Speed cameras ....

[pgarner]

slower speeds will reduce fuel consumption and CO2 emissions

can i ask how this works i live in the country and driving through a 30mph town doing 30mph i achieve only 31 -33 mpg (from a 1.8t producing 200bhp) yet out on the open road i regularly drive at around 70mph and return 37-42mpg
explain

lets see if i can get an answer

[waynne]

I'll second HDI for transport minister.

I've never really got the speed cameras as a safety thing. I can't help but think that most people are missing the point of the accidnet statistics. The fact is that there are so many accidents on a certain road is because there are so many cars on the road. Simple law of averages. If you compared the number of cars and accidents today and obtained a ratio then compared this with to say at 20 years ago I'm sure that the accident rate would be substantially reduced. Our cars today are safer both for the occupants and for pedestrians and due to congestion road speeds are reduced inner urban areas and due to congestion.

So to make safer roads, we need to reduce the number of cars using them and not claim that accidents are due to speed.

[kai_mitsurugi]

Originally Posted by Pixel

"Everywhere" would be an understatement. A simple journey from my home to University which is about 5 miles takes me through 5 (FIVE) speed camera's.

Yep same here Pixel. I pass 5 speed cameras on my way home from uni too let alone spots where camera vans are regularly sited. A good idea would be to put a speed limit sign on the camera itself or maybe just before. Quite a few cameras (including where the vans are put) in the Swansea area are in areas where the speed limit is not made clear. As Pixel may know they do this on the Valeo road in Gorseinon, my home town

[waynne]

Its not a bad idea to have the speed limit on the camera itself. I have nearly been caught out on holiday in unfamiliar areas where the speed limit signs left a lot to be desired.

[HDi fun]

I agree, what's the point of enforcing a limit that's ambiguous. If it's that unimportant then raise the limit and stop the needless application of cameras.

[pgarner]

1 example ( and possibly the only one ) where a speed camera worked, in this case the vans, was on the M9 the, now, ex chief police driving examiner for scotland was caught doing 118mph
he pleaded exceptional circumstances as he was trying out a new route for training. now he never put any paperwork in as he was on way to pick up a mate
result banned judge said there was no way he could be let off for being near twice the limit only downside is that he is now living off his £1800 a month pension and only banned for , i think , 3 months still nice to see the police cant get away with it for a change

[Prince]

Now how will he go and catch all those rapists and murderers? Oh wait...the police don't bother with real crimes! The only crime a rapist or murderer will get punished for is speeding!!!

[pgarner]

ohh no this was just a copper who examined the police to make sure they could drive cars can expect then all to sit behind desks all day

best thing was he claimed he needed to keep his driving license so he could find another job

[old-git]

Originally Posted by Prince

Now how will he go and catch all those rapists and murderers? Oh wait...the police don't bother with real crimes! The only crime a rapist or murderer will get punished for is speeding!!!

Murder in UK March 2006 - March 2007 - 755 (to the best of my knowledge)

Road deaths for same period - approx 3600

Time spent reducing deaths on roads is much more productive in preserving life.

I certainly wouldn't want my daughter killed by a speeding idiot because the police decided that catching one gang member who killed another (IMHO let them get on with it) was better than trying to keep some sort of control on our roads. It is bad enough now in some places (Basildon), but can you imagine the chaos that would ensue if there was no chance of getting caught? It would be like living in a war zone (some would say like Basildon!)

Time to duck methinks

[fingers]

Originally Posted by old-git

but can you imagine the chaos that would ensue if there was no chance of getting caught? It would be like living in a war zone (some would say like Basildon!)

Time to duck methinks

Basildon would be a bit like Braintree then. The carpark to freeport shopping village is a lovley place to be in the evening.

I see speed cameras as a good thing because it saves me paying extra TAX to employ extra traffic cops to catch speeders. I also see them as a way of weening stupid twat drivers off the road. They are always in the same place, they are always sign posted to warn you, and if that doesn't make things easier for you they are painted bright yellow so you cant miss them! If you still get caught then I'm sorry but your a bit stupid and so un-observant or blind that you probably shouldn't be driving anyway.

I have lost 2 very good friends, seen one hospitalised and my sister lost a boyfriend because of idiots who were going to fast and/or were too un-observant to see them.

I find the only people who winge and moan about GATSO's are the spanners who get caught by them. Slow down, and there's no problem is there? Beleive it or not, speed limits are ther for a reason and not just to irritate people or be broken. Thats what the track or 1/4mile is for.

Rant over.

[Prince]

You definitely give a young driver something to think about.

[old-git]

Good one fingers, couldn't have said it better myself.

The unsolvable problem, as I see it, is that when you are young and your balls have just dropped, you think you are brilliant, can do no wrong and know everything. Anyone over 25 is past it and should be in a home! I know, I can remember being like that. I used to race on the highway for money back in the 70s. You feel in perfect control of your vehicle, and don't give a thought to other road users or pedestrians. It's only when you get older, have kids, see friends killed, that you realise how bloody stupid you were!

Young people will always want to speed and there is nothing, short of possibly castration, that the authorities can do about it other than try to keep the lid on it.

Restricting young drivers to small engines won't work because they can still be driven at speed, just takes longer to get there. There is even the argument that driving a low powered car flat out is more dangerous than a powerful one being driven at half chat.

The only way I can see of preventing 17 - 19 year olds killing themselves and others is to raise the driving age to 20 (ignoring the fact that some will still drive).

[fingers]

Originally Posted by old-git

The only way I can see of preventing 17 - 19 year olds killing themselves and others is to raise the driving age to 20 (ignoring the fact that some will still drive).

I totally agree. I drove like a tit untill I nearly killed myself in my Capri when I was 21. I also think driving licences should be renewed. It all very well having laws stating a car should be checked every year to ensure its roadworthy, but what about the driver? I know for sure I wouldn't pass my driving test again without refresher lessons first.

[Prince]

Originally Posted by fingers

I also think driving licences should be renewed. It all very well having laws stating a car should be checked every year to ensure its roadworthy, but what about the driver? I know for sure I wouldn't pass my driving test again without refresher lessons first.

I agree partially with that...you should have to re-take your test when you get to a certain age...but re-taking your test every few years would not only cost a lot, but it would p*** everybody off! We already have to pay enough money for driving as it is...why should we pay for refresher lessons and another test (or tests)! I'll admit, I wouldn't pass my test if I was forced to re-take it tomorrow...but I've already done the hard part!

[fingers]

Originally Posted by Prince

why should we pay for refresher lessons and another test (or tests)!

The next time you are at a round about, watch all the people whe havn't a clue what lane to be in or when to indicate and I think you will find there is no specific age group. Why should old people be targeted for re-tests/refresher courses when you agree yourself that you wouldn't pass a tst again 1st time? Surly if you feel your driving skils have lapsed below the standard you need to gain a licence then you need a refresher?

All it would need is you take apracticle test, if you fail, brush up on what you failed on and re-test. This would dramatically reduce the amount of un-capeable/high risk drivers on the road and should in theory reduce insurance premiums.