Speed cameras cut injuries by a quarter - RAC research

[PatrickO]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22809291

Lots of people seem to absolutely hate and despise speed cameras.
Personally I think they are a good thing (unless I get caught by them )

 

[Mr Bump]

I want to see more in local areas especially residental but in general i am ok with them as well.

 

[DorsetDude]

I'd like to see bluetooth links (or something) from speed limit signs to vehicles so when you're on a dual carriageway in town you aren't constantly wondering if you're allowed 50, 40 or 60 that changes every 300 yards immediately followed by a speed camera of course.

(Yes I know there are signs up and yes I can read)

 

[foggy4ever]

551 out of 3,500 fixed cameras monitored and I wonder how they choose those.

 

[Dale_tem]

I'd like to see bluetooth links (or something) from speed limit signs to vehicles so when you're on a dual carriageway in town you aren't constantly wondering if you're allowed 50, 40 or 60 that changes every 300 yards immediately followed by a speed camera of course.

(Yes I know there are signs up and yes I can read)

A lot of new cars do this, but it is based on say nav data, so not 100% accurate due to changes. My car shows the speed limit on the sat nav display and I believe new fords it comes up on the instrument panel.

 

[Nikon Man]

Last year ended up behind a speed camera van along a well known very straight road north of Hereford city, it's a designated a 40mph area. I was doing 40mph and he was pulling away into the distance at a rate of knots.

Another driver who pulled up at the next set of lights dropped his window and shouted "did you see that a**hole in the speed trap van".

Most speed cameras, not that we had many around here have been replaced by flashing speed aware signs. Even the infamous camera in Newent
Gloucestershire has been removed, it was there for more years then I can recall.

 

[nilagin]

There's a couple of speed cameras in Dagenham that I've seen set off by cars travelling too fast in the opposite direction, I wonder if they all do it.

 

[Suvv]

So that's what the markings on the road are for!
I thought that they were for brake testing - you have to see how many marks it takes to slow down 20 mph :bonk:

Personally I would do away with all speed humps, sleeping policeman etc and replace the lot with speed cameras, I would also measure average speed on dual carriageways to stop all the accelerating and braking.

My sat nav beeps when I am near a speed camera location, it also displays the speed limit and it knows my speed. Are there any sat navs that only warn of speed cameras if you are actually speeding?

 

[Nikon Man]

I heard in France car satnav devices are not allowed to have speed camera information stored in them.:nono: I will stand corrected if wrong.

 

[Steve Smith]

I heard in France car satnav devices are not allowed to have speed camera information stored in them.:nono: I will stand corrected if wrong.

That would be impossible to enforce. As speed cameras are out in public, it is common knowledge where they are so you cannot legislate against that information.


Steve.

 

[jezgb]

551 out of 3,500 fixed cameras monitored and I wonder how they choose those.

Lies, damned lies and statistics...

 

[seashaker]

Don't see the problem with them, they are there to stop people breaking the law, if you don't break the law, you will not be affected.

Anything that helps reduce the number of deaths has got to be a positive. (I have been caught myself in the past, grumble grumble)

 

[cambsno]

Don't see the problem with them, they are there to stop people breaking the law, if you don't break the law, you will not be affected.

Anything that helps reduce the number of deaths has got to be a positive. (I have been caught myself in the past, grumble grumble)

But many people disagree with CCTV and DNA database which does the same thing?

 

[Nikon Man]

That would be impossible to enforce. As speed cameras are out in public, it is common knowledge where they are so you cannot legislate against that information.


Steve.

Information from The Caravan Club website on the matter.

"I have written confirmation from the legal department of the ACF (Automobile Club de France) confirming the following:

The UK driver who visits France are not allowed to use a Sat Nav that warns them when they are approaching a fixed speed camera.

They can switch off this function when they drive in France, but if the warning can't be disabled, they have to remove this information totally from their device."

 

[TCR4x4]

That would be impossible to enforce. As speed cameras are out in public, it is common knowledge where they are so you cannot legislate against that information.

Steve.

They can and they have.
You aren't allowed to use satnavs with built in speed camera locations, maps with written locations or snooper type laser devices.
If you get caught, you get fined/arrested.
Its no more difficult to enforce than using a mobile phone at the wheel. If they see you and suspect you are doing it, they pull you and check.

 

[Suvv]

They can and they have.
You aren't allowed to use satnavs with built in speed camera locations, maps with written locations or snooper type laser devices.
If you get caught, you get fined/arrested.
Its no more difficult to enforce than using a mobile phone at the wheel. If they see you and suspect you are doing it, they pull you and check.

Exactly.
It used to be OK to have a sat nav with the fixed locations but not a radar detector, the law was changed last year to include all speed camera "databases".
It has been that way in Belgium for some time. I got so fed up with all the alerts that I have mine turned off all the time anyway.

