time. It happened to me 1 year ago this week and by no means did it prepare me for what i'd face.
There are far bigger issues that now need to be tackled.
W.f.pearson March 1, 2007
Speed cameras are in the main a good idea, but when placement is a means of generating an excessive income they are being abused. How many of us can categorically state that at any speed our speedos are 100% correct and how many of those cameras installed are likewise accurate.
A £3,000 camera can generate an income far in excess of of its cost in a matter of days. (whether accurate or not!
Why is it that we can come off a perfectly surfaced stretch of 30mph.road to enter a limit off, round the corner cart track, sorry highway,that doesn't even
denote hazards or that anything obver 5mph will shake the guts out of anything other than a Sherman Tank.
R. Derek February 12, 2007
If I hear one more person ranting about speed "killing children on the roads", I will throw a mental. Children get into trouble on the roads because their parents are too damn lazy to keep them under proper control. I pass a school regularly and often see women standing on the school pavements, smoking and talking, while the children tear around on and off the same pavement. Passing a school like this is a god-awful nightmare for any driver.
As for cameras and talivans, there are far too many of them. I've driven for 33 years, and held a clean licence until December 06, when some miserable talivan shot me at 33mph, whilst slowing from a 40 zone to a 30. For pity's sake, what the hell is this country coming to? The last thing we need is zero tolerance. Despite what other people have said here, it DOES DOES DOES encourage speedo watching. 30mph is notoriously tricky to keep "level", and I agree fully that many roads, especially rural ones leaving a village, have limits set too low.
What seriously concerns me, though, is the insistence of politicians and police in pursuing their endless quest against drivers. What in god's name have we all done to deserve this? Placing fear in people's minds as they try to drive carefully? Criminalising people for the slightest misdemeanour. Speed cameras actually punish us for being human and faulty. Only a perfect robot could ever negotiate Britain's roads these days and escape a fine.
It is time that we took a stand against the government, and against the safety campaign people who are driven by high emotions and illogical thinking. It happened before with the Poll Tax. It is high time that it happened again....and double quick, before our lives are infested with cameras and Big Brother spyboxes in our cars to log our mileage.
Tony February 8, 2007
Speed cameras are loved by people living in our area because the police have abandoned the roads. Now the nutters can drive on the right, no more need for tax or insurance and can drivde cars in a poor state of repair. They can also visit the local pubs and drive home. No police in our area so carry on regardless. just don't speed.
Daniel Pearce January 29, 2007
Just to add, that you don't have to be speeding as some people think to be driving stupidly. I nearly had 4 accidents in 1/2 a mile going round my local ring road because people "forgot" what their indicators were for and we were only avereging 20mph, well inside the 30mph limit. And yes you guessed it, there is a speed camera on the ring road to make sure everyone sticks to the 30mph limit. The fact is that this camera is useless now (even though there's only ever been 5 minor accidents on there and they've all been since the camera was installed). They have just installed a new crossing 20 yards past it, and the lights spend more time on red than green and they change even if there's no one crossing it (came round at 3am the other morning and they changed on me). The traffic also backs up past the camera so probably 95% of the traffic that goes past it only crawls past it anyway.
Daniel Pearce January 29, 2007
I agree that speed cameras have there uses in some areas, but I do think they are overused.
I'm all for them around schools, roadworks (when there are people actually working on them, Bristol motorway last summer (2006) springs to mind!!!) etc.
However I have never really seen the point of them on open roads, but then there's no point to the 30mph speed limit they're enforcing!
People ranting about how people shouldn't speed etc, etc, are a pain in the rear end. I bet none of them could stand up in court and state under oath that they've never exceded any speed limit. But of course they weren't one of the unlucky ones that (like me) that "gets done" doing 32mph in a 30mph limit. They'd soon be moaning about speed cameras then!
