Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 13:01

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Sky TV - news Chat SKYTV
PostPosted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 13:17 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7355
Location: Highlands
Chat re Swindon vote last night - it ran from 12:30 - 1pm (23rd Oct 08)http://news.sky.com

The following was the chat that occurred today. Reproduced here with permission from Lulu from Sky TV - thank you and we thank her for the opportunity to appear on todays event.

[qoute]
12:28
Hello, I'm Lulu, your host for today's chat. We're talking about speed cameras and their pros and cons. Joining me soon will be Claire Armstrong of Safe Speed, a group that lobbies the Government for safe driving, but not speed cameras and Hugh Bladon of the Association of British Drivers.

We'll be starting in a couple of minutes.
12:32
[Comment From hugh bladon]
Some will say that the decision is brave. It isn't - it's sensible. The only way to judge whether these cameras have been a success is to look at the number of people killed because there is no problem with interpretation as there is with slight or seriously injured. In Wiltshire, the number killed has been 36 in 2000 (the lowest ever figure), 52 in 2001, 44 in 2002 rising to 62 in 2007. That is during the speed camera era so they have failed completely. We need more police on the roads to catch the people who cause 94% of the accidents since, from the Dept of Transport's own figures, only 6% of accidents are caused by people exceeding the limit.
12:40
[Comment From Gary Newell]
I live in the North East of Scotland and I moved up here from the south of England. I swear the people here get their licenses in with their cornflakes because there is clearly no kind of driving test up here. I think speed cameras should be operated by private companies as opposed to the police.
12:40
[Comment From Steve]
Hi,
12:40
[Comment From Tony]
We need to be sensible here and maybe go back to when cameras where first installed and the reason for, I know since then its seen as a tax/easy money maker but go back and review the real issues why. Also if people are stilling being fined then they are still speeding!! lets not overlook that too. no speeding = no fines, plain and simple
12:40
[Comment From Steve]
hi,
12:40
[Comment From Katherine Barrett]
Could we have someone from a safety camera partnership as well as then it's more of a balanced discussion - someone who advocates them?
12:40
[Comment From Gary Newell]
I wish they would have cameras on all bends and hills and catch the people who overtake on them
12:40
[Comment From darren]
Speed cameras are a complete and utter waste of time as far as im concerned, people slow down and speed up betwwen them.. pointless
12:40
[Comment From Daniel from Belfast]
Whilst speed cameras might be a deterrant for the majority of people on the roads, is it not time for the actual speeds on most roads to be amended. I drive on an extensive number of 4 laned roads in Belfast whose speed limit is 30mph.
12:40
[Comment From Katherine Barrett]
Nationally 13% of all fatal casualties in 2007 were due to exceeding the speed limit (not the same as too fast for conditions)
12:40
[Comment From Daniel from Belfast]
Very rarely a speed limit will be amended unless it is outside a school or a public area with a high density of pedestrians, but many people hold the consensus that actual speed limits on certain roads are too low. Why should an empty motor way at 4am with no traffic be subjected to the same speed limit as during rush hour ?
12:40
[Comment From Katherine Barrett]
Sorry I should make that clear. I'm the Communications Officers for the Kent & Medway Safety Camera Partnership.
12:40
[Comment From joey]
Hi, are there general camera in the area, so they record any accidents etc?
12:40
[Comment From simon]
why do we rely so heavily on "Safety" cameras how can these make the roads safer when they can't detect drunk drivers, people driving erratically, poeple driving at night without lights on for example. these are all things that need real police to sort out not automated tax collectors at the side of the road.
12:40
[Comment From Terry G]
It would not be so bad if the monet raised was to go into imprving the safety of roads but it doesn't. It just goes in to the governments black hole.
12:40
[Comment From John]
From Experience drivers are more inlined to make up lost time when they reach the end of a controlled area. i have to drive through 3 different 20mph zones along with speed bumps, curved road obstructions and other traffic calming methods. i dont believe they are the answer and tax payers money could be better spent taking dangerouse drivers and uninsured drivers off the road.
