I like speed cameras.

[Mondeo Man]

I must be one of the few drivers who doesn't have much dislike for speed cameras.

I don't see the problem with them.

They are, 99% of the time, obvious. You see one, if you are speeding, you slow down, you pass it, and you get on with your day. If you're not speeding, why give a toss?

Arguments:
Cameras are "cash cows". So what if they are? What isn't? Petrol is essentially a giant skimming operation. Brits are arseraped to an inch of their financial lives in every aspect: housing, tax, shopping, etc. Cameras at least puts the odds in your favour: if you still get caught, you deserve it, for being so blind on the road.

My point is, if you are an honest driver, driving within the limits of the road, you should be indifferent to cameras. Basically, why give a toss?

The problem is, is that to sell cameras, the public is offered some stark shit: without cameras, the roads would be strewn with dead babies. Maybe. But probably not. This is as vacuous as the tired arguments against the cameras.

Fixed cameras are actually the best option for sensible drivers (and sensible speeders) - the alternative, self limited cars, gps tracking, etc, would be far more invasive. This is actually the reason behind the general anti camera ideology , lazily pushed by the tabloid press and mainstream media, which the unthinking public jumps on the decomissioning bandwagon.

Within fifteen years, people will mourn gatsos, becuase at least they left the option of speeding before and after it's presence.

I've just never encountered a truly convincing argument against speed cameras. You can counter spurious arguments for cameras - dead babies strewn on the highway - but that's not actually an argument againt cameras, because it was never a valid reason for them in the first place (but hyperbole) . What I mean is, I might say you shouldn't spend this evening on the pc, but with your family, as the internet destorys family. You can no doubt offer an argument that suggest the internet doesn't destroy families. But that's not a reason to not spend the evening with your family: you've just discarded a crap argument, not the actually point.

[P.]

[Mondeo Man]

[Aff]

I have no problem with stationary cameras, like your said they are usually well signposted and easily visible, which does actually slow people down.

What I cant stand is plod in a bush, in a driveway or around a blind bend, in a van where you can only see the marking when its too late.

These seem to defeat the purpose. It should be to dissuade people from speeding not to catch them doing it.
____________________
Current Bikes:Honda 929RR Fireblade, Honda CD200 Benly (Project), Stomp Z2 140
Electric Bike Project

[CaNsA]

I see the points you are trying to make.

But how many Gatsos are badly placed or hidden in such a manner that even if you were doing 54 in a 50 you have to slam on cos you couldnt see it until you were right on top of it?

What about the stuff (i dont know where to find it) that shows Gatsos have caused more accidents than what they have prevented by causing people to slam on.

Gatsos are a cash generator IMO.
They are treating every motorist as a criminal that must be caught and punished.

[Mondeo Man]

PS if you disagree, argue the case. Don't just leave neg. feedback.

I'm open to ppl convincing me cameras are wrong. But as I say, I've never heard an argument that convincing.

Pro Cameras: The roads would be onvered in dead babes without.
Anti Cameras: No they wouldn't!
That's not a debate: that's trading black and white.

[Mondeo Man]

[Poseidon]

Where's the discretion? Okay, you may catch a couple of people speeding, but most people know exactly where the cameras are, so just speed between them.

Replace them with average speed cameras? You mean those cameras that indiscriminately record every number plate that passes them and logs location and direction etc. Thank you but no. I have committed no crime therefore should not be subject to being tracked.

Get rid of all cameras full stop and get more coppers in cars driving around on the roads.

I've seen some seriously crazy driving in my time (especially when I was spending 37+hours a week on the roads) and speeding was very rarely the problem. Tailgating, drink/drug driving, poor lane discipline, extremely unsafe loads, tired drivers, dangerous vehicles (I've seen so many people driving on a flat it's unbelievable)... and the list goes on and on. None of those will be picked up by a speed camera provided they stay below the arbitrary speed limits. Most if not all would be spotted by a copper in a T5.

It's gotten to the point now where I know exactly where mobile speed units sit on my commute. It means I can charge around at triple figure speeds with immunity as I know the local authority puts all its stock into the cameras and I can slow down at the appropriate points. If there was any chance that a volvo may be lurking around the next bend, I'd take more care, but as it's been 18months since I started this commute and nery a single traffic copper has crossed my path, I guess I'll just keep on endangering those kitties.
____________________
1977 Honda CG125
2002 Ducati Monster S4 (currently restoring)

[mr jamez]

The cameras are just the product of badly thought out road 'safety' policies looking at the wrong problems. So no I don't have a problem with a gatso somewhere where it could help prevent accidents by keeping speed down. The 'truly convincing argument' is that they are never going to solve all road safety problems, 'cos speed isn't the main factor in most accidents.

I'm pretty sure I got caught by a camera van this week. He has about a 150m line of sight. You can see around half of the back of the van as its tucked into a little side entrance to a field. The road goes from a 30 to a 40 so people start speeding up early as its a wide safe road.

That pisses me off, its only there in the morning catching people going to work as well
____________________
NSR 125F > BROS 400 > NC30 > BROS 400 > Trumpet S4 > '97 VFR 750

[iooi]

[Pete.]

Tower Bridge is a 20 limit to keep speeds down due to the number of tourists milling about. Very hard to spot the specs cameras at night.

You still get 3 points for driving across it at 30mph completely deserted at three in the morning though
____________________
a.k.a 'Geri'

132.9mph off and walked away. Gear is good, gear is good, gear is very very good

[jimspeed]

[angryjonny]

[Pete.]

Wasn't it more a case of the council kept the fine money but the government funded the cameras? They shut them down when the govt pulled the plug on funding.
____________________
a.k.a 'Geri'

132.9mph off and walked away. Gear is good, gear is good, gear is very very good

[jimspeed]

[EazyDuz]

I swear on top gear it was quoted that since the introduction of additional speed cameras, road accidents didnt actually reduce at all.
____________________
To shreds you say? Tss tss tss

[tbourner]

My issues is more with speed limits themselves.
A 40 limit is set at 40 all the way along a road, even around the blind bends where it should be 20, and on the long open straight where it should be 60.
A 30 limit is set on a road that goes past a school, even though it's a straight open road without a lot of houses. It should be 20mph between 7 and 9 in the morning and 2 and 5 in the afternoon, then 40 at all other times.
Both of these roads are still 40 and 30 respectively on warm dry summer days, and also when it's -10C after a week of snow.

Implementing a proper variable speed limit system would be a nightmare, but that's the only way speed cameras would really be fair. Otherwise it should be down to the driver to decide what's dangerous, and speed is very rarely the sole factor in that decision.
____________________
Trev, now a biker?
Looking for first big bike.

[colin1]

[Ariel Badger]

Birmingham Middle Ring Road is dual carriageway 40 mph except a stretch near me where it is still DC, no schools, old peoples homes or kitten sanctuarys but it drops to 30mph for a mile and there are two gatzos within sight of each other. All day......Flash flash flash, that is nothing to do with safety it is a con.
____________________
Bikers make great organ donors, get 115 on your licence today.

[Ariel Badger]

May I point out that the OP drives a Mondeo and is not able to break most speed limits with it.
____________________
Bikers make great organ donors, get 115 on your licence today.

[EazyDuz]

[angryjonny]

[Tenko]

Cameras make sense in places where people need to slow down, for example going into villages, before schools etc. If used this way they would be a positive contribution to road safety. Unfortunately they are not, and as a result people like a good friend of mine (allegedly Ossifer...) see fit to set them alight.

[-LG-]

[Poseidon]