 

[SpikeK6]

That would be impossible to enforce. As speed cameras are out in public, it is common knowledge where they are so you cannot legislate against that information.


Steve.

Same as anything else really but there have been quite a few people spot fined for using it. case in the local paper the other week here.

Its not hard to do they just pull you over and check the sat nav if you have it switched to speed camera's you get fined.

Same as the breath test kit you are to carry with you, they pull you over you do not have one they will spot fine you.

 

[BarryDawsib]

551 out of 3,500 fixed cameras monitored and I wonder how they choose those.

What's the sample time period, did they sample before and after the installation of speed camera?
Did they take into account road layouts and signage?
Did they sample individual driver habits?
Have they taken into account advancements in car building?
Did they take into account what time of day incidents occurred?
How many of the drivers were quoted as "not knowing what happened"?
The differences in locations aka rural road and built up areas?
Did they cross reference anything like this?

I've said it before, show me the data. Or else they might as well say squirrels are hypnotising people.

Oh and to the Sat Nav thing, I tend not to use them but street maps and atlases have speed camera locations, what's the laws on them?

 

[Steve Smith]

Oh and to the Sat Nav thing, I tend not to use them but street maps and atlases have speed camera locations, what's the laws on them?

None. Same as writing their locations down on a piece of paper.

In this country though, they are not allowed to be hidden. They are prominently positioned and warning signs are put up.

I don't do Sat Navs either. They appear to turn otherwise intelligent people into idiots.


Steve.

 

[DorsetDude]

Its not hard to do they just pull you over and check the sat nav if you have it switched to speed camera's you get fined.

That is blatantly wrong if you ask me. speed cameras are ostensibly there to prevent crime by stopping you speeding (thats the line the authorities trot out anyway, nothing about cash cows) and if you break the speed limit you then get caught. If you take steps to have something in your own car that helps stop you breaking the law (speed camera "reminder") and then they come along and fine you for it? Huh?
Case for court of human rights/liberty or something there I reckon.

 

[mrgubby]

Safety cameras are installed at accident black spots, it seems only sensible to have a device to warn me of such dangers / hazards :shrug:

 

[SpikeK6]

That is blatantly wrong if you ask me. speed cameras are ostensibly there to prevent crime by stopping you speeding (thats the line the authorities trot out anyway, nothing about cash cows) and if you break the speed limit you then get caught. If you take steps to have something in your own car that helps stop you breaking the law (speed camera "reminder") and then they come along and fine you for it? Huh?
Case for court of human rights/liberty or something there I reckon.

The point is though the way they see it is whats the point in having speed camera's if all you do is slow down when your machine what ever you have is telling you there is one there. you are meant to be doing the speed limit all the way along the road you are on,not just the 100 or so yards either side of the camera.

Why is it against your human rights if you are blatently breaking a law that they have in their country??? The French police take no **** not like over here (UK) they pull you over they are going to fine you no matter what you say. Been fined a few times for various things over there, mainly for being a few KPH over their speed limit, 10 KPH works out at 6MPH over their speed limit and thats 90 euros please

 

[TriggerHappy]

That is blatantly wrong if you ask me. speed cameras are ostensibly there to prevent crime by stopping you speeding (thats the line the authorities trot out anyway, nothing about cash cows) and if you break the speed limit you then get caught. If you take steps to have something in your own car that helps stop you breaking the law (speed camera "reminder") and then they come along and fine you for it? Huh?
Case for court of human rights/liberty or something there I reckon.

Is it not because they facilitate speeding between speed traps, and notify the driver of when to slow to fall back under the limit? I can see no other reason of being warned of a speed camera's location other than to remind you to slow down. If you're already travelling at a legal speed they serve absolutely no purpose at all.

 

[Steve Smith]

Case for court of human rights/liberty or something there I reckon.

I agree. I wonder if any of the French spot fines have been challenged in court.


Steve.

 

[Bluehawk]

Dorset Dude, whilst I agree with your point, you will find that with all rulings emanating from Brussels, we Brits bend over backwards to comply. The French, however routinely ignore any Brussels directives that don't suit them.

 

[DorsetDude]

you are meant to be doing the speed limit all the way along the road you are on,not just the 100 or so yards either side of the camera.

Agreed. However just because you have a system in your car warning you that there is a speed camera does not automatically mean that you will be speeding either side of it does it. This french system is basically fining you for something that you might do rather than what you have done. Seems wrong in so many ways.

In related news, a fire this weekend in the white flag manufacturing factory in Poitiers has effectively crippled the French military.