It also makes no difference what car you choose to drive either. I have driven (in no particular order) a :- Vauxhall 1.0 litre Nova, Peugeot 1.4 litre 206, Ford 2.0 litre Mondeo, Rover 1.0 litre Metro and a Peugeot 1.6 litre 106 GTi. Have a guess which one I "got done" in? THE LITTLE CLAPPED OUT 1.0 litre METRO (and no the others didn't have speed camera detectors in them either)!!!
As for pedestrians, and this goes for both adults and kids........LEARN TO CROSS THE ROAD PROPERLY!!!
The number of times I have driven along a road, in traffic, struggling to get above 20mph but moving steadily (not stop, start), and pedestrians (adults and youngsters) have just stepped off the footpath, and walked out into the path of the oncoming traffic!!!
It's people who do this that get on my nerves because if they were to get knocked down the finger, and the blame, would be placed right on the driver, even if they'd done nothing wrong!
It also gets on my nerves that people see speed as the cause of every accident on the road.
I have witnessed 9 accidents and NONE were caused by speeding!
It made me laugh though that at the scene of 5 of these accidents, when people had pulled out of a junction without stopping, the first thing that the person who pulled out of the junction said as they got out of the car was along the lines of "YOU WERE GOING TOO FAST" or "YOU WERE SPEEDING".
In all cases this wasn't true, as was backed up by at least 2 drivers in the cars behind. I know in the one case I was following the car on the main road that ran into the other car that pulled out and had to keep toutching the brake as he was only doing 20mph and it was a 30mph limit!
As for putting up speed cameras where there have been so many deaths or serious accidents, a death is self explanatory, but a serious injury can be classed as something as "minor" as a broken leg/arm (and before anyone says anything, I have broken my leg so I know what it's like compared to my mate who broke his neck playing rugby!). My brother got "T-boned" in his car by another car doing 20mph (other car had brake faliure on approach to a junction so came straight out without stopping) and that broke his wrist but it was still classed as a "serious accident". If they're all "classed" like this was then no wonder there are so many speed camera sites and accident blackspots.
Simon Dowler January 22, 2007
If the speed limit on that stretch of road is 30 m.p.h you've only got yourself to blame for getting caught doing 39 m.p.h. 1 or 2 mph above 30mph and I might be a bit mor sympathetic. Anyway, it shouldn't matter whether there is a speed camera or not. So stop whinging on.
Also, seeing as everyone's trying to show how green they are don't forget speeding uses more petrol as well as serioulsy annoying local residents. Changing the way I drive has cut my fuel consumption by 30%.
Paul G Clough January 19, 2007
I regularly use a flyover going out of town that will often have a speed van at the bootom of the incline just round the curve, Just inside the 40 limit! When drivers see the van the brake, a lot are doing 40 or so or a few m.p.h more, but they brake hard and i have very often seen a near miss by other road users trying to avoid other vehicles due to the "bunching up" THIS IS AN ACCIDENT AREA WAITING TO HAPPEN!!!
David Harris January 9, 2007
If every motorist voted against the government in every election, local or national, and told the candidates grovelling for their vote, the reason why, I suggest that speed cameras would soon be a thing of the past. Concerted action by motorists could be one of the most powerful actions in sorting out the immorality, lies and sleaze of the present parasites in power. Anyone got the guts to start a campaign?
Andrew Dodds January 9, 2007
If you don't want points for speeding buy a Road angel or a TomTom and regularly update the database, I have been saved from a so called safety cameras (piggy banks) plased in the least likely danger zones so many times that I have lost count. I am not a speed merchant and have been driving for 43 years with out incident apart from one brush with a speed camera secreated behind a road sign 10 years ago.
Barry And Sue December 21, 2006
"Speed" cameras are a pain (also road humps). Not only are the speed limits set way too low so the cameras catch even moderate motorists, but we all know they are purely and simply a stealth tax.
They also distract you from watching the road which in its self wipes out the split second you gain by driving slower.
They also, I believe contribute to road rage which causes more accidents than pure speed. I therefore propose that if speed limits were made sensible and cameras removed, then the number of accidents would go down.
What do you think?
Barry
Ben December 16, 2006
i hate speed cameras but i agree that they are a necessery evil to help save lives. if just 1 person's life is saved then it's worth it. you may not agree with me now but imagine how you would feel if your child gets killed tomorrow by someone speeding. i do think that they are used to make money though and that's unfair so i think that all revenues should be used to pay for private medical treatment for road accident victims that way every time you got flashed you would be saving a life.
Christine Gale December 13, 2006
I’m sure you’re like me, and easily get confused with statistics, that’s why politicians and advertisers use them. I’m 99.69% sure of this! I always remember my professor at University telling me any theory can be proven; you only have to find the right statistics.
So, I was interested in finding the following on BBC Cefax on Friday 23rd June 2006. “Research has cast doubt on government claims that roads are getting safer. A study by Oxford University and a regional public health group found serious injuries caused by road crashes had not changed since the mid 1990’s.”
That’s very interesting since the first speed cameras were introduced in 1992. The piece goes on to say: “Latest figures show the government is on target to reduce road deaths and serious injuries by 2010 when compared to the mid 1990’s.”
So, who do you believe? The article further quoted: “That the Department of Transport said the British Medical Journal report was misleading.” Confused? If so, statistics are working.
Now the West Yorkshire Safety Camera Partnership quotes that we have the lowest fatality rate since the 1970’s. Now is that down to speed cameras?
First speed cameras were not introduced until 1992. Isn’t it more likely that improvements to car safety have lowered the fatality rate both for passengers and pedestrians- the Honda Civic comes to mind. On top of that we have had a sea change in drinking and driving and wearing of seat belts. Not to mention the improvements in medicine that would have been fatalities 30 years ago.
On the premises that speed leads to more fatalities, what slows traffic down the most?
1) Traffic Police?
2) Speed Cameras?
3) Mobile Speed Cameras?
Non of the above can effect drivers all the time since they are infrequent and far too few of them. Congestion on the other hand slows down traffic.
So if I just make up a theory, which I have done called the Gale’s Congestion Theory, now according to my old professor I need statistics to support it. Since congestion of traffic is dramatically increasing ever year, would that not account for the fall in fatalities?
The good news is that fatalities will naturally go down while the congestion goes up. Costing nothing but time waiting safely in those queues. Obviously the government will take credit for this as governments do.
If the Gale’s Congestion Theory is right or not, I don’t know, but it has statistics on it’s side.
If you have any statistics or theories don’t write to me.
Christine Gale
Michael Prescott December 8, 2006
An experience driver should know the speed from the feel you have, without constantly looking at your speedometer!
John Middleweek December 7, 2006
If you challenge these Scammera van tickets 9 out of 10 wont reach court, they are manned by amatures who do not follow set-up and test proceedures correctly and threrefore can not proceed into court.
The police are in NO way connected to these scammera vans even though the scammera vans claim they are in "partnership",
It's a local council revenue earning scam and we are geting screwed.
Stephen Laing December 4, 2006
Contest everything! if you do this it will bury them in paperwork and they dont earn enough from the ticket to justify much follow up. They rely on mug punters !
R Wilson December 2, 2006
Buy a good hazardous area early warning device and believe it, then you will never speed in a hazardous area, you will not then get fined. A good hazardous area warning device will save you money and points. If you are not willing to help yourself,do not complain.
Pete Jones November 28, 2006
The Road Traffic Act requires a speedometer never to read slow but it can be fast by 10% +2mph so if you are caught doing 31mph your speedo is probably showing at least 35mph - doesn'y anybody look at this piece of equipment anymore?
Ray Everett November 24, 2006
I have just changed jobs to be closer to home. My previous job meant travelling 35k miles per year and I was the only person in the office without speeding points - some would say I was just lucky.
