Speed cameras good or bad?

wyze

Tuner
Points
70
Location
Kent UK
Car
Polo 1.1
What do you think about speed cameras. I really hate them especially since I got flashed the other day so Im waiting to see if the fine comes through. Do you reckin I can get off it somehow?
 
I despise speed camera's. There purely there to generate revenue for the piggy wiggies! Annoying as it is a lot are just in foolish places. There's that many of them now though that any time i see a long stretch of road i'm always uncomfortable with cranking it up a notch as i always assume there'll be a camera hiding somewhere.

If you're ever unsure about whether or nto speed camera's are a good idea, simply watch Top Gear as there was an episode when Clarkson discussed them and listed off the facts that there had actually been more deaths WITH the speed camera's, than before they were put up. Madness and a complete waste of time! :twisted:
 
I hate the cameras. They're yet another Nanny state icon. They allow Mr and Mrs Self Fuckin Righteous to drive as badly as they've always driven on open, safe and de-restricted roads. Naturally, they rarely exceed 46mph, that being the speed that the Honda Civic; Vauxhall Astra etc can just about maintain in fifth gear without stalling. Curiously, they maintain the same 46mph in towns (where 30 is the posted limit). And still in 5th gear.
 
Speed and the use of speed cameras is another one of those things that instead of looking at it properly, they've just gone for a technology quick-fix. This in fact is having an adverse affect not only on driving safety but also on all manner of vehicle crimes.

Sure, I'm all for cameras, and adequate warning and slow down signs outside schools and in built up areas where 30 (and in some cases 20) mph speed limits should be strictly enforced. But there are some glorious, wide open roads with stupidly restrictive speed limits - never been an accident on them and yet they're still peppered with speed camaeras, just to make some quick cash.

Yes, there are roads that need lower speed limits because they can be dangerous; but there are also a lot of roads that in this day and age could have higher limits as well; some 40 roads that could be upped to the national speed limit. I also think that the national speed limit could be higher these days too, but I'm sure that's far too much fun for the government to allow us to have.

At the end of the day, stop controlling us with machines, put more flesh and blood police officers on duty and use some bl**dy common sense
 
They have started springing up on French roads as well now. Mainly motorways but they will spread like the proverbial plague.
 
blacklineninja said:
Speed and the use of speed cameras is another one of those things that instead of looking at it properly, they've just gone for a technology quick-fix. This in fact is having an adverse affect not only on driving safety but also on all manner of vehicle crimes.

Sure, I'm all for cameras, and adequate warning and slow down signs outside schools and in built up areas where 30 (and in some cases 20) mph speed limits should be strictly enforced. But there are some glorious, wide open roads with stupidly restrictive speed limits - never been an accident on them and yet they're still peppered with speed camaeras, just to make some quick cash.

Yes, there are roads that need lower speed limits because they can be dangerous; but there are also a lot of roads that in this day and age could have higher limits as well; some 40 roads that could be upped to the national speed limit. I also think that the national speed limit could be higher these days too, but I'm sure that's far too much fun for the government to allow us to have.

At the end of the day, stop controlling us with machines, put more flesh and blood police officers on duty and use some bl**dy common sense

I'm with you on this one mate. Yes ok, have them in the 20 30 mph areas near schools etc where they are needed. But no on roads where no accidents happen and are perfect for opening ya baby up a little ;)
 
I never really had a problem with regular speed cameras as I've fortunately never been in that much of a hurry that I couldn't slow down in the speed camera areas.

*However*, Average Speed Cameras are just plain annoying. The A2 and M4 are peppered with them as well as many other areas and you don't know if you're caught until a notice arrives in the post. They do work on numberplate recognition, which is hardly the most accurate identifier so it's a plus, but otherwise they're just annoying. I'm pretty sure that if the gaps between the cameras were wide enough, no one's average speed would be above 70mph because of traffic and road works. I drive from Bath to Kent on a semi-regular basis and I've never managed to travel the 160 miles in less than 2:30hrs. I really hate average speed cameras.
 
That's a very good point. Go and pick a nice safe stretch of road where it's safe to make brisk progress (eg. pass lorries, towing vehicles etc) and then install an average speed kit over, say, two miles. You'd make a mint.

I'm interested to know how evidence from such cameras stacks up in court. Has it been tested? In my opinion I think it would fall over as there is no actual photo of the offence being commited. If the start/end cameras took a piccy of your car/bike and it was below the speed limit I can't see how a mere calculation can be used as evidence for a conviction.

For example: distance between the cameras...

1. Was the tape measure or other device calibrated?

2. When?

3. By whom?

4. Did that person have accreditation to calibrate it?

See my point?

Anyone fancy a sprint along the A43 in Northants to test this?
 
ohhh how much i love living in dumfires and galloway were very lucky not to hAve any fixed cameras only the mobile 1's which are operatored by real police officers.

the advantage of this is that they can only sit in 1 place for 5 mins tops by that time everyone is warning each other

as for the specs cameras they have to be the biggest pain as they still work at night unlike gatsos so when you go up the motorway at night. ad it deserted you have to stick to 40 mph
 
France use speed cameras and warn you with a MASSIVE sign abuot 1/4 mile in advance - this is not sneaky and help reduce speed on blackspots. In the UK we have warning signs all over the place so people can start to ignore them and revenue is generated!

The limit on long motorway stretches should be raised to 80 in the dry and reduced to 65 in the wet. France have this sort of system and few people were going much over 80 - it was quite interesting.
 
Cam the ones facing you, catch you?

Ive been told they cant because the flash would blind you.

My theory is, either it wont catch you or just wont use the flash?
 
pgarner said:
common mistake gatsos (common 1 with big yellow box ) can catch you both ways

They can catch you, for sure. But no, they can't use the evidence.

The flash may still fire and the camera equipment will take a picture.

The evidence thus gained is inadmissible in a court given the fact that it's likely to render the driver unable to see due to flash blindness - especially at night.

Given that fixed post GATSO's are operated by the local authority with a view to collecting revenue, the last thing they want is a case going to court.

As soon as a case goes to court the local authority loses totally. Even if the driver is found to be 'guilty' all the funds from fines etc. goes to central government.


Your best chance in a marginal situation is to ignore the initial letter. If it's taken over 14 days to be delivered (assuming you haven't been especially subversive) then you're off scot free.
 
I just had a thought about the ethos of speed cameras as money-spinners for local councils. How much extra revenue has been generated, and what was it used for (if such a thing can be pinpointed)? I can understand there are certain defecits education and healthcare (perhaps it's all gone to military) so they need more money. Is there that much of an issue of gaining some of this money from people that do break the law and exceed the speed limits?

Of course there are always greater offenders such as uninsured/untaxed drivers, other criminals, benefit scammers etc. But that's a whole different discussion.
 
if a truvelo (faces toward you) flashes you, crash your car and file a lawsuit against the council that placed it, stating that the flash binded you and rendered you blind for a few minutes with blind spots all over and that your speedo was not calibrated properly.
 
Similar threads

Similar threads


Please watch this on my YouTube channel & Subscribe.


Back
Top