Speed Cameras cause accidents...?

[H8RRA 0]

From a previous thread regarding accidents and the tragic event at the weekend where a bunch of cyclists were wiped out,

 

Previous thread

 

... I thought i'd raise the controversial subject of speed camera's that seem to be the kneejerk reaction to any accidents - or at least the justification for speed camera's, tagged as "safety camera's" (my A5re are they. :roll: )

 

So [sOAPBOX MODE ON],

 

the reaction of authorities/police is to erect these cash generating speed camera's that do little to resolve the underlying issues - i would even suggest that it is suppressed that they cause more accidents than they prevent. In addition, they remove the process of addressing what issues have caused an accident or answering why a blackspot is a blackspot - and cash generated is just a fortunate spin-offf, eh?!

 

Everyone knows what they are regardless of how it is disguised but there is some acceptance of them ( :?: :? ) by justifying them as safety camera's?!

 

First off, as things stand, I agree with them being sited outside schools and other such places - kids are full of the joys of spring and will run across roads etc......but here I continue my rant - it seems to me that the majority of schools are sited on long straight roads where people will drive that little bit faster/over the limit. Many are on very busy long straight roads - its always struck me that this is so obviously dumb BTW.

 

Additionally, I constantly get very riled when I try to pass local schools anywhere between 0830-0915 and other leaving & departing times and there are cars, 4x4's etc. parked both side of the roads restricting traffic to one lane, getting other drivers vexed, annoyed, wound up etc because again, the schools are located on major roads with no parking facilities and most parents don't give a sh1t and park anywhere to save a few minutes dropping the kids off (don't get me started on the inadequacies of public transport and why kids are ferried by car to school !!!)

 

By addressing the actual problems, there are better solutions that would prevent accidents as opposed to speed camera's which without a doubt ARE just cash generators AND an easy, quick, spineless fix that ticks the boxes to say a problem has been addressed in a society where everyone is target driven - even those that shouldn't be, like the police who should be there to maintain order, not be graded on how many tickets they've issued, ASBO's etc....

 

Now, back to SPEED camera's. Surely it is obvious that they distract drivers more than 6ft scandanavian blonde's (female/male - delete depending on your gender/persuasion :oops: ) in miniscule, belt-style mini skirts walking down the street topless??!!

 

They distract drivers immensely (as does the blonde BTW - girls insert your own fantasy image here :roll: ) you are CONSTANTLY looking for speed camera's and not on the road ahead OR at your speedo because everyone is so paranoid they will stray 3-4 miles over the limit and be flashed - even if you aren't speeding or prone to doing so.

 

In truth, most drivers would drive a lot safer if they weren't looking at the speedo and for camera's CONSTANTLY. I've read and believe it is true (great conspiracy theory here) that there is evidence of this but it is suppressed due to the revenue camera's generate.

 

To summarise, i think the government should employ an army of 6ft scandanavian blonde's in miniscule, belt-style mini skirt to walk the streets of our nation topless - we'd all drive a lot slower just to cop an eyeful :roll: :wink: and i'd far rather be flashed by a buxom wench than a camera [sOPAPBOX MODE OFF]

 

VACANCIES

 

If you look like this and want an active job whilst saving the lives of our nations children and bringing smiles to everyones faces, please apply to the Depatment of Transport. Please include full height picture (Lingerie optional) Click for possibly NSFW scantily-clad example

 

 

Edit: pic linked so people get a warning ;) - dinkus

[Trig 0]

To summarise, i think the governemt should employ an army of 6ft scandanavian blonde's in miniscule, belt-style mini skirt to walk the streets of our nation topless - we'd all drive a lot slower just to cop an eyeful

 

I only read that bit & in all seriousness I completely agree. :|

[catch_twotwo 0]

I agree totally.... (both about the blondes topless and the cameras as well)

 

What were we talking about again :?: oh yes, topless blondes.

 

I've seen a few shunts caused by cameras... people see then and immediatly break as a knee jerk reaction. Then 2 seconds later the ass behind them in a lowered chav mobile (Corsa/Saxo take your pick) rear ends then quicker than he would the 6ft scandanavian blonde in full lingerie. Got to love the logic behind these things..... they make cash to pay for more to make more cash to pay for more.... Repeat as required until the world implodes.

[craigowl 0]

Reading rants like this makes me glad I haven't had to face the ever increasing madness of the daily commuter drive for the last ten years.

 

I drove in the Edinburgh "rushhour" for 17 years up to 1995, but worked "flexitime". The growth in traffic 1978-1995 was staggering. Initially the M9 was nearly empty at 0730, latterly people were heading in for work in droves before 0700. The queue at the roundabout at the end of the motorway into Edinburgh soon extended to about a mile in length.

 

I was mostly laid back about traffic problems, tending to regard delays as a good chance to listen to my favourite music a bit longer. In fact, when I had to use the train for the last six years of full time work, I fell behind in my music listening (hate earphone music) but managed to get in a good read.

 

These cameras seem to do peoples' heads in. As if the working life wasn't hectic enough already.

 

I was flashed once. so my wife tells me. Not, unfortunately, by an attractive blonde lady.