12:41
[Comment From Steve]
I live in Swindon and I don't believe that dismantling the cameras will impact to the detrement on where I live, as most people in the town know where the cameras are located, and this takes away the element of surprise. There has been a significant increase in mobile police units recently which has caught out a lot of people and is therefore far more effective as a deterant. Good luck to the council for their strong convications and I hope that other councils will follow.
12:41
[Comment From Alan Blunt]
I'm told, 'speed kills'. This is clearly not the case, bad driving and human error is the main cause of accidents. Money would be better spent on cracking down on poor lane discipline, observation and indication. Cameras have no discretion like a human officer does and can’t catch badly driven cars under the speed limit. Like wise with the MOT, few accidents are caused by mechanical failure and other countries do well with out them. If the government really wants to cut road deaths then, why not abolish cameras and the MOT and replace them with more police and an annual driving lesson where people could be told where they might be getting lazy.
12:42
[Comment From Phil Slocombe]
Speed cameras worked when they were inially installed but now drivers tend to speed between them and then brake sharply before they reach a camera. All they have done is move the dangerous driving to different areas. What is needed is for cars to be fitted, by law, with a device that transmits their ID and speed so it can be pickled up automatically by roadside readers. Only if you guarantee that an offender will be caught will you stop the madness on our roads. The system would be far cheaper as fines could be automatically issued by computer. and furthermore the device could be used to track stolen cars.
12:42
[Comment From Peter C.]
Swindon has taken the bull by the horns and quite rightly done away with sped cameras. They do not save lives, better cars and breaking systems save far more lives than a speed camera ever did. The "average speed cameras" now being introduced are a menace to the saftey
12:42
[Comment From CK]
Trouble these days is that cars are becoming safer, more comfortable, quieter and smoother. This is simply detracting from the task at hand - driving. I believe that most accidents are caused by concentration - or lack thereof. Driving needs 100% concentration all of the time - everyone needs to be aware of and able to react to situations occuring on the roads. Speed is dangerous in inexperienced hands and you should be able to drive powerful cars according to experience.
12:42
[Comment From Guest]
Na, they dont work, i spped all the time
12:45
[Comment From John]
while were on the subject bus lane cameras are also another source of frustration. they slow down the traffic flow as cars are not allowed to pull around a turning car into the bus lane without being fined. the joke is with all this help busses are still late !
12:45
[Comment From london]
both my husband and I were caught speeding with the mobile speed cameras on a quiet bank holiday monday on a quiet road with no pedestrians anywhere. Suely that is a money making machine!!
12:47
[Comment From corky cat]
i have seen a camera on Bordesley Green Road in Birmingham, where traffic rarely gets above 10mph day or night, waste of money some of them!!!!
12:47
[Comment From Mark]
I live near the A14 which has had average speed cameras on it for quite a while now. Do they work? No becuase the road is so busy, nobody could speed if they wanted to.
12:47
[Comment From Peter C.]
ooops, hit the return button! to continue, are a menace to the safety of all road users, keeping your eys on the speedometer instead of the road is a recipe for a great more serious accidents.
12:47
[Comment From Chas]
As responsibile car user I resent these piggy banks/speed cameras they only serve to top up the governments coffers and do not stop speeding! The real issues on the UK roads are untaxed or uninsured drivers and dangerous drivers, only yesterday I was tail gated by a massive and indimadating Lexus 4x4 no more than a few inches from my bumper these are the type of fools when need off the roads not the road user that is 4mph over the speed limit.
12:47
Lulu:

Hugh, what do you think is a good alternative to speed cameras?
12:48
[Comment From Guest]
can i comment
12:48
[Comment From Gary Newell]
I believe most accidents are caused by boy racers overtaking each car in turn when there is a queue of cars, on bends, on hills, across double white lines etc. Too many films like Fast and Furious and chav songs showing boys racing... I would enforce anyone under 25 to have a 1.2 litre engine maximum
12:48
[Comment From Guest]
DONT SPEED, PROBLEM SOLVED!
12:48
[Comment From NON-SPEEDER]
DONT SPEED, PROBLEM SOLVED!
12:48
[Comment From Gary Newell]
Why do people feel the need to speed anyway?
