Speed Cameras Should Be Used More

[Zero]

Originally posted by MikeH
I disagree with the way you stated point ii, even though I actually agree with most of what you said.

The main problem with the initial speed camera policy was that it was used to generate revenue by putting the cameras on roads that weren't dangerous but that people always sped on. Downhill stretches of straight road etc.

The new policy is to put clearly visible cameras on dangerous stretches of road where there are lots of accidents. The idea now is accident prevention and saving lives rather than trying to catch people speeding which I think is a much more valid reason for their deployment.

The cameras that are hidden just as extra revenue gatherers are little more than an extra tax on motorists. I'd rather all the money for speed cameras was spent putting them in places that will increase safety.

I agree wit you. Theres an intersection near my place known for drivers running thru red light. They installed a cam and since then virtually no one does it anymore. So saftey overall has been increased Except, one of my friend once pulled a stunt by driving on the opposing lane 3AM in the morning when he was speeding too fast to stop during yellow. (camera doesnt cover the opposing lane for obvious reason)

[Zero]

Originally posted by Boddington's


Cameras are more cost effective. They also free up police for tasks that do actually require immediate human intervention.

That statement above is true. But it still doesnt change anything I mentioned.

As long as you dont have cams covering the entire city, ppl are gonna speed.

[Solly]

As long as you dont have cams covering the entire city, ppl are gonna speed.

That's why I recommend hidden cameras.

What you've just said is like saying, "unless we have police covering every shop, people are going to shoplift".

It makes no sense to pubish the whereabouts of every camera, just as it makes no sense for crime prevention to state where every police officer will be at a certain time.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Boddington's


That's why I recommend hidden cameras.

What you've just said is like saying, "unless we have police covering every shop, people are going to shoplift".

It makes no sense to pubish the whereabouts of every camera, just as it makes no sense for crime prevention to state where every police officer will be at a certain time.

Duh! and has not knowing where cops are right now ever stopped people from speeding and shoplifting?

[Solly]

Because police coverage is too thin, and they are far more spottable than a hidden camera.

[Az]

Actually, enforcing speed limits on Straight-line, safe highways is damaging the economy, making goods flow at slower speeds, etc.

[Solly]

Economy over lives!

[FrustratedPoet]

For once I completely agree with Bods.

[Az]

Economy over lives!

What's the risk to lives on a well-kept straighline expressway?

[Sirotnikov]

I completely agree with Bods as well.


No sense in publishing where cameras will be.

The goal here is to make everyone stop breaking speed limits.

What speed limits are set, and whether they are reasonable is a whole different question. I'm sure that someone will always demand changes.

But that doesn't mean that this law should be broken as often.

[Sirotnikov]

Azazel - speed doesn't cause traffic accidents. It really doesn't.

Our slow reaction time, though, at times does.

Also, the higher the speed, the worse the accident is going to be. Thus, in case an accident happens (and at times they are unavoidable), you better want the two vehicles driving as slow as they reasonably can.

[CerberusIV]

There was a bit on our local TV news a couple of days ago. There is a trial scheme starting up in the UK run by someone at Leeds University testing cars which are linked to sensors at the point you enter or leave each speed limit area and the car will not accelerate above the speed limit. So you can't speed even if you try.

Needless to say all the motorists the TV crew stopped and asked about it were against the idea.

[Sava]

I would like to see cameras in public places, traffic and otherwise.

[Solly]

Originally posted by CerberusIV
There was a bit on our local TV news a couple of days ago. There is a trial scheme starting up in the UK run by someone at Leeds University testing cars which are linked to sensors at the point you enter or leave each speed limit area and the car will not accelerate above the speed limit. So you can't speed even if you try.

Needless to say all the motorists the TV crew stopped and asked about it were against the idea.

They want their freedom!

[FrustratedPoet]

Yes, according to many motorists the freedom to put other people's lives at risk for no good reason is inviolable.