There seems to be a big problem with the whole issue of speed detection equipment. What is the problem....why do people feel so hard done by. If you obey the speed limits then you should be glad thet there is a system in place to adress those who don't.
Or do you not understand the differance in injury in relation to the speed? Speed limits are there not to reduce accidents....they will happen, but to reduce the sevirty of the injury sustained. Does this not make sense
2006-10-26 12:38:19 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Cars & Transportation ➔ Safety
Perhaps you do not understand that in the same time the number of speed cameras has tripled, the number of fatal accidents within half a mile of a camera has doubled.
Now how is that making things more safe?
2006-10-26 12:42:15 · answer #1 · answered by Mr Glenn 5 · 2⤊ 4⤋
because they penalise the unwitting. I try to stay within the speed limit although there are many crazy speed zones here in Ireland where the limit is just plain wrong but I may still get done for being a couple of KPH over the limit in front of a camera on the motorway or suburban dual carriageway whereas the boy racers who tear around at super high speed and drive aggressively know where the cameras are and slow down in front of them before accelerating again. I've nothing against highly visible cameras but hidden cameras are just bad and a money making scam.
If government was serious they would speed limit all cars to the national limit but they don't.
2006-10-27 03:17:48 · answer #2 · answered by questioneer 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't mind speed cameras at genuine accident blackspots wher accidents are known to have been caused by excessive speed, but the porblem lies in cameras placed on safe stretches of road where people may creep over the speed limit with no danger, and even hide the cameras, asimply as a money-making exercise for the 'camera' partnerships.
And look at the statistics.for accidents. Accidents went odwn every year.. until 1995, when cameras were introduced, and statistics remained the same, despite increasing vehicle safety standards and more rigerous driver testing.
Basically, some police forces see speed cameras as a replacement to human traffic patrols. While you can be convicted for driving 33MPH on a 30MPH stretch, you can escape conviction, driving on the same road, drunk and high on drugs, and swerving all over the road, as long as you're under the speed limit.
To sum-up, they're more anal on speeding, but they've forgotten about everything else. Of course,a speeding driver is more profitable.
2006-10-26 13:39:44 · answer #3 · answered by mr_carburettor 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I respect cameras that are placed in areas that warrant it.
People get most disgruntled (me included) at the cash generating scamera vans that park on deserted motorways.
The speed limit is a joke by todays standards on major roads. We need to have vairable speed limits.
My car has ABS, Vehicle Stability Assistance and Braking Assistance built in. I can stop on a coin and can't loose control of the car if I tried.
My neighbour got caught by a van the other day where a speed limit went from 40 to 30 and back to 40 all in a small stretch of road where there were no houses, schools or any sort of danger.
He's about 55 years old and is no boy racer. £60 fine and 3 points!
2006-10-26 12:48:37 · answer #4 · answered by Nathan 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Because a speeding motorist is an easy target for doing very little wrong, add the fact the current speed limits are too low in some areas and you have a recipe for easy tax collection
A drunk/drugged up maniac driving with no lights on at night but within the speed limit would have no problems but is far more dangerous than someone going a bit faster than some prescribed limit.
2006-10-26 18:19:46 · answer #5 · answered by Martin14th 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I agree. And with the arrival of SPECs cameras a lot of people are going to find themselves on the receiving end of a speeding ticket. As SPECs use two cameras some distance apart to measure the average speed of a vehicle over a greater distance i think this will cut down on the drivers who slow down for the camera and then hit the gas as soon as they pass the camera. there's no way of cheating these new cameras. The attitude towards speeding needs to change. It's not a motorists right to drive as fast as his car is able. By signing his UK driving licence he is essentially agreeing to driving in accordance with the rules that allow him to retain the licence.
The points system is fair. Minor speeding incurs only minimal points and allows the offender to retain their licence. Serious or repeated violations are the only way to get disqualified from driving. Once you've seen a pedestrian disembowelled by a truck as I have you begin to understand the significance of the speed limit.
2006-10-26 12:48:56 · answer #6 · answered by THE BULB 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
It would make sense if you could spell "difference" and "severity", realised that there are only three points in an ellipsis (...) and could use a question mark after questions.
Despite that though, I agree. If you speed, you get a ticket. If you don't you won't. What's to complain about? Oh I know - perhaps because most people are impatient b@stards and can't possibly drive any slower 10mph above the limit?
2006-10-26 12:53:27 · answer #7 · answered by Andoo W 2 · 1⤊ 3⤋
They are irritating in some places because the speed limits are too low. However, in the vast majority of cases, I agree with you, people should stick to the legal limits, and if they can't do that, then at least quit whinging when they get caught.
2006-10-26 12:47:36 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Yes this makes perfect sense, but it's wrong for 2 main reasons.
Firstly speed limits set are very generalised, and at times it can be more dangerous to obey them, e.g 30MPH limits on a 3 lane carriageway. If your doing this speed you may as well be a brick wall built in the middle of the road, and the reason brick walls aren't built on roads is because its dangerous.
Secondly, if people didn't express their freedom of speech, didn't use it, we'd have a situation where the person in charge felt they could do whatever they like and nobody will challenge him, in other word we'd lose democracy in favour of dictatorship.
Adolf Hitler is a perfect example of this happening. A man VOTED into power, who stood up for his people and re-gained their independance, but because nobody questioned him he gradually got rid of their ability to question him and the power he developed turned him mad, as it would any human being.
2006-10-28 14:35:52 · answer #9 · answered by Bealzebub 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Beacuse they have to slow down and show consideration for others on the road.However the minute the driver with a passion for speed realises the camera's are gone, (s)he will put the foot down again!
2006-10-26 20:59:31 · answer #10 · answered by Mc D 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
people hate speed cameras because their unfair,if the municipality wants to give me a ticket i feel they should have to physically witness me breaking the law because if they don't i will get out of the ticket on technicalities like was the radar properly calibrated (which a radar guns required to be before each use)the only speeding tickets i've had stick is when an unmarked patrol car has snuck up on me and paced me so to hell with the traffic cameras
2006-10-26 18:13:59 · answer #11 · answered by t.j. a 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