12:48
[Comment From Katherine Barrett]
I'm not 100% sure of Swindon's casualty figures and crash data for their speed cameras, however I can confirm that there are no plans to remove safety cameras in Kent. At each of our 70 fixed sites there were 3 or more people killed or seriously injured in the 3 years before the camera went in, and 1 person for each of the 80 camera van sites. These figures have been reduced by nearly 60% in the 5 years since they went in so it would make no sense to remove them from this county. Overall the number of people killed or seriously injured in Kent have been reduced by 40% in the last few years and cameras have played a bit part in this. Each fatal crash costs £1.5 million so they are saving the taxpayer money. Katherine Barrett, Communications Officer Kent & Medway Safety Camera Partnership Phoenix House, 2 - 8 London Road, Maidstone ME16 8PZ T: 01622 656393 F: 01622 656394 www.kmscp.org
12:48
[Comment From darren]
speed limits were established in the 60s, when morris minors were new. my car can stop from 70 in a quarter of the time. time for a change.. i think so
12:48
[Comment From Claire from Safe Speed]
Our road Safety Absoltely depends on drivers choosing appropriate speeds all the time
12:48
Lulu: [Private Message to Claire from Safe Speed] well done, off you go! (Reply Privately)
12:49
Lulu: [Private Message to Claire from Safe Speed] Your comments will now be published automatically. (Reply Privately)
12:49
[Comment From corky cat]
strange how mobile cameras are always on dual carriage ways and not sleepy backroads where people race up and down and the police know about it?!@*
12:49
[Comment From Chas]
More police patrolling the roads would be a great start!
12:49
[Comment From Gary Newell]
Darren watch a small child run out in front of you and then see how fast you stop
12:49
Claire from Safe Speed: Camera's do not do anything for Road Safety and only inform you 2 weeks later of the 'offense' so how can that help safety?
12:49
[Comment From Mark]
It Makes you slow down for the 100 Meters with the speed camera thats it.
12:49
[Comment From NON-SPEEDER]
I understand people feel that speed cameras are a waste of money, but dont speed. The amount of people I see "racing" towards a speed camera, then braking last minute only to carry on speeding after the camera.
12:49
[Comment From arvids]
there is good practice informing drivers about cameras location on the roads. do you have such a servics in UK ?
12:49
hugh bladon: There is no real problem with using a camera where there is a known accident blackspot which cannot be rectified with engineering. Make the limit and the reason obvious, shove up a big sign and then if you get done, so be it. However, 7000 cameras around the country have brought the whole idea into disrepute. The other problem is not so much with the cameras but with the limits themselves. Many councils have reduced limits so they can be seen to be 'doing something' and then the limit is hopelessly inappropriate for the road in question. The means that limits no longer command respect. We are conceentrating on the wrong problem. It is the way people drive rather than the speed at which they drive that matters most. The speed only becomes important when there is an accident - so let's not have the accident in the first place.
12:49
[Comment From darren]
dont expect to speed
12:49
[Comment From london]
when you are caught you get £60 fine and 3 points on your license which affects you for four or five years on your car insurance and hence you are paying more over 5 years.
12:49
Claire from Safe Speed: Driver education is the key to Road Safety not money making schemes and targets
12:50
Claire from Safe Speed: and of course tells you nothing about how to select a safer speed the next time ...
12:50
[Comment From darren]
dont expect to see children on the M1. i dont speed in rural areas
12:50
[Comment From Chas]
My view is that is if big brother can entrap you by using speed measuring devices then I am more than willing to use anti-speed camera deflecting devices/ jammers. After all if they can use kit to top up the coffers than we should have the right to defend our income.
12:50
[Comment From Mark]
I don't understand why, if speed cameras are meant as a measure to stop people speeding (therefore have to be painted yellow) there are mobile speed cameras and the ones that are in the back of vans with a window on the back. If they aren't a money making opportunity then why do these vans exist? Could anyone explain? Or at least air their view?
12:51
[Comment From NON-SPEEDER]
correct, I also believe in making people go to speed awareness days etc, which would result in them losing that days pay from work.
12:51
Claire from Safe Speed: At accident black spots this is the last place you want a distracting camera
12:51
[Comment From Gary Newell]
I think making the likelihood of a ban more instant would be more of a deterrent. If you are caught speeding... 6 month ban.
