Anti-Speed Camera Petition

[Maxriddles]

I'm all for more speed cameras and plenty of them along with much stiffer penalties for many driving offences, right up to and including life imprisonment for the most serious offences. The vast majority of road traffic accidents are caused by stupidity or carelessness in one shape or form, many by people who think the road traffic laws don't apply to them.

[ShatnerPants]

I'm all for more speed cameras and plenty of them along with much stiffer penalties for many driving offences, right up to and including life imprisonment for the most serious offences. The vast majority of road traffic accidents are caused by stupidity or carelessness in one shape or form, many by people who think the road traffic laws don't apply to them. BMW, Mercedes, or VW golf drivers.  I blame Boldie.

FYP

[kinboshi]

I'm all for more speed cameras and plenty of them along with much stiffer penalties for many driving offences, right up to and including life imprisonment for the most serious offences. The vast majority of road traffic accidents are caused by stupidity or carelessness in one shape or form, many by people who think the road traffic laws don't apply to them.

...and speed cameras have categorically NOT done anything to reduce the number of accidents that involve serious injury or death.  The reason is that speed is not the cause of the majority of accidents.

http://www.speedcameras.org/speed-camera-news-article.php?id=129

[Maxriddles]

I'm all for more speed cameras and plenty of them along with much stiffer penalties for many driving offences, right up to and including life imprisonment for the most serious offences. The vast majority of road traffic accidents are caused by stupidity or carelessness in one shape or form, many by people who think the road traffic laws don't apply to them.

...and speed cameras have categorically NOT done anything to reduce the number of accidents that involve serious injury or death.  The reason is that speed is not the cause of the majority of accidents.

http://www.speedcameras.org/speed-camera-news-article.php?id=129

The reasons listed would suggest to me that speed may be a contributory factor to many of those listed, albeit not the main reason attributed to the cause of the accident.

Failed to look properly: 32%
Bad behaviour or inexperience: 25%
Misjudged other drivers speed/path: 18%
Poor turn/manoeuvre: 15%
Going too fast for conditions: 12%
Loss of control: 14%
Vision affected: 10%
Slippery road: 10%
Following too close: 7%
Sudden braking: 7%
Disobeyed traffic signal or stop sign: 6%
Impaired by alcohol: 5%
Exceeding speed limit: 5%
Road layout: 3%
Vehicle defects: 2%

[tikay]

I'm all for more speed cameras and plenty of them along with much stiffer penalties for many driving offences, right up to and including life imprisonment for the most serious offences. The vast majority of road traffic accidents are caused by stupidity or carelessness in one shape or form, many by people who think the road traffic laws don't apply to them.

...and speed cameras have categorically NOT done anything to reduce the number of accidents that involve serious injury or death.  The reason is that speed is not the cause of the majority of accidents.

http://www.speedcameras.org/speed-camera-news-article.php?id=129

The reasons listed would suggest to me that speed may be a contributory factor to many of those listed, albeit not the main reason attributed to the cause of the accident.

Failed to look properly: 32%
Bad behaviour or inexperience: 25%
Misjudged other drivers speed/path: 18%
Poor turn/manoeuvre: 15%
Going too fast for conditions: 12%
Loss of control: 14%
Vision affected: 10%
Slippery road: 10%
Following too close: 7%
Sudden braking: 7%
Disobeyed traffic signal or stop sign: 6%
Impaired by alcohol: 5%
Exceeding speed limit: 5%
Road layout: 3%
Vehicle defects: 2%

Mr Riddles gets it spot-on, in both his Posts.

Argue till you are blue in the face, but excessive speed for the circumstances contributes to almost every accident.

Speed Cameras are a good thing. IMO, of course.

[Bongo]

Speed cameras don't do anything about excessive speed for the circumstance though.

[kinboshi]

I'm all for more speed cameras and plenty of them along with much stiffer penalties for many driving offences, right up to and including life imprisonment for the most serious offences. The vast majority of road traffic accidents are caused by stupidity or carelessness in one shape or form, many by people who think the road traffic laws don't apply to them.

...and speed cameras have categorically NOT done anything to reduce the number of accidents that involve serious injury or death.  The reason is that speed is not the cause of the majority of accidents.

http://www.speedcameras.org/speed-camera-news-article.php?id=129

The reasons listed would suggest to me that speed may be a contributory factor to many of those listed, albeit not the main reason attributed to the cause of the accident.

Failed to look properly: 32%
Bad behaviour or inexperience: 25%
Misjudged other drivers speed/path: 18%
Poor turn/manoeuvre: 15%
Going too fast for conditions: 12%
Loss of control: 14%
Vision affected: 10%
Slippery road: 10%
Following too close: 7%
Sudden braking: 7%
Disobeyed traffic signal or stop sign: 6%
Impaired by alcohol: 5%
Exceeding speed limit: 5%
Road layout: 3%
Vehicle defects: 2%

Mr Riddles gets it spot-on, in both his Posts.

Argue till you are blue in the face, but excessive speed for the circumstances contributes to almost every accident.

Exceeding the speed limit and excessive speed are not the same thing.  Excessive speed is a problem.  Exceeding a speed limit is not inherently dangerous.

Speed Cameras are a good thing. IMO, of course.

Tell us why please.

[thetank]

Guy on the bus today told me that you want to keep a copper penny in the call that was issued pre 1988. (95% copper)

If the rozzers ever pull you over and you're worried you might be over the drink driving limit, you start sucking on the 2p coin, and the copper in your breath contaminates the sample and they can't prove shit.

Hee-haw to do with speeding, but there you go.

[kinboshi]

Guy on the bus today told me that you want to keep a copper penny in the call that was issued pre 1988. (95% copper)

If the rozzers ever pull you over and you're worried you might be over the drink driving limit, you start sucking on the 2p coin, and the copper in your breath contaminates the sample and they can't prove shit.