 

[PatrickO]

What's the sample time period, did they sample before and after the installation of speed camera?
Did they take into account road layouts and signage?
Did they sample individual driver habits?
Have they taken into account advancements in car building?
Did they take into account what time of day incidents occurred?
How many of the drivers were quoted as "not knowing what happened"?
The differences in locations aka rural road and built up areas?
Did they cross reference anything like this?

I've said it before, show me the data. Or else they might as well say squirrels are hypnotising people.

This is the detailed report. You can see the data there.

http://www.racfoundation.org/assets...oadables/speed_camera_data-allsop-may2013.pdf

 

[Dave *]

They can and they have.
You aren't allowed to use satnavs with built in speed camera locations, maps with written locations or snooper type laser devices.
If you get caught, you get fined/arrested.
Its no more difficult to enforce than using a mobile phone at the wheel. If they see you and suspect you are doing it, they pull you and check.

It's all semantics, TomTom have now updated their French speed camera database to a new "Danger warning" database.

Does the same thing with a different name, and a different icon.

Changes to the law in France

Since decree n°2012-3 was introduced on 3 January 2012 it has been illegal to be warned about the position of fixed or mobile speed cameras while you are driving in France.

If your TomTom navigation device has the Speed Camera service and you continue to use the service, you risk a fine of up to €1500.

New update: TomTom Speed Camera service becomes Danger Zones in France

TomTom had a meeting with the Road Safety Ministry to clarify the situation regarding new and upcoming legislation. As a result, TomTom is introducing a 100% compliant Danger Zones service available in a free download for compatible products.

http://uk.support.tomtom.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/5560

 

[TCR4x4]

Same as anything else really but there have been quite a few people spot fined for using it. case in the local paper the other week here.

Its not hard to do they just pull you over and check the sat nav if you have it switched to speed camera's you get fined.

Same as the breath test kit you are to carry with you, they pull you over you do not have one they will spot fine you.

Breath testers are no longer required by law. Go figure.. Something that might actually prevent accidents is withdrawn and some crazy scheme to stop people knowing where accident black spots are is introduced.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

I heard in France car satnav devices are not allowed to have speed camera information stored in them.:nono: I will stand corrected if wrong.

That's not the biggest problem. They are grey and well hidden away unlike our flashy bright yellow boxes. You usually get road signs here as well for cameras. Not elsewhere in EU :nono:

 

[Bernie174]

I agree. I wonder if any of the French spot fines have been challenged in court.

They don't need to test in the the Euro Courts, 2 twits tried that with the UK's Speed Camera legislation, they failed.

Any attempts to try the same by the French would fail at the first hurdle, as they'd be referred to that case.

Anyway, what the French do is a French problem. There's an oh so simple way to avoid speed limits, drive at or below the speed limit.

In the UK, they are signposted and yellow, if you can't see either of those clues then you shouldn't be driving anywhere near the speed limit, let alone above it, because you aren't paying sufficient, or more likely any attention.

 

[Pookeyhead]

I disagree with speed cameras, for one reason. They have reduced the amount of real traffic police patrols, and that means a great many OTHER problems are now more prevelant.. such as:

tailgating
bad lane discipline
talking on phones
turning round to berate or comfort kids in the back seat
not indicating
Road rage
uninsured drivers
banned drivers
drink drivers

The list goes on.

Anyone would think speeding is the only problem there is on the roads.

More speed cameras on residential streets... sure. I'm all for that. Fast dual carriageways with no foot paths and no joining roads? That's just there to make money IMO. If they really cared they'd install them in 20MPH residential zones, and outside schools.

Less speed cameras, more traffic police.

 

[Dave *]

There's an oh so simple way to avoid speed limits, drive at or below the speed limit.

In the UK, they are signposted and yellow, if you can't see either of those clues then you shouldn't be driving anywhere near the speed limit, let alone above it, because you aren't paying sufficient, or more likely any attention.

While that is generally true it doesn't take into account greedy "Road Safety Partnerships" going for revenue by manipulating speed limits.

I can think of at least 2 dual carriageways and a stretch of motorway in my area where this has happened. Until recently all were NSL, one stretch of dual carriage (lovely straight stretch as you leave town) went down to 50mph and the following month 2 static cameras went in about a 300 metres before it goes back to NSL.

The other, another straight level stretch leaving town the other way went to 50mph, and then again to 40mph, and now a speed camera van parks right at the end just before it joins the A1.

The stretch of A1 close by had some improvements, a third lane was added in one part, resurfaced and slightly widened where it was 2 lanes, when they finished the works, you guessed it, a new 50mph limit imposed and they are building little hard stands in 2 locations south and 2 locations north. I wonder what will be parked on those when they are complete?

 

[sturisoma]

My job involves working on motorways and I drive 700 miles/week on average.