12:51
[Comment From CK]
I agree with Claire - driver education is the key - the standard of driving on Britains roads is absolutely awful
12:51
Lulu:

Hugh, re driver education - what aspects do you think are most important.

12:51
[Comment From david jackson]
Since i was caught speeding and hit with 60 pound fine and 3 points ,i always follow the speed limit and it has deterred me from speeding for good,this proves cameras are important.
12:51
[Comment From Ian]
I agree that there is a place for cameras, when they are placed in strategic locations for reasons of safety ie. accident blackspots, near schools etc. NOT put in places where it is just for revenue ie on stretches of road where there are no dangers from, houses with children, elderly etc but simply unsuitablly low speed limits for the road where they serve no other purpose than being a cash cow!
12:51
Claire from Safe Speed: we naturally drive to the conditions ....camera vans do nothing to teach about better risk management on the roads
12:51
[Comment From Jason]
Some people actually drive too slowly causing a frustrated queue behind to overtake dangerously. I see cars driving at 40mph on motorways which cause trucks to swerve yet these people get away with it.
12:52
[Comment From Chas]
There should be more time given to pass plus courses to make users more aware of what sensible driving actually is.
12:52
[Comment From Alan]
Do speed cameras work? The one near me doesn't, not since I threw a brick at it! lol
12:52
[Comment From Guest]
I am surprized the government hasnt yet introduced an policy where drivers are required to re-take their driving test every 5 years (I know it would be a nightmare as the amount of people in britain) but it would be a money making scheme.
12:52
[Comment From london]
they don't tell you it costs that much when you are given the option to go on the course or have the 3 points on the license. totally money making
12:53
Claire from Safe Speed: we now have drivers unsure what to 'do' and how to behave on the roads ... so we are seeing effects as spon off from the 15yrs of cameras ...
12:53
[Comment From Chas]
lol
12:53
[Comment From Gary Newell]
Claire as much as I see your point people clearly know the rules when they murder someone but they still do it. Education works so far and then there has to be punishment
12:53
[Comment From Phil Slocombe]
The best alternative is a system that monitors a cars speed at all times and therefiore ensure offenders will always be caught. With modern technology this is fairly easily achieved by fitting cars with a device that transmits its ID and speed to roadside readers which are connected to a Police computer.This would not only stop speeding but be an aid in tracking stolen cars and in traffic management.
12:53
[Comment From BR]
Speed cameras should be made illegal...
12:53
[Comment From Al]
learner dirivers dont break speed limits qualified drivers do, education is something that occurs at learning level regardless what your taught people will always take risk, limiting engine size to new and persistent offending drivers.
12:53
[Comment From Guest]
How much is the course?
12:53
[Comment From Peter C.]
Claire, you are dead right, how many of us have driven past roadworks on duel carraigeway at the weekend where all the cones have been moved back, but low and behold the 30/40 mph signs remain along with their speed camera, the A30 at merrymeet in Devon was a classic example of this.
12:53
[Comment From Patrick]
70 mph on a busy wet motorway can be stupid, but 100 in good visibility on an empty road can be safe - cameras do not take account of conditions
12:53
[Comment From lisa]
Actually I think safety cameras are money makers and are there for that purpose only! If we are thinking about road safety...then that's another issue. One town in Germany (it's name exscapes me right now) discovered that drivers slwoed right down when they (the town) removed all road markings... accidents went down...the report concluded that motorists were much more careful when there was no markings! interesting thoughts!
12:53
[Comment From corky cat]
low speed drivers create confusion, aggression and i have seen them cause near accidents, is speed the real or is it the ability / confidence of the driver??? slow drivers are a nightmare!!!!!
12:53
[Comment From John]
To me the fundamental problem in this whole camera/no camera argument is the focus of the effort. Rather than focusing long term, looking at educating new drivers, making tests harder and more in depth, teaching road safety, the effects of speeding, the responsibilities of a driver, the dangers of different weather conditions, the repercussions on people who drive dangerously and the effect upon families of those injured and killed in road accidents, the focus is instead on the short term catch them at it, scare them into complying, make a quick buck speed cameras. Would it be so difficult to include motorway driving, driving in built up areas, driving in poor weather conditions and driving at night as sections on a staged driving test? Any initial cost outlay could be recovered in cheaper insurance premiums for the drivers that passed these stages. There is no thought for the millions of responsible drivers on the road, nor the fact that slowly but surely, all the enjoyment of driving is slowly being strangled out.