Hee-haw to do with speeding, but there you go.

Drink-driving is a far bigger crime than exceeding the national speed limit on a motorway.

[kinboshi]

Wahay!!  Sensible thinking reigns over hysterical nonsense in Swindon!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/7686057.stm

[WYSINWYG]

Guy on the bus today told me that you want to keep a copper penny in the call that was issued pre 1988. (95% copper)

If the rozzers ever pull you over and you're worried you might be over the drink driving limit, you start sucking on the 2p coin, and the copper in your breath contaminates the sample and they can't prove shit.

Hee-haw to do with speeding, but there you go.

Drink-driving is a far bigger crime than exceeding the national speed limit on a motorway.

Motorways a relatively minor environment for serious road traffic accidents. If you want a serious RTA, put two cars together from opposite directions (e.g. 'A-Roads').
Agreed that slightly exceeding speed limit might not be 'excessive speed' in some instances but what practical measures do you suggest? Driver behaviour has to be shaped somehow. Put the legal limit at the border of excessive speed, and drivers will go just above that limit. It's pretty safe for most to drive on motorways at 80. The limit's 70, many drive at 80. Put it at 80, the'll drive at 90. 90 is not safe.
Unsure about 'driving over drink limit is more dangerous' argument. Maybe so, but plenty of avoidable serious accidents caused/contributed to by excessive speed. I feel my own driving is safer than most at speed (advanced driving, skid training blah blah) but I never exceed the speed limit cos I know the roads are full of nutters who don't undergo an intelligence test as part of their driving exam. You need to be able to stop in time when they pull out without looking.
And what are you trying to achieve by doing 35 instead of 30 anyway? Gaining 5 exta minutes free time really so important?

[WYSINWYG]

Sucking on coppers ( ) seemingly doesn't work

http://www.snopes.com/autos/law/breath.asp

Love the story of the guy who tried to eat his uderwear to foil the test.

[kinboshi]

Guy on the bus today told me that you want to keep a copper penny in the call that was issued pre 1988. (95% copper)

If the rozzers ever pull you over and you're worried you might be over the drink driving limit, you start sucking on the 2p coin, and the copper in your breath contaminates the sample and they can't prove shit.

Hee-haw to do with speeding, but there you go.

Drink-driving is a far bigger crime than exceeding the national speed limit on a motorway.

Motorways a relatively minor environment for serious road traffic accidents. If you want a serious RTA, put two cars together from opposite directions (e.g. 'A-Roads').
Agreed that slightly exceeding speed limit might not be 'excessive speed' in some instances but what practical measures do you suggest? Driver behaviour has to be shaped somehow. Put the legal limit at the border of excessive speed, and drivers will go just above that limit. It's pretty safe for most to drive on motorways at 80. The limit's 70, many drive at 80. Put it at 80, the'll drive at 90. 90 is not safe.

90mph on a clear, dry motorway with good visibility is safer than 65mph on an icy, foggy motorway.  However, 65mph isn't exceeding the speed limit.  Inappropriate speed is dangerous - that I agree with.  Someone going 45mph next to a school in a 30 zone should be locked up.  Same for someone who drives the same road well over the drink-driving limit.

Unsure about 'driving over drink limit is more dangerous' argument.

Just going off the figures.  More accidents are caused by drink-drivers than by drivers exceeding the speed limit. 

Maybe so, but plenty of avoidable serious accidents caused/contributed to by excessive speed.

Excessive speed can cause accidents.  An arbitrary speed limit with some pretty cameras doesn't prevent these accidents.  From what I heard on the news this morning, 13 deaths on Swindon's road in the past 12 months (I think they were the figures), and not one was down to speeding.  In fact the authorities there want to spend the money on policing the roads, rather than on ineffective and unnecessary cameras.

I feel my own driving is safer than most at speed (advanced driving, skid training blah blah) but I never exceed the speed limit cos I know the roads are full of nutters who don't undergo an intelligence test as part of their driving exam. You need to be able to stop in time when they pull out without looking.

You never go over 70mph on a motorway?

And what are you trying to achieve by doing 35 instead of 30 anyway? Gaining 5 exta minutes free time really so important?

I try not to speed in 30 zones.  Pedestrians, cars pulling out, cyclists, animals, etc., all share the roads with cars in 30 zones. I'm all for 20mph zones near schools and other similar areas.  Placing a speed camera doesn't make the roads safer though.  Neither do speed bumps, but that's a different story altogether.

[WYSINWYG]

One time I was doing over 90 on a motorway. I came round the bend and spotted the coppers sitting high in their little station, and slammed on the brakes, drifting past them at about 60. Gut wrenching feeling as they drift out, sharklike, into the stream of traffic behind you. 'What speed were you doing before you spotted us?' His laser caught me at 92mph =30 pound fine and 3 points. I've been told since by an authority on these matters that the immediate braking stood in my favour (I was speeding but alert enough to spot 'a danger'). I got the lecture in the back of their car: 'Do 80, we won't stop you; at 90+, you're just not in control'.
There was something about the incident that hit home, not sure what. Haven't sped since then, so it may have saved me from a serious accident.
Obviously their discretion and impact are not replicated by a Gatso pic and fine.
ps. I was at that time in possession of a radar detector 'to help me identify accident hotspots' 

I agree with what you say about there being greater dangers than speed alone. One of the major causes of road deaths is alcohol: some drink-driving, most drunk-pedestrian. Big difference in survival rates if you're hit at 30mph versus 40. The irony is that if you do get hit, it's better to have drunk a little (some kind of cerebral preservation), but that's a different story.

[thetank]

Sucking on coppers ( ) seemingly doesn't work

Paris Hilton can attest to this.