andy97

iTrader: (1)

Not really, AFAIK the "anti-camera groups" as you call them, use the government's own figures, or when they can get them, the raw figures from the police which in turn are number crunched by the government crews. So you are guessing where the data comes from then. If the anti-camera groups are getting their data from the (possibly) flawed government data, then surely their data is just as invalid. Simple logic there.




The anti-camera lobby are saying that the figures used are flawed, therefore the results and conclusions are flawed. The goverment and the camera safety partnerships are using this incorrect data to keep the spin about the need for more and more cameras. Due to the fact the the safety partnerships are self funding(business) they need to keep increasing the number of cameras and staff to increase their profits

Sprint Chief

Accidents down since speed cameras installed?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/w...re/4463667.stm

Fatal accident unfortunately Hit by a lorry, i.e. probably by a vehicle with a speed governer. Typical of accidents on that stretch, breaking the speed limit is not associated with the accident risk.

For those who want to know what the protest is about, the demands are listed here

Diesel

No no no! The answer is that speed kills and that it should therefore be banned or prosecuted out of ALL motorists...

Guys I admire some of your perseverance here, but when someone thinks a speed cam on a motorway is a good thing I lose all hope and rule them out of sane reasoning on the realities of traffic and driving. In fact I visualise them in a Micra with nose to windscreen, unaware that there is actually a fifth gear in the car yet thinking that they are the best and safest driver in the world as they NEVER, but NEVER, exceed an arbitrary life/death speed limit.

D

Ted Maul

surely there are better, more important things to campaign about than this?

Iain Young

And you are exactly the reason why we need cameras, and why my insurance premiums are so high. The M4 has definitely been a safer, calmer and generally more pleasant place to be since the introduction of the cameras.

And for your information I don't drive a Micra, but actually drive an sti and regularly do track days with it. There is a place for excess speed and driving like a nutter, but the public roads are not it.

Twigster Home

To be fair I don't think you can consider 80mph or even to an extreme 90mph an obscene speed mate. Especially as you have commented yourself on the fact that you think there is less traffic around than before.

Like I said, I have no problem with speed enforcement, in whatever fashion is deemed necessary, where it is needed (i.e. schools and residential areas etc). What I have a problem with is targeting a safe road (EU figures say that stretch is one of the safest in Europe), for no other reason than to make money.

Diesel

Iain you are so rude and ignorant jump to such regular uninformed conclusions - much like the camera partnership ‘big stick’ approach really.

I have no time or inclination to debate further with you [time is better served in practically fighting those with power whom share your simplistic blinkered views], but if you consider a motorist who has driven/ridden over 20 years without any accidents [even on track], an IAM badge on both car and motorcycle as well as a RoADA silver badge the reason your insurance premiums go up, then you must share the same absurd statistician as the camera partnerships.

Your argument [and those that you support] is increasingly discredited and increasingly invalid. After all you own an STi so you must drive like a nutter; I’m only in an estate and statistics PROVE you are the bespoilered menace not me LOL. Forget common sense…

PLEASE JOIN US ON THE PROTEST – ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.



D

pslewis

Iain is quite correct in what he says, which is quite simply:-

IF YOU DON'T WANT THE FINE, DON'T DO THE CRIME

The quicker we get speeding idiots off the road the better and its an excellent way to have 12 points and you're off the roads .... it gives the speedfreaks a chance to mend their ways, TWO chances in fact!

If they continue to break the law, on whatever road - in whatever road conditions then they deserve all they get

Just like with smokers ...... the speeders add to the tax take, reducing it for the rest of us - RESULT IMO!!

Pete

Diesel

Looks like you are in good company Iain - ignore me, many apologies

POLICING NOT FLEECING - SAFETY CAN'T BE MEASURED IN MPH

pslewis

Don't understand your issues Diesel - do you wish that shop CCTV cameras weren't there?

I would imagine that you are happy for the thieving chavs to get caught shoplifting?

The speeding cameras are the SAME thing, you KNOW they are there - if you get caught speeding in those circumstances then I would think you are daft at the very least .......................

Why not just drive at 70-80MPH past the cameras and live a happy life??

I simply don't get what the objections are?

For the record I think that the 70MPH speed limit on motorways should be 85MPH and strictly enforced.

Pete

Twigster Home

Except it doesn't go to tax like smoking does pete. It is apparantely used for police funds but quite where they are spending it I have no idea.

Besides, even if everyone else bites on that comment, I ain't gonna!!!

P.s for the record I never go above 80 on motorways, and certainly never breech 30mph in residential areas. My licence is clean, as is my conscience and we clearly have a difference of opinion. For what it's worth, I don't think we should be looking at motorways for this, but instead concentrating on the drivers who drive like idiots at clearly dangerous speeds in areas where children live and play, hogging middle-lanes, cutting us up on roundabouts and those who follow other vehicles too closely. I think prosecutions brought against people doing 80mph or similar only serve to widen the gap between police and public, not to mention create a growing trend of drivers who spend too much time looking at the speedo and not where they are going.

That will be the last I say on the subject unless direclty asked a question and I hope that people take the time to read my argument rather than winding each other up, as has happened from both sides of the argument in this thread!! lol.

Iain Young

Ah, here we go. Start to lose the argument so resort to petty name calling and insults. Nice to know the standard of debating, intelligence and common sense is up to its normal standard on here

I've not been at all rude. In fact you are the person being very insulting, arrogant and rude and are trying to turn the safety discussion into something far more simplistic than it actually is. Speed is a factor in accidents. It may not be the cause in all cases (as I'm sure it is not), but when the unexpected happens, the faster you are going, the less reaction time you have to escape the situation. Simple fact. I can't see why you people can't understand it. I can accept that it's safe to drive at 90mph when the road is empty, but when you are surrounded by other drivers doing the same, driving inches apart this becomes a different matter. Speed cameras cannot stop this bad driving, but they can help reduce the collateral damage if an incident does occur.

And why do you presume I drive like a nutter because I drive an sti? I've been driving 17 years, with no accidents, no convictions etc, and have been commended on my driving by members of the police that I have met. Doesn't mean I drive like a granny either though (at one time I got close to the lap record at Castle Coombe in a Formula Ford). So, a good bit of reasoning on your part that was...

As for the safest stretch of road, I'd like to know where you got that information from. Driving to work, I've seen at least 2 or three very bad accidents a week on that road, (a lot which I'd have been very surprised if they weren't fatalities). If that's one of the safest roads, I'd hate to try driving on a dangerous one.

Never mind. Giving up debating this with you blinkered folks now. I'm going to let you carry on with your law breaking now....

Diesel

>> For the record I think that the 70MPH speed limit on motorways should be 85MPH and strictly enforced<<

Although I am loathe to agree with you, I do - amongst swine there can be pearls That however does not mean I lamely accept the quango quo - how can you with that view; are you institutionalised or something? The fact that it IS doesnt not make it right. Will you kindly campaign for the 85mph rule and 3 points over 90? That would be a nice resolution to a difference of opinion. >>Dream on mode OFF<<

Iain; I will have no further response to you after agreeing with you that we both >>can accept that it's safe to drive at 90mph when the road is empty<<. If only those that govern and bludgeon us could... I hardly ever drive at this speed - but that is not really the point; is it - or should that be was it... Just saw this - relates appropriately to your speed argument, and very much in context as they cant go at more than 56mph http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/w...re/4463667.stm

SLEEP CAMERAS TRIAL TO BE INTRODUCED AS LONG AS THEY ARE SELF FUNDING

D

pslewis

I would campaign for the 85MPH rule - but, we differ in the other.

I would say, anyone doing 85-100MPH get 4 points ..... 100MPH and over get BANNED and 10 points and £1,000 fine

I would reduce speed limits around schools to 20MPH - with a £100 fine and 6 Points for anyone doing over 30MPH .....

Pete

Diesel

BAFFLED I can happily agree with all that - particularly the school bit.

BAFFLED how you can agree with the current pathetic quango driven un-policed status quo in such a lemming like 'roll over' way [but then we been here, so take that as rhetorical, please!]

CAMPAIGN FOR EFFECTIVE POLICING BASED ON REAL ISSUES

wacky.banana

Someone on here was looking for some evidence on the impact of speed cameras (or lack of it). Hope this helps the debate.

WB

http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/art...587166,00.html

Edmondo

Less cameras.....more cops imho

pslewis

Whats wrong with ...... MORE Cameras and MORE Police??

Pete

Tiggs

no good because behind all the bull**** is the fact that most ppl here want to be able to go faster than they should.

the M4 protest is a joke and joe public will agree.....a protest about being caught????????? nuts.

and all the ppl that attack my views........do so knowing that cameras WONT go....motorways WONT up limits to 90+ and in 10 years you'll have a GPS device strapped to your ****....so attack away if it lets you vent some anger at all that

Diesel

Tiggs - your view is that the law is the law and must be respected - fine, that is many's view.

Do you have any comment on the Times article above however? This shows you are less safe than previously. That concerns me a lot more than worrying if I get flashed at 80mph on a quiet dry motorway...