I am constantly amazed at the number of people who think it's ok to slam their brakes on when they see a 60mph sign over a gantry, then speed up again until they reach the next one. This is what causes accidents. If the red ring says 60 then you should do 60 (or less) until you see an NSL sign (or another red ring). The M42 drivers have got it right, now we just need the M25 drivers to learn.

 

[nilagin]

My job involves working on motorways and I drive 700 miles/week on average.

I am constantly amazed at the number of people who think it's ok to slam their brakes on when they see a 60mph sign over a gantry, then speed up again until they reach the next one. This is what causes accidents. If the red ring says 60 then you should do 60 (or less) until you see an NSL sign (or another red ring). The M42 drivers have got it right, now we just need the M25 drivers to learn.

Why should that cause accidents? If everyone is driving with correct gaps between them, no-one will hit anyone else.

 

[sturisoma]

Why should that cause accidents? If everyone is driving with correct gaps between them, no-one will hit anyone else.


(a little bit of real world here, and less idealism) - they don't drive with correct gaps - just as they don't drive within the speed limits - I thought that was the whole point of my argument.

 

[Bernie174]

Dave

Yes, its true, there are less Traffic Police now, but then thats not entirely the fault of speed cameras.
In theory, although there are less Traffic officers employed there are more available. Yep, I kinow sounds like faulty logic but it's not.

So, pull up a lantern and swing a sandbag.....

When I was a baby police officer, and had no option but to report people for traffic offences, rather insultingly occasionally they would plead not guilty. So off to the local Magistrates for an afternoon hearing. And interestingly the court would be full of Traffic Officers. Why? Because all the people they reported unsportingly pleaded not as well. So it'd not be an exaggeration to say there were more traffic officers in Courts than there were driving round the streets.

Now, all that changed with FPN's for traffic Offences, and suddenly, far fewer Police of all flavours in courts.

That was used as a justification for reducing traffic numbers overall, but it also mmeant there's probably no fewer on the streets.

Anyway, Traffic are a bit irrelevant, all Police Officers have the same powers, and especially those who want to go to traffic tend to make themselves busy in that direction.

I have to say it was rare for me to report someone for a traffic offence when I finished my probation, I preferred crime. BUT, most crime had a vehicle involved somewhere, and RTA offences are always a good starting point to stop cars. Ok, that meant in my case that there were mostly warnings for the traffic offences, but the effect was probably much the same.

So in short, your theory, while apparently well founded isn't quite as certain as you clearly think.

As for speed limits and 'greedy partnerships'. The 2 things are separately decided. The Council make pass speed limits, the partnerships not part of that. However, they will act on Police advice, and if that is that a new speed limit isn't being taken notice of, it's obvious where the cameras will go.

If you mean fixed cameras, then the same thing applies I mentioned earlier, the warnings are all there, if people can't see them, they shouldn't be driving at any speed, let alone above the limit.

 

[Cobra]

If you mean fixed cameras, then the same thing applies I mentioned earlier, the warnings are all there, if people can't see them, they shouldn't be driving at any speed, let alone above the limit.

I do several hundred and sometimes thousands of miles a week, all over the country.
And yes I agree most of the speed camera's are now quite well "sign-posted"
and again the majority of them have the speed limit, with the camera warning
a few yards before the camera.

But I do remember a time and not so long ago, two local ones I will cite,
but it wasn't uncommon either, for them to be disguised in such a way.
One just within the 30MPH from a 60MPH,
as you approached the "camera" you were greeted by a huge round-about
direction sign probably 10 feet x 10 feet, inc. the "legs"
and the camera strategically
placed slap bang in the middle on the far side of the sign.

And before the camera "heads" were painted yellow, from the battleship grey
one, just inside a 30MPH from a 40MPH was place behind an overhanging willow, completely obscured
from behind, needless to say the willow was neatly trimmed
away from the lens / front of the camera
No warning signs were ever posted at both these locations.

The galling part, from my point of view is that the cameras were always
"sold" as being speed deterrent, not revenue collectors.

These two certainly weren't a speed deterrent as they were invisible to
approaching traffic.

 

[Dave *]

Bernie, I don't dispute the traffic officer stories (I didn't mention them).

With regard the Road Safety Partnership, it's a little different up here. The council who is cutting speed limits on the nice straight level roads that I mentioned is a primary partner of the local force in said "safety" partnership.

As long as they trap on that sort of road I'll be sceptical of the road safety over income generation argument.

 

[Bristolian]

I heard in France car satnav devices are not allowed to have speed camera information stored in them.:nono: I will stand corrected if wrong.

Quite correct. Even disabling the feature if your satnav has it isn't allowed.

Sorry, posted this before I saw others had already addressed the subject ... ignore me