How many people actually agree or disagree to Speed Cameras?

Question

In some circumstances I do agree to them fully, such as outside schools, well known black spots, General roads of danger well known for speeding.

In most cases I think speed cameras distract me from the road becasue i am sometimes to busy looking for them, I don't speed in general and tend not to look at the guage and when I see a camera it panics me a bit, i just drive to what the condition of the roads are.

What are your opinions please?

I concider my self to be a safe drive and most of the time they do not display the speed limits so it is guess work. That is why i tend to drive to the condition of the road.

In some cases some speed limits are stupid. Not far from where I live the speed limit has been reduced to a 30 and 40. It was a 60 previous and the condition of the road still looks like a 60.

So far I have maintained a clean driving license and keep on intending to.

I hate it when they purely place speed cameras there for money. I have often seen them craftily hidden. And on the brow of a big hill. So you are bound to be going a little faster becasue of the increase in spead from rolling. The amount of cars that have to brake suddenly and casue havoc for other cars users just reaching the top is a nightmare. It is an accident waiting to happen.

I would understand if there was a big warning saying there was a camera just over the hill.

As for mobile speed traps, thats another story

SORRY FOR KEEPING THIS LONG

I think the Speed Flashers, The ones that Say 30 in big text to alert you work much better than speed cameras.

For the first time ever I had one flash up on a road I was not used to. I did not see the speed limit change becasue it was hidden by a overhanging tree.

It certainly made me think and I did not know where to hide my head when I looked at people these passers by.

Answer 1

They don't take into account the road conditions or the time (I know someone caught by police doing double the limit but he got off with a caution because it wasn't dangerous and it was 2am). Also yes they are a distraction.
Many people assume they are always 30mph - I nearly hit someone in Bierton a few weeks ago where it is 40mph because they slammed on their brakes to get down to 30 for the camera. Fools!

Answer 2

I don't speed (at least not intentionally), but people driving too slow often cause accidents and sometimes traffic is moving faster than the speed limit. If the speed limit, for example, is 70 mph, but all the traffic is going 80 mph, it can be dangerous to be driving below 70 (especially if someone comes flying over a hill and hits them). Does this mean someone should jeapordize their safety in order to not get a speeding ticket? No.
In Missouri, they are illegal (they can put up radar guns which show you your speed, but that is it), and only a small amount can go to local government; by law, anything gained from speeding tickets above that limit must go to the state (this was because of a couple of towns running well-known speed traps).
I would also disagree on the grounds that you have the right to defend yourself, and if you don't know there is a speed camera there, how can you tell the judge what speed you were driving when your picture was taken (I remember years ago there was television footage of radar guns showing stop signs "going" 70 mph!).

Answer 3

I drove over half a million miles in the UK between 1985 when I passed my test and 1998 when I emigrated. I still go back, sometimes more than once a year. So I get this time lapse view of how things change in the UK and I get to compare it to the many many miles I drove before.

For most of the 80s and 90s the main roads were actually lightly policed, I would actually go months or even years without seeing a traffic car on the M1 and A1 in the evenings when I tended to be there.

Driving at that time was all about watching what other cars were doing, or going to do, keeping a weather eye open for cops and making sure you were driving properly. Same thing on the roads in Scotland and through towns like St Neots and Bedford where I lived. The main road through St Neots used to be wide open and four lanes wide, I'd cruise through there a little over the speed limit and towards the middle of the road, keeping a careful eye out for the kids coming out for their busses or cycling to school.

In all my time driving in the UK and all those miles I only once got a speeding ticket, that was on a 30mph dual carriageway. 30? Oh well, that was 1988 or so.

Then came the rhetoric "speed kills" and the attack on motorists.

As the cameras went up and the police started operating more radar traps my driving changed. Instead of watching the road I started looking for police cars and evidence of photo radar traps. Instead of thinking where I was going I started thinking about where the next camera was. Trips into southern Scotland started to feel like a raid on hostile territory. On the A697 between Coldstream and the A68 they put cameras at every safe passing place. They did the same thing on the A68 from the border northwards. None of this distraction made the roads any safer.

In St Neots they 'traffic calmed' the Great North Road, what this means in practical terms is that they took the pedestrians that used to be a lane away from most traffic and brought them right up next to the cars. They also narrowed the road and made the lanes snake back and forth and this means you now have to spend all your time watching where the road goes and where other vehicles are going and you no longer have time to watch pedestrians.

