+♫ ♫ ♫ Sprog wasn't enough of a challenge so we decided to move house... oh yes a...
+♫ ♫ ♫ Sprog wasn't enough of a challenge so we decided to move house... oh yes and we packed ourselves (never do that). That's where I've been. Will return at some point (when scion starts school?).
Member since:10.06.2003
Reviews:34
Members who trust:86
Ok so I've bitten the bullet and here's my opinion, my very contraversial opinion on speed cameras and more generally speed and driving etiquette. I used to drive 1,000 miles a week. If you didn't know you'd have guessed by the time you'd finished reading this. I apologise if my opinion seems vehement, the last thing I want to do is upset anyone, but I also I want to express my views openly and honestly because this is an issue I feel strongly about.
SPEED CAMERAS
To a certain extent my views on speed cameras are somewhat mixed up with my views on speed in general so please bear with me if I seem to be going off track. The fact is, any of you who derive any enjoyment from driving will know there's a lot more to driving carefully and safely than speed, so often with a camera in place the people who are driving dangerously will continue to do so, the only difference being, they'll be doing it a little more slowly.
One other reservation I have is that if they are reducing the number of traffic patrols and installing more cameras instead, a lot of bad and dangerous driving will go unnoticed and unpunished.
THE VANS
I may be wrong but I believe that in order to put up a static camera the police have to put up the warning signs first for a period of 3 months (I think it is) without any cameras. Then they have to use a mobile camera for a further period, then they put in a gatso. If that's what they most use the van for, preparing the way, I can kind of understand but basically we all know they're a way of getting a lot more "hits" for a lot less money. There is a human with them though so there is still a margin for judging the appropriateness of the punishment.
WHERE CAMERAS ARE GOOD
1 To warn of Dangerous Areas
Speed cameras are good in dangerous areas or at accident black spots as they do slow motorists down. I also appreciate the fact that at night I can often spot a black spot or tricky junction highlighted
up ahