Its a fact that 70% of places there are speed cameras accidents have increased. In Glasgow last month they put up Average Speed cameras and a guy staring at his speed clock hit in the car infront killing his own kid in the back seat in his wife. And now they just have changed the name to saftey cameras it makes me so angry i hate the traffic police all together :(
2006-07-26 04:03:46 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Cars & Transportation ➔ Safety
To an extent i agree. When you get speed cameras then you tend to keep watching how fast you are going to ensure you dont get papped more than watching the damn traffic on the road.
I think average speed cameras are worse than speed cameras. Its more a revenue thing than a safety thing a lot of the time.
Why dont the cameras get placed where they are needed? Like outside schools and that kind of place, not where they get the most money. Like on the Norwich ring road where the entire ring road is 40mph except a really small stretch which they have made a 30mph. The ironic thing is that on the next stretch of the ring road - there is a school, but naturally no speed camera there is there??? Grrrrrr.
2006-07-26 04:13:38 · answer #1 · answered by Moi 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Not sure they CAUSE anymore accidents but you mention the fact that people act erraticaly around them, so that could indeed cause accidents to occour.
Heres a suggestion to the authorities.
If you GENUINELY want people to slow down at a certain spot, BE MORE OBVIOUS! If you just want the revenue collected from these easy targets, carry on hiding in the bushes and in the shadows.
Heres another little known fact
Safety camera vans have a "code of conduct" to aim for. But in reality, they can get "evidence" ANY way they want. Only if this is challenged in court will the operater of the van be penalised. The penalty? They arent allowed to claim back their "fee" for the operation. However, even if you can prove they got their evidence
outide their guidelines, this is still no defence and the (your!) conviction will stand.
It is the only "crime"in the country where,by definition, you have no defence. Ever. The Highway Code was in the first instance a set of laws to protect inocent travellers from Highway Robbery! How things have changed.........
If I commited a serious crime, say a multiple murder with a couple of rapes thrown in, the crown prosecution service had BETTER make sure the do it all by the book or I will walk. And the evidence must be good too..... If I momentaraly exceed the speed limit, I will be dealt with without any mercy or extenuation.
Just remember this. If you are caught speeding, ask to see the photograph because you dont know who was driving. Admit nothing and ask the agency in question to decide who to prosecute from the list of possible drivers that may have been driving that day. Two other drivers is enough. The crappy systems they use are only focused at 100 feet and glass is reflective.. More often than not they will drop the case.
2006-07-26 11:54:39 · answer #2 · answered by andy2kbaker 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Actually, that is a myth perpetuated by the large group of people that hate camera traffic enforcement. Here in Arizona we had a very dangerous stretch of road upon which were several fatalities every month! The city put in speed cameras and notified people with signs. Several tickets were issued and people started screaming. In the end, people started slowing down and the overall drive became much faster because traffic was not stopping and starting.
Speed is the number one traffic violation in the US, hands down. We could never have enough traffic officers to catch even a small percentage of the people who are speeding, but cameras are less expensive, more accurate and work 24/7...
Arizona also makes extensive use of red-light cameras, and red-light tickets and accidents have decreased tremendously. I teach traffic classes, and my average class size is about 40 people. 2 years ago, I would have 10-12 red-light tickets in a 40 person class. Now I have 5-8. That is an incredible increase...
And David, you did have a choice to avoid your accident. You were obviously way to close to the person in front of you if you couldn't avoid hitting them. Why would you ever have to speed up to avoid hitting the person in front of you? Makes no sense...
2006-07-26 16:30:43 · answer #3 · answered by merigold00 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
An argument that speed cameras cause accidents falls apart on 3 counts:
1) Speed cameras enforce speed limits. Some people drive over the limit and only slow down when they see cameras. The fact that accidents happen when these people slow down can only be blamed on the fact that they were over the speed limit to begin with.
2) Even if someone is to slow down to avoid being caught by a speed camera, the fact that they slow down dangerously is entirely their fault. People know that as soon as they get on motorways and busy roads, there is everychance that there will be cameras. And the presence of cameras are signposted well in advance. If you do choose to speed, why drive at such a high speed as to have to brake dangerously to get back down to the speed limit?
3) If someone slowing down in a reasonable manner gets hit from behind, it is not for the fact that speed cameras are there. People shouldn't tailgate. The 2 second rule is there for a reason. If the other guy is to slow down for any other reason and someone is to tailgate him, the result would be the same.
Speed cameras are a fact of life. Like it or loathe it, live with it. If you don't want to be caught, keep to be limit.
2006-07-26 11:30:58 · answer #4 · answered by k² 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
yeah your spot on, i drive up to aberdeen a lot and there is one area which is 50 mph around a juntion and while i'm looking at the speedo i'm not looking at the road. also do you find the mobile cameras are in a place where they know people will go that bit faster due to the type of road, ie I was leaving aberdeen a few years ago and was on a dual carrageway. the speed is 40 mph but as i knew the road was going along a big winding corner ad the speed limit would go up to 70 mph i put my foot down, just around the corner just before you hit the 70 mph bit there were the bastards waiting with the speed gun and i got 3 penalty points and a £60 fine but do you find them as you enter the built up area entering into the city? NO cos they know thay would not make any money. and what happens when thay speed, i was just checking my car for my work to see what speed it would do, or the top copper says he was late for an important meeting and he driver was resposible even though he told him to put his foot down, cunts.
2006-07-26 22:51:54 · answer #5 · answered by littlebrother1961 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Where did you get this sterling piece of evidence?
For a start, there a re prompts to reduce your speed long before the camera,
second what a moron for not looking at the road, you can tell by glancing quickly if you are doing less than 30, was he trying to be clever and go 29.9 mph.
Get the swine who talk on their phones, park on junctions and otherwise endanger public safety.
FYI, the easy wasy to avoid detection by speed camera is not to speed!
2006-07-26 11:07:38 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
why is it that the motorist always is in the firing line for the police, we know speeding is a problem but so is theft, murder etc etc yet they are not patroling the streets looking for these people, yet the motorist who could be doing 3mph over the limit is persecuted yet again. Get rid of the fancy police cameras and put the police back on the beat then maybe we will see a decrease in other crimes
2006-07-26 12:14:50 · answer #7 · answered by craig j 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I feel that speed cameras do make us more wary of our speed but the problem with this is that driver are more "heads down" looking at their speedos. Head up Displays or audible warnings about speeding my help to prevent accidents caused by this. Speed cameras cannot stop lunatice or tailgaters though, it tis those who drive unsafely that need to be caught.
2006-07-26 11:07:01 · answer #8 · answered by ehc11 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They are a menace. You are at 30 MPH near a school and pratting about checking your speedo. It's usually in an area with other stuff like traffic lights, keep left signs and white lines. parked cars and kids playing chicken.
I don't know why more kids aren't killed. It's just to raise cash - why not just screw more money out of us in petrol tax - and stop wasting it on cameras and traffic calming bloody humps and ramps.
2006-07-26 12:01:42 · answer #9 · answered by Mike10613 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes I do believe this too!
It goes to show the idiot behind is also watching the rip off camera rather than the blazing red tailights on the rear of your car.
Wonder if anyone yet has taken the local council who installed the offending party (Camera) to court after all in most shunts its the contributing factor isnt it!
2006-07-26 12:57:38 · answer #10 · answered by Steve 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