An all the time more cameras. Each time I come back it seems a little more Orwellian. Green cameras, blue cameras, photo cameras, police with laser guns. And it's all more stress and more concern about things that don't help you not hit other vehicles.

I'm sad for many of you that you'll never have the relaxed driving experience I used to have in Britain.

Oh yeah, I hate speed cameras and traffic calming. I think it's all about taking money off you and pretending to be doing something worthwhile.

Answer 4

It's the nature of the beast. The question is similar to one posed in an ethics class. If you had absolute assurance that you would never be caught or punnished, would you commit murder? Rob a bank? The fact is, the only ones who complain about such cameras are the ones who break the law. They like to think of themselves as having done nothing wrong. But the truth is, they were breaking the law and then try and blur the facts by shifting the focus to "but it wasn't an ACTUAL police officer, it was a stupid camera..." Whether you agree with them or not, the laws are made with reason. Driving is a priviledge, not a right. When we accept a government issued driver's license, we agree to abide by the governing laws as they are posted. The beast is lazy and self-centered. We like to pick and choose.
I live deep in the outback type country-side. The limit posted at the head of my driveway (on the public road) is 30 MPH. The people who live at the opposite end of the road all complained and got speed bumps put in to slow traffic. It's a dead end road, so of whom were they complaining? They fly upwards of 60 passed my driveway. Yet, they complained about speeders at their end of the road. Hmmm. I sometimes sit out and hide in the bushes. When I see one breaking over the hill going that fast, I let loose a bright orange children's ball out into their path. I have children so it's a reasonable conclusion that they might actually be playing. So, who's the bigger jerk? Cameras? At every street corner, intersection and every major straight stretch of road!

Answer 5

I was driving along the other day and I came across one of the many speed cameras on my route. I looked at my speedo to ensure that I was under 30mph, then I looked up at the camera to see how near I was to it. I intended to repeat this until I was past it to ensure I didn't get flashed. As I got near the camera I noticed a cyclist out of the corner of my eye and managed to avoid hitting him at the last moment. It was probably the closest I have ever come to actually hitting a non car entity whilst driving, and I am pretty sure that if I hadn't seen him he wouldn't be alive today. My heart was certainly beating a bit faster afterwards.

Of course, had I not been distracted by the camera, none of this would have happened. I would have been doing about 32/33mph, seen the guy in plenty of time, moved around him and we both would have carried on with our day, happily and safely.

The problem is that speed cameras put £132 million* into the governments bank account, so now we have them, they are never going to take them away.

Answer 6

i agree with them
speed limits are there for a reason
if you want to drive without thinking about the limit, then apply to brands hatch, where for a fee you can drive around the circuit

the problem with fixed cameras is people know where they are and slow down just before them, and speed up again right afterwards

road traffic accidents are on an alarming increase, more cars on the road etc etc

no, i'm not an angel, i have been caught speeding too

Answer 7

Have recovered at least 124 cars which have been in an accident caused by speed cameras , two fatal , the same story every time someone sees the camera at the last moment brakes hard to slow down and gets tail ended . sometimes as many as four cars are involved , one fatal one a car swerved to avoid the accident in front of her and knocked an old lady over . a second one ran down a roadside stream and went through the Windows . Some safety i don't think. they are a stealth tax
nightmare with no regard for safety whatsoever

Answer 8

They cause more accidents and danger than they do good. It is important to keep speed down like you said in areas where people live and young children may be, however on major motorways a 40,50, 60 or 70 limit is an absolute joke. Anyone who uses the A40 into London or the North Circular will totally agree!

Answer 9

I can see the point of them near schools etc, but let’s face most of us slow down, pass them and speed up again so I can’t see the real point of them it's only when you go some where you don't know you have to be on your guard.

I also think there going to get people killed because you see it all the time when some slams on the brakes or some really impatient **** over taking at the camera just because the person in front has had to slow down rapidly because they have just realised there’s a camera there, what’s all that about?

Answer 10

They do make people drive slower but usually only where the cameras are. But the worst part of being done is that you get 3 points on your licence and you get banned if you have 12 points. You could therefore get banned for doing 32 miles an hour 4 times. Very harsh!!