This week, on the way to my new job, I have been flashed by the same camera in Birmingham (top of Wolverhampton Road). The signs are very clear that this stretch of dual carriageway has a limit of 40 mph. On the first occasion I was doing 32 mph and this morning I was doing 33 mph.
Now, either my speedo is way off or there is something wrong with this camera. I may never here anything, but that gut wrenching feeling when the thing goes off is not a good one.
If there is something wrong with this camera, I should be able to sue Birmingham Council for causing me stress for the 14 days I have to wait before the all clear!
Oh yes, and Monday morning I am going to test it again. I may even go up to 34 mph, get flashed and stress for another two weeks.
Joel November 24, 2006
I feel that speed cameras do have a valuable role to play in keeping roads safe. Going over the speed limit, even by 1 or 2 mph, in a built up area is not acceptable.
Even on a motorway speeding isn't a good idea, albeit for very different reasons... I was once sideswiped by a car that suffered a blow out as it over took me at speed. I would concede that sticking to the speed limit doesn't stop these kinds of scenarios, but I genuinely believe that had the driver not been speeding he would have been able to take better control of the car and perhaps avoid hitting me.
Let's remember that a vast number of motorists don't check their vehicle over every time they get in it and the bonnet is only ever opened by the mechanic each year or so. This makes the occasional failure virtually inevitable, and the faster you're moving when it does happen, the more difficult it will be to recover.
Peter November 23, 2006
POLLY WHAT A CRACKPOT < What a statement to make ,What Planet are you off . People who kill with cars seldom pay the full price for the crime, it should be Like in the States First degree murder Locked up for Life not the 7 to 9 years "LIFE" in this pathetic dudicial system.
Polly Wanna Cracker November 22, 2006
i recon people should be aloud to speed all they want cuz at the end of the day if they kill someone they'll go to prison
Peter November 19, 2006
With the system on my car you only press one button when doing the correct speed , Then you can concentratae on the road .
Gregg November 17, 2006
Most cameras are an easy way of generating cash, why else would so many be mounted where they cant be seen ie behind another sign or trees. I dont agree with dangerous speeds but some of the limits make no sense at all. When entering a 30 limit you need to look away from the road to check your speed and I bet you are close to it but not close enough not to get a ticket so you spend most of the time watching the dial not the road. Ever trid to keep to 30 over a long distance on an empty road without watching the dials, not easy not safe if you dont want to pay up. Keep the camers but for gods sake lets have some thought and common sense about their use before the public lose what little respect remains for the police.
Peter November 17, 2006
I have had cars for the last four years with speed limit recognition and find that when I am being controlled to either 30 mph 40 mph 50 mph 60mph and 70 mph,In no time at all cars that have been hundreds of yards behind me , have caught hanging on my rear end and try passing me and looking at me as if I am from another planet .I was in a 40 mph zone in September when a peeked cap IQ Zero overtook me in his boy racer , hit a bike rider breaking his ribs and arm ,He was eventualy dealt with a Wristslap . Speed cameras are a modern day necessity,does it matter if we arrive five mins before other drivers if it saves lives and it does ,abide by the rules and regs they are made for the benefit of all ..
Mark Miller November 12, 2006
How many people here have actually has their spedo's calibrated?
I suppose they are to work from the day you buy them to the day the car is scrapped? They are not full proof. So a little discression should be allowed with fixed and mobile cameras.
Also NOT all speed cameras are bright colours, far from it, many are grey / green and completely blend in, as for the warning signs, black and white, hardly designed to stand out. And because they are on just about every road in existance, people tend to ignore them as part of the surroundings. What about a sign that lights up??
Also speed cameras are hardly proved technology as they have managed to clock a wall doing 35mph!!! why are we standing for this?
And if anyone thinks they can tell (to the mph) how fast there car is going without looking at the spedo, they are lying. All it takes is 1mph over and points are heading your way (and you cant save them for the free toaster)
Brian Marsden November 10, 2006
A relative of mine is one of those "safe" drivers who never knowingly exceed the speed limit. She has never been caught by a speed camera. However she is one of the worst drivers I have ever come across.