12:53
[Comment From london]
£100
12:54
[Comment From Craig]
Speed Camera's are a joke, they penalise somebody for going 2mph over the speed limit and yet there are people that go 150 on the motorway and get away with it!!
12:54
[Comment From corky cat]
ban slow drivers!!!!
12:54
[Comment From ashley]
i am actually a police officer, but i think speed cameras are a joke, people only slow down when they see it, then speed up again afterwards, they need to introduce a new covert style of catching speeders, that way, they won't know when they're supposed to slow down, and the fear of being caught will naturally condition them to slow down
12:54
[Comment From Paul]
People can talk about improving driver training (etc.) all they wish but if a static unit can prove people are breaking the law then that is a good thing - far better than wasting police time. This issue is bigger, whether people support speed limits, since it is difficult to support speed limits and not the imposing of those limits through whatever cheap means possible. If you're foolish enough to get caught, pay up.
12:54
Lulu: Ashley, that's an interesting comment. Do you think speed cameras could in fact be dangerous?
12:55
Claire from Safe Speed: yes but it ONLY proves that a law is being broken
12:55
[Comment From Gary Newell]
Why do you need to drive at 100 mph?
12:55
hugh bladon: There are only 2 sure ways to make our roads safer. We have to educate people to drive with more courtesy and concentration and we have to replace the cameras with the police aptrols who were so effective in the past.
12:55
[Comment From Chas]
There is nothing worse than being stuck behind a doodler on the Sunday drive
12:55
[Comment From Guest]
£100 > than paying a fine and 3 points on car insurance for the next 5 years!.
12:55
[Comment From Ross Robinson]
Cameras give the police an excuse to not police the roads properly. A person can apply common sense to a situation, (like doing 32 in a 30) a camera can't. What with cameras and traffic police, there are very few true police catching real bad drivers. Like people who sit in the middle lane on the m1, oblivious...
12:55
Claire from Safe Speed: that is all that they are good for and even then the proof is highly debataely as they are very error prone etc
12:56
Claire from Safe Speed: the police WANT to police properly and have the authority to enforce as they see fit and appropriate
12:56
Lulu:

Hugh, we've had quite a few comments from people suggesting more police patrols. Were they stopped because of financing?
12:56
[Comment From Paul Parkinson]
I am totally convinced that speed camera' s are purely money making devices.The only problem is, if this government took them away, they would only introduce a new pocket raiding scheme through another measure. This government is in debt up to it's eyeballs, and the thought of losingrevenue from speed camera's would keep Gordon Brown up at night!
12:56
[Comment From CK]
to get somewhere fast?!?!
12:56
[Comment From darren]
Ashley, again, this means getting caught without your kniowlege and then getting punished after the fact,
12:56
[Comment From Gary Newell]
maybe all cars should be fitted with tacos like large trucks are
12:56
Claire from Safe Speed: and we now have the police spending 80% (!!) of their precious time on paperwork !
12:56
[Comment From ashley]
they could.. if there is more than one car, travelling at the same speed and the car in front slams on the brakes when they see the camera, the car behind could consequently hit it or swerve out of the way and possibly into oncoming traffic
12:56
hugh bladon: Yes, the priorities were changed.
12:56
[Comment From CK]
Why do you want drivers to be looking at their speedos rather than the road Ashley? Cause that's what I do when I go through the average speed traps
12:57
[Comment From london]
you don't catch the real people who speed on the motorways but you catch the everyday hard working people on the little roads who have children and after being fined you kill us with the points on the license, Wheres the justice!! in this country we should work together to help each other . It is already bad with the fuel and food prices. When people make mistakes you should look at their history of driving and then judge
12:57
[Comment From Paul]
Proving you are breaking the law is half way there, better than a police officer being forced to do the same job. As you should fully know, speed cameras are calibrated to a high level of accuracy, if there is an error, it will be obvious.