OllyK

If speed limits were variable and took account of traffic & weather conditions etc.etc and were set correctly in the first place, then yes I'd say we have a case for tighter enforcement against a speed limit, and possibly by using cameras.

I'd almost agree if all the current speed limits were reviewed in line with the 85th percentile (i.e. remove the limit completely and monitor the road for a while and then set the limit based on the 85th percentile rather than setting it artifically low to ensure that the majority of otherwise safe drivers are going to be fustrated travelling at that speed.

However, the current approach of focusing on speeding is not improving road safety and is a bit like trying to reduce violent crime figures by focusing only on people who drop chewing gum in the street. Yes dropping gum is an issue, but to focus on it in isolation is going to do little to reduce other crimes.

Leslie

I have been away for a couple of days and this is my first chance to reply.

My post had nothing to do with being caught for speeding. As I said, PSL is not able to grasp the real principle involved. This would fit in of course with how authoritarionism views the control of the electorate. Such people just want to have complete knowledge of what people do in their lives because that gives them power.

If you read my post again PSL , you will see that I was objecting to having our whole lives scrutinised and recorded by the authorities. This is epitomised by all these cameras, not only to check our speeds, but to make a note of our registration numbers so that our movements are known at all times. There is no excuse for all this nonsense. It is the action of those who have a lack of self confidence and feel that since information is power, then they need to have that sort of control over us. Identity cards are in the same boat. The Nation's security would not be improved since the crims will just forge them as they need them. The NL type statement that if you don't break the law then you should have no fear is typical and also inaccurate.

You have to realise PSL that the British just do not like this kind of intrusion into our private lives. Why should all our most personal details be kept on some register somewhere for all the authorities to study when they feel like it and when we have not done anything wrong anyway?

When it comes to speeding then the traffic police used to cope very well before and they also used to catch the real law breakers such as the drunks and those with no MOT/insurance etc. Don't say there are not enough of them, I saw an accident the other night when there were scads of police cars turning up at very high speeds along the hard shoulder and then standing around with thrir hands in their pockets with nothing to do!

I am on record some time ago for saying that I also feel that the speed limit on motorways should be increased to 85 MPH and with stronger penalties for exceeding that speed, especially for exceeding three figure speeds.

Mild excursions over the present limit on a motorway cruise are difficult to avoid and require concentration on the speedometer which is tiring and could be dangerous. Commonsense should be used in these cases and drivers should only be penalised for significant errors.

Les

pslewis

I don't see what the problem is, if you haven't anything to hide then nowt to fear and no objections should be defendable!

I am in TOTAL FAVOUR of ID Cards and EVERYONE having their DNA registered and stored .................. would make the conviction of criminals, pikeys, gypsys much, much easier (all the people who rely on their invisibility to commit crime and get away with it!)

Bring on BIG brother ... sooner the better!

Pete

mart360

Good !!

the boring old farts like you would be sectioned, and then culled to save wasting valuable resources..


M

lewis if he wasnt laughable he,d be serious

pslewis

I pay more into the society I live than you do, and have done for many years ... I think 'kiddies' like you should be culled, you are a drag on the country!!

Pete

Vegescoob

YOU WILL CONFORM.
The NL mantra.

pslewis

Nowt wrong with that at all!!

Pete

Vegescoob

If certain physicists in the past had conformed to the orthodoxy of the day you would not be a nuclear engineer.
My own father in law, who studied under Rutherford, for his Phd ,made a singnificant discovery but it wasn't accepted until years later when someone else saw the same.

Leslie

Well PSL is well and truly brainwashed in the NL mantra isn't he!.

I notice that his response to a reasoned argument against his peculiar ideals is just to say the exact opposite with no facts or proof to back up what he is saying.

Exactly the same as we have been listening to for some years now when his heros get caught out having claimed something great on their own behalf when it has all been demonstrated to be utter rubbish or at best yet another load of spin.

At least he seems to be admitting to the glorious coming of Big Brother, about the only truthful prediction he has made yet.

Les

Abdabz

Christ, I've agreed with Pete twice today!! I'm going to go to hell and burn for eternity!!! Spot on re this subject Pete... I emailed the organisers and questioned their sanity and purpose...

More cameras and more police - should do the trick.... Cameras to catch the speeders and police to catch other bad driving incidents and speeders too - excellent...

No campaign to increase limits for me - the **** who drive at 90 in 70's will just end up doing 105 in 85's...

The safespeed website is the funniest site on the net - well worth a look if you're feeling low