She must spend 50% of her time looking at the speedo, and regularly drops gear if (in a 30 area) she notices that her indicated speed has crept up to 33. However she has a woeful lack of awareness of what is going on around her. On one occasion she asked me "is the speed limit 30?". She was carefully making sure she didn't exceed 30. Unfortunately she had been so busy checking her speedo that she had failed to notice the 40 sign half a mile back back, or the regular "40" repeaters at the side of the road.
She has never driven on a motorway. "They are too dangerous." (I'd have to agree in her case.) However as we all know, "speed kills", and therefore by definition she is a "safe driver".
The problem with the obsession with absolute speed (and mechanical enforcement) at the expense of almost everything else is that it breeds zombies who think that by mechanically sticking to the speed limit, they become safe drivers. In most cases they are a menace.
Hugh Ferguson November 8, 2006
Speed Cameras are overused. I have been driving now for almost 15 years. I travel the A9 in the scottish Highlands on a regular basis. We are lucky on the stretch of Road thre first camera is around the Pitlochry Area.
The one camera that catches a lot of people is at Ballinluig which is 18 Miles north of perth which is on a Dual Carriageway but is limited to 50mph for the last 1/4 of a mile southbound, so most motorists thinking it is dual carriageway and get booked for going through at 60mph although it is normally 70mph which is normal for a Dual Carriageway
Just outside Perth northbound there is a Speed camera just behind a sign. The legality of the hidden camera is dubious as I am sure you have to be able to see 70% of the Camera before it can actually be held up in Court and you being booked.
Jason Tillman November 1, 2006
I agree with all those who have said that speeding fines should vary as a percentage according to how many mph over the speed limiet you are going. That would be a lot fairer on everyone. Speed cameras should not replace police but I think they are a good invention and arent dangerouns at all. I defy anyone who complains that they have to stare at their speedo which means they could hit someone. If you have passed your driving test then you know how to drive safely. Staring at your speedo or not knowing what speed you are driving at constitutes a FAIL.
As for signing I think the councils put too many speed camera signs up. And yes I know that lots of you will disagree but I think more people would be caught speeding if they didnt know where the cameras were! I got a speeding ticket once for doing 62% in a 50% zone. It was a mobile unit on a slip road. However I didnt agree with the speed limit for that road. But then I still shouldnt have been speeding so I accepted that I was at fault. Rules are rules and the law is the law. Just becasue you dont agree with something doesnt mean you should break it.
I think there should also be more cameras up reading numberplates catching people with No tax and insurance. This will free up time for police to catch drivers with broken, missing and obscured numberplates.
Peter Fullwood October 30, 2006
If gatsos are not for making money then pray tell why there are more than twenty yes twenty of them on a two mile stretch of road out side leeds
Vic Dale October 30, 2006
I have read all the comments made.Whilst only a few believe that the revenue collected is to swell the Governments coffers,most believe that the revenue is justified.Well,as we know,Speed Cameras were not introduced to reduce Serious Accidents/Fatalities caused by Speeding. Speed is only one of the many factors contributing to accidents and is ranked about 8 in a table of 10.
However,nobody can deny that it is the easiest way to collect Revenue.
The Government plans to double the Penalties and keep all the revenue from next year,So instead of raising Income Tax by 10% or more,which would cause a great public outcry,Revenue raised from Speeding and other offences that can be detected by cameras,will be more than adequate to fund Government overspending and will be supported without much protest.The overseas conflicts are costly indeed and have to be funded somehow.
I have never believed that the revenue goes to improve Road Safety to reduce accidents,same as Road Fund Licences etc.
I would accept the penalties are justified if accidents directly related to Speeding are reduced,however in areas where there are no speed cameras,the accident rate has reduced or remained the same.