12:57
[Comment From Emma]
speed cameras dowork in certain areas, ie though built up areas, and yes the drivers do speed up after they have passed the cameras but it works for that shortish distance then its a good thing. Only in certain, built up areas though!! ie outside of schools, shops etc
12:57
[Comment From darren]
a TWOC er will get 12 months ban and a speeder will get punished for 5 years, is that fair?
12:57
[Comment From Emma]
Taco's? MMm food on the go
12:57
[Comment From Ian]
variable speed limits could be introduced on motorways and certain other roads, how many times do you see someone travelling down the motorway at 80mph when it is bucketing down with rain, where on a clear day that would be perfectly safe.
12:57
[Comment From Gary Newell]
Why does it have to be the police who monitor speed? Maybe we could privatise this area of law enforcement with the police only required as a backup
12:57
[Comment From Grant Sonne-Clifford]
there is no solution....
12:57
Claire from Safe Speed: and when you look at a camera and back to your speedo it takes time and in that time you have maybe missed many things
12:57
[Comment From lisa]
Why dont motor companies just reduce the overall speed of an engine! and limit a vehicle to 60 miles per hour...for use on a motor way...of corse this doesn't stop speeding in built up area's.
12:57
[Comment From Paul]
The figure is 1/3 of police time on paper work, not 80%.
12:58
[Comment From Jason from Chigwell]
Hi, don'tknow if this has been discussed already but I have seen numerous near accidents where speed cameras are positioned. When you have the scenario of someone checking their speed or slowing down for the camera by putting their foot suddenly on the brake . the effects on cars behind having to slam their brakes on are very dangerous.
12:58
[Comment From BR]
The Police speed all the time.......
12:58
hugh bladon: Most cameras are not in built up areas - they are out on the open or semi-urban roads.
12:58
[Comment From CK]
We all need to be concentrating onthe road - if someone slams on their broakes when going through a trap - and you are looking at your speedo - there is an accident... - Why? Because people aren't CONCENTRATING on DRIVING
12:58
Claire from Safe Speed: there are always solutions ..
12:58
[Comment From Jon]
My brother was cleared of 2 speeding offences because the police hadn't had their cameras calibrated - I assume this is an expensive exercise. Are these things even reliable in measuring speed ?
12:58
[Comment From Chas]
CK, I completly agree these average cameras are quite simply big brother gone stupid! whats next a camera in my bathroom??
12:58
[Comment From Paul Parkinson]
Well done Swindon! I hope the results of a community without speed cameras will highlight to the British public how pointless these camera's are. I conceed that there are some danger spots that may require the use of one, but generally they are pure money making tools! Good on Swindon Council!
12:58
Claire from Safe Speed: proper intelligent research ....
12:58
[Comment From Gary Newell]
claire if you were going the correct speed you would not need to look at your speedo
12:58
[Comment From london]
yes well done swindon!!!
12:58
Claire from Safe Speed: no many measuring devices are fraught with errors
12:58
[Comment From Patrick]
Gary - how do you know if NOT looking?
12:58
Claire from Safe Speed: i have seen a car with it's engine off read 7mph !
12:59
Claire from Safe Speed: then the beam of the camera van lt2020 is also prone to errors as is the operator selecting the right area to target too and so on
12:59
Lulu:

I can't understand why some speed cameras are on way-out roads where there seem to be few problems.
12:59
[Comment From John]
Speed cameras are nothing more than a revenue generating scheme. The only cameras I can agree with are those that are positioned at red lights to catch the amber gamblers that consciously chose endanger other road users by jumping lights.
12:59
[Comment From CK]
I' ve seen a house going 15mph!!!
12:59
[Comment From Stuart, Orpington]
I find it weird how we're now allowed to call the Gatso's 'speed cameras' now and for so long they were known as 'road safety' cameras which were supposed to be installed at accident blackspots only.
12:59
[Comment From Paul]
And many are not, do not make blanket statements. Furthermore, cars UNDER-READ, not OVER-READ.
12:59
hugh bladon: Because that is where they are most likely to catch people!
