Page 1 of Speed cameras - Justified?

A recent experiment has shown that in areas where the numbers of speed cameras were increased, road deaths dropped by 35% (equating to about 280 people) over a year.

Ignoring the requisite tabloid `Stealth Tax` backlash, can we expect to see yet more cameras on our streets?

My comment: The law is there for a reason, and speed cameras enforce those laws.
They may not seem fair sometimes (particularly when on the wrong end of it) but surely the old adage `If you`re not doing anything wrong, you`ve got nothing to worry about` applies?

Loath them or loath them, when you see one you slow down.
At least they are now well marked, unlike the nice traffic policemen with the speed guns who hide at the bottom of a steep hill on a local dual carriagway with a 30 limit and book you for 33mph.

I would argue that it is inappropriate speed that kills.

40mph on a major road at 3am in the morning (which is illegal) is clearly perfectly safe compared to 30mph down a double parked road outside a school during hometime.

I have no objection to all speed cameras, I just have objections to those that have suddenly cropped up in stretches of road where accident rates are negligable and the local traffic law enforcement has joined a revenue sharing scheme. :)

And that reminds me, I also think if they are to slow traffic down then they should be clearly marked. How can a hidden camera that you don`t even know is there till a few weeks later prevent you from driving dangerously?

This item was edited on Tuesday, 11th February 2003, 19:16

CHECK YOUR FACTS, in the Thames valley Speed Cameras have increased motor accidents. They along with traffic lights are two of the biggest TAX Collectors in the UK. FACT.

I (nearly) always watch my speed these days, having been fined and had 3 points added to my licence. So, from my point of view, cameras are entirely justified because they do work as a deterrent.

As far as I`m concerned, if somebody manages to accrue 12 points, they are either incapable of learning their lesson or they`ve shown utter disregard for the safety of others. Either way, such people should be removed from Britain`s roads.

In Australia, you get one warning (particularly in Queensland). That`s a sign at the City marker telling you speed and red light runner cameras are in use. The cameras are not painted a nice luminous yellow, and are invariably hidden.

If you try to protest that the camera wasn`t in plain view, you get laughed out of court. you were speeding, that`s all they need to know.

Over there, It`s down to you if you speed or not, at any time of the day, whatever the traffic conditions. There have been many cases of drivers starting a day with a clean license and ending it walking.

Australia has the lowest population to road death ratio on the planet

FACT

What I heard was that cameras designed to make us good citizens and deliberately placed to generate revenue had their bums painted yellow (wasps anyone?) so if you passed one and didn`t slow down you were fair game.

Ones placed on accident black spots etc, are left grey to actually catch people at fault.

Having got guilty/frustrated/poor driving my enomously thirsty car into work at £3-4 pounds a day to do 12 miles through 30mph traffic, I bought a moped to do the trip, which by default is limited to around 30mph.

It`s a real eyeopener how many times I get overtaken while I`m doing 30 mph.

Dave

I think that most reasonable people (myself included) welcome speed cameras at accident blackspots, near schools etc, BUT, siting them on long open sraight stretches of road is unacceptable, as they acheive nothing other than revenue.

The various roads through the borders in the north east are a case in point.