 

As always, guys, try and reap the positive out of the situation rather than focus on the negative. Sometimes that is well nigh impossible, but do your best.

[craigowl 0]

Just anounced on Scottish news.

Driver who does 60k miles per year has been banned for a year and fined £3000 at Kirkcaldy Court.

 

Crime? - Doing 156mph on Fife dual carriageway and on mobile 'phone at same time.

 

Caught on speed camera.

 

He is to appeal. However, whatever you think of speed cameras, I reckon most will not find his conduct appealing.

[G60Jet 1]

I agree, however, if you not speeding you dont need to lookout for the cameras, and if you cant control you car at a constant speed so as not to go over the speed limit you should not be on the road in the first place. Britan has become a driving nightmare, but if you dont break the law whats the problem. personally I dont give a a t0** if the goverment monitor my movements, I've got nothing to hide.

[GIXXERUK 0]

I agree, however, if you not speeding you dont need to lookout for the cameras

 

i dont agree with this , how many people do you see brake needlessly when they see a camera ? nearly everyone

 

this has been known to cause a pile up as everyone has to progressively brake harder

[craigowl 0]

G60Jet - I agree with you entirely, but can't help thinking you might put up another post which tells us you be taking the pi$$. :wink:

[catch_twotwo 0]

It's not that I don't think they have a place... its that alot of them are JUST cashcows for the local police. This has been proven as I read a report somwhere about speed camera's in a certain area of the UK that are placed where there have been 0 accidents in the last 5 years. How can they claim this is an accident hotspot. (and yes the road was accident free for 5 years BEFORE the camera was installed)

[Kevin Bacon 5]

G60Jet - I agree with you entirely, but can't help thinking you might put up another post which tells us you be taking the pi$$. :wink:

 

Sadly I don't think he is and why does such a do gooder need a Road Angel 2 then?

[dazzyvr6 0]

I agree, however, if you not speeding you dont need to lookout for the cameras

 

i dont agree with this , how many people do you see brake needlessly when they see a camera ? nearly everyone

 

this has been known to cause a pile up as everyone has to progressively brake harder

 

how true that is,when ever i went passed a speed camera i would check the speedo,then the gps then speedo again as well as braking!!

[H8RRA 0]

Click for possibly NSFW scantily-clad example

 

 

Edit: pic linked so people get a warning ;) - dinkus

 

Spoilsport :wink: - that was a pic from a boots fake tan advert and was tertally respectful of the female form :wink:

 

Now everyones going to click that link and expect to see naked chicks!

 

Didn't think it was unwork safe TBH or i would have put a warning..........

[Trig 0]

H8RRA, change the link for a better pic ;)

 

So what fake tan did you choose in the end then?!

[H8RRA 0]

I agree, however, if you not speeding you dont need to lookout for the cameras, and if you cant control you car at a constant speed so as not to go over the speed limit you should not be on the road in the first place. Britan has become a driving nightmare, but if you dont break the law whats the problem. personally I dont give a a t0** if the goverment monitor my movements, I've got nothing to hide.

 

 

Absolute baulderdash.

 

If you're telling me that you maintain an exact 30mph, 70mph, whatever, uphill and downdale 100% of the time you drive, you either don't drive or are talking from your posterior. Do not believe you one bit.

 

As soon as anyone ever see's a camera, the first thing they do is check the speedo regardless of how law abiding they are. Even if I had cruise control and it was set within the speed limit, I would still check my speedo.

 

By this, I'm not referring to people who DO speed - see craigowls example above - but the problems that camera's cause EVERYONE as stated - eyes off road looking at speedo in THE WORST POSSIBLE LOCATIONS - those that are accident area's with camera's installed.

 

I drove to bradford and around leeds on saturday an drove down the A65, i think, with chrisvr6nos - there must have been 40+ camera's!!! Mostly downhill heading toward Shipley and Keighley and due to the camera's, i constantly had to look at the speed as there was no way i could be certain i was below 30. Without the camera's, I would have had my eyes 100% on the road and may have drifted between25-35mph. By being able to look at the road constantly, even if travelling 3-4mh above the speed limit, I would identify hazards far quicker than if my head was up looking for camera's or down checking i wasn't doing 34mph

 

I would give you £50 if you could drive in such an area without looking at your speedo when you should be driving normally and able to identify hazards/pedestrians/school kids etc. You'd either check your speedo or crawl at 20mph to be sure you didn't get flashed. Either way, you'd be a greater hazard than someone who drove sensibly and fully aware of their surroundings without looking at camera's or your speedo.

[.Rich. 0]

To be honest it doesn't bother me, i generally drive around and about the speedlimit. If i do speed its normally on roads i know well including where the camera's are and if its safe to motor and if its not worth the risk.

 

I dont like to lecture (i dont care if others speed, that their decision) but if your a "good driver" there is nothing to be worried about. I think that also goes for "people brake when they see camera's" arguement, driving too close to the car infront causes the accidents not the camera. And people who drive up other people's arses are TWATS anyway.