Andrew Smith October 27, 2006
Speed Cameras aren't always at accident blackspots although quite a lot are. Some are just there to make money. I remember driving down the new A43 dual carriageway around Silverstone just a few months after the road opened. I was surprised to see a GATSO on such a straightish bit new road built to the latest standards. It's hard to believe there was any history of accidents at that location - if it really was a blackspot then I'd have to question the design of the road!
Laura B October 23, 2006
Yes some cameras may just be there to make money, but if people didn't speed past them they wouldn't make any would they? People who complain about getting fined bore me. If you don't want to get fined then just obey the law. Easy isn't it. And those who say "but I was ONLY doing 39 in a 30" really annoy me. Is that what they'll say when they are up in court for running over somebody's child? I always keep to the limit in a 30 or 40 area whether there are cameras or not, but I do speed on motorways and dual carriageways - if I think it's safe to do so. And if I were to get a ticket then I wouldn't complain.
I do agree there are problems other than speeding though - mobile phone users being one of them; another is those who do 40 miles an hour everywhere, even in a 30 zone!
I also agree with an earlier comment about traffic light cameras - how I wish they would put some on the Beckton roundabout (A13/A406), to stop the $%*&ing selfish idiots who go through on red even when the road in front is blocked, so that when they go green for everyone else NOBODY can move! It's so frustrating!
Malcolm Penny October 21, 2006
Some years ago, when the subject of speed, speed cameras, etc., was being discussed in the Letters column, a guy wrote to the Times with this tale. As I recall, he was sitting on 9 points and got done for speed in excess of 100mph on the M.40. He pleaded 'Guilty', and was represented in court on the issue of disqualification, since he employed a number of people, and his business would fold without him. The Bench, showing wisdom and compassion, imposed a huge fine and gave him two more points, putting him on 11. Living on a razor's edge, or what! Until some of his points were 'purged', he stuck religously to all speed limits. By doing that, not only did he pay his legal bill and the fine with the money he didn't spend on fuel, since fuel consumption rises dramatically with increased speed, but his journeys took no longer in terms of time.
Speed of itself does not kill, what kills people is running into people, when the physics come into play. Put another way, it is the shortfall between wheel speed and brain speed that causes problems. If the brain is going down the road faster than the wheels, there should be time to see the signs and act accordingly
Norman Clark October 21, 2006
according to tiff nedell and tom-tom there is no such thing as speed cameras they are known as safety cameras
David Brede October 20, 2006
Getting caught by speed cameras is voluntary taxation. You know where the cameras are. you whizz passed at whatever speed, the camera records the happy scene and you pay up.
Simple.
Keeps down my income tax.
Shelly October 20, 2006
The soultion is simple don't speed. Regardless of what we think is a right or wrong speed there are many engineers who work out peak traffic flow and all hazards at all times. If its 30 then stick to 30. I have been known to speed on the motorway.
But I have also been hit in a 30 zone but a car deemed to be doing approx 45mph. When being done for speeding excuse was It shouldn't be a 30!
Tell that to the motorcyclist he just hit and left with serious leg injuries.
Jamie Powell October 19, 2006
Yes you can have points taken put onto your lovely clean license with a handheld but its unlikely as they have been proven unreliable. Unless they stop you at the side of the road its EXTREMELY unlikely you will ever be done for it. Also they only point it if they have REASON to believe so if it was only 8 miles over they wouldnt bother.
Jamie Powell October 19, 2006
If your were doing the correct speed in the first place you wouldnt have to worry about the camera. The again you do have some leeway you get 10% plus 2MPH so if you are meant to be doing 30 then you can do around 34MPH and not get clocked. On a national speed limit its around 76Mph sometimes higher. I personally hate them but at the end of the day the limit is there for a reason if people just stuck to them - wheres the problem? Ive been Riding just under a year and I have never had a problem with them
Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of PetrolPrices.com (Fubra Ltd)