12:59
Claire from Safe Speed: the correct speed for the road varies you should not need to look at your speedo
1:00
Claire from Safe Speed: the gov made a problem to then be seen to 'solve' that 'problem'
1:00
[Comment From Chas]
Gary Newell, are you having a laugh? is you body connected to the speedo. You need to look at the speedo to be certain of the speed you are travelling!
1:00
[Comment From london]
if swindon are successful all other cities should folow suit
1:01
[Comment From corky cat]
if slow drivers dont like fast moving traffic... GET THE BUS!!!
1:01
[Comment From lisa]
Why not remove all the cameras and increase the penalty for speeding when cuaght! make a few strong cases...thro them in jail or someting...and bingo...job done!
1:01
[Comment From ashley]
it amazes me to find out that some people still get caught by a speed camera after all the warning signs and the massive yellow box at the side of the road, i admit that sometimes on the road i speed, and i naturally slow down when a speed camera is there, but if i didn't know where the cameras were going to be, i'd be cautious at all times, making sure i stick to the limit.
1:01
hugh bladon: Yes, but there are still plenty of sneeky cameras hidden behind bushes and so on.
1:01
Claire from Safe Speed: there are only from the dft figures only 2% of accidents that are from excessive speed ....
1:01
Claire from Safe Speed: the 'speeding' 'problem' does not exist
1:01
[Comment From Andy]
as most people have said here they are ok in the right places....i have 9 points - and those were acquired by officers hiding in areas where there was no traffic and each time i was 5-7mph over the limit and the limit was 40....so from my point of view they seem like a cash cow...
1:01
[Comment From Patrick]
70 on speedo is likely to be 65(ish) real
1:01
[Comment From Phil Slocombe]
It is interesting how many commentators are blaming the police for this problem. Drivers are the problem and should be able to drive within the limits. Speeding like serious crime in Britain is caused by peoples attitudes as a result of poor upbringing. Like most of Britains problems , poor parenting is the problem and it is time that the law held parents to account for youth crime.
1:01
[Comment From Swindoner]
The removal of speed cameras in swindon is an experiment,. Not sure I like being used as a guinea pig by the authorities. What if its proved that the cameras do work and the death toll on swindon roads rises? Who pays the cost, ah yes the families of the victims of this 'experiment '
1:01
Claire from Safe Speed: but inattention, frustration etc does
1:01
[Comment From Katherine Barrett]
I'm not 100% sure of Swindon's casualty figures and crash data for their speed cameras, however I can confirm that there are no plans to remove safety cameras in Kent. At each of our 70 fixed sites there were 3 or more people killed or seriously injured in the 3 years before the camera went in, and 1 person for each of the 80 camera van sites. These figures have been reduced by nearly 60% in the 5 years since they went in so it would make no sense to remove them from this county. Overall the number of people killed or seriously injured in Kent have been reduced by 40% in the last few years and cameras have played a bit part in this. Each fatal crash costs £1.5 million so they are saving the taxpayer money. Katherine Barrett, Communications Officer Kent & Medway Safety Camera Partnership Phoenix House, 2 - 8 London Road, Maidstone ME16 8PZ T: 01622 656393 F: 01622 656394 www.kmscp.org
1:01
[Comment From Paul]
Is the point of a speed camera not to catch people breaking the law? Yes, it is.
1:02
[Comment From Chas]
Claire from Safe Speed- that is rubbish if you are travelling down hill and picking up speed you obviously need to ensure that you speed is below the limit so the mobile camera in the HEdgerow doesnt zap you.
1:02
[Comment From london]
also if you see a sign which says 40mph you must speed after that sign and it's funny how you are going down a hill approaching a roundabout which ssays 40mph and yes they want you to speed up as you are approaching a roundabout?????????????
1:02
Claire from Safe Speed: I was talking about all driving conditions and about SAFE driving
1:03
Claire from Safe Speed: not about 'camera safe' driving but you can of course check your speed when you see one
1:03
[Comment From john]
I feel that Swindon Council is right,if there is a case for cameras then why are they not at accident blackspots or well known speeding points.
1:03
Lulu:

I'm afraid we're going to have to wrap it up for today. It's been a lively chat. Thanks to all of you for joining in, and to Claire and Hugh.

See you tomorrow.
[/quote]

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.029s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]