[Jim 1]

I agree, however, if you not speeding you dont need to lookout for the cameras, and if you cant control you car at a constant speed so as not to go over the speed limit you should not be on the road in the first place. Britan has become a driving nightmare, but if you dont break the law whats the problem. personally I dont give a a t0** if the goverment monitor my movements, I've got nothing to hide.

 

You're kidding me! That VW show I followed you to last year, I struggled to keep up with you! :D

[G60Jet 1]

G60Jet - I agree with you entirely, but can't help thinking you might put up another post which tells us you be taking the pi$$. :wink:

 

Sadly I don't think he is and why does such a do gooder need a Road Angel 2 then?

 

cos i used to speed, that RA2 has mad me slow down, not sure why, but it has. im certainly more "aware" of my speed. also help with those blackspots and schools so i can EXTRA care.

[G60Jet 1]

I agree, however, if you not speeding you dont need to lookout for the cameras, and if you cant control you car at a constant speed so as not to go over the speed limit you should not be on the road in the first place. Britan has become a driving nightmare, but if you dont break the law whats the problem. personally I dont give a a t0** if the goverment monitor my movements, I've got nothing to hide.

 

You're kidding me! That VW show I followed you to last year, I struggled to keep up with you! :D

 

not my fault my car gets to the speedlimit faster than yours :lol:

[catch_twotwo 0]

I think that also goes for "people brake when they see camera's" arguement, driving too close to the car infront causes the accidents not the camera. And people who drive up other people's arses are twits anyway.

 

Exactly thanks for proving my point. If you went past a speed camera and had the kneee jerk braking reaction you'd be in the right. However you'd still be pissed when the ass behind you rams you and turns your lovely C into an insurance writeoff. If it wasn't for the speed camera then the only thing you'd have got was a bad driver behind you.

 

I think from a personal standpoint that some of these speed camera's only change a possible accident blackspot into a more likely one. Eye's off the road, braking, loss of concentration. All these things we get told are likely to cuase accidents. So why make a situation where you cause them. If they weren't cash cows then they'd flash a warning sign as you approached reminding you of the speed limit like some of the signs around schools. As it is they make them grey (the colour of most of England) and sometimes even hide them around corners, or the bow of a hill etc. Sneeky eh...

 

If the main reason for accidents is following too close then why not take the Germany view. They have much fewer speed camera's and alot more cameras that record your distance on a motorway or fast road. Seems to work better for them than it does for us.

[catch_twotwo 0]

Point and case.

 

Keith Jones, 43, from Epsom, claims the camera near the bridge joining Claygate and Hook has done little to reduce the number of accidents and in fact encourages collisions and queues by causing drivers to break suddenly.

 

His attack came just days before two more accidents happened on the southbound carriageway at the New Malden junction and near the Hook on Monday causing tailbacks during the Monday morning rush hour.

 

But safety officials argue he has been too hasty with his conclusions, and added drivers should not be speeding in the first place.

 

Since the camera was installed in 1995 there have been 39 accidents at the spot, five of them serious. Figures available from 1992 to 1995 show the number of accidents as 14, with one serious.

[H8RRA 0]

 

I think from a personal standpoint that some of these speed camera's only change a possible accident blackspot into a more likely one. Eye's off the road, braking, loss of concentration. All these things we get told are likely to cuase accidents. So why make a situation where you cause them. If they weren't cash cows then they'd flash a warning sign as you approached reminding you of the speed limit like some of the signs around schools.

 

he's got it! By george he's got it!

 

My point exactly - surely this is obvious to everyone else or are people blinded to the "....safety camera" and "...if you don't speed, you don't need to worry..." argument????????????

[andy 0]

Installing a camera at a "blackspot" simply creates a blackspot either side of the camera, one where everyone is breaking and piling into the back of each other and another where people are accelerating and changing lanes to maintain decent progress again. This has been documented. They are cash cows, that much must be unavoidably obvious to anyone. They do nothing for road safety but keep a lot of people in jobs and provide a lot of revenue which is just what this government is all about, figures and their manipulation.

[ZippyVR6 0]

I agree with Catch 22 in that cameras are a poor replacement for a copper. but I think flashing lights displaying the limit would just make things worse. even less chance of spotting that kid by the road caus you are concentrating on the sign and then the speedo.

 

There was some research in Europe somewhere a few years ago (vague I know but cant remember where) into the removal of all road markings and speed limits signs. The effect was that people slowwed down and concentrated on the road around them more, and roadside accidents involving both cars and pedestrians were proven to be reduced.

 

None of these things though would have prevented the tragic accident, Which was probably just that. An accident. They do happen on their own without fault to be apportioned. Icy weather and cars are just not good bedfellows.

[H8RRA 0]

They do nothing for road safety but keep a lot of people in jobs and provide a lot of revenue which is just what this government is all about, figures and their manipulation.

 

...and keep a lot of coppers on their asses doing unnecessary paperwork so they don't ge sued or get cases chucked out by REAL criminals who sue for damages for being tw4tted when they try to rob someone... sorry - wrong soapbox :roll:

[catch_twotwo 0]

It's interesting to read that the government keep all profits from the camera's. It's the same as with fuel taxes, it's just another way of raping the general public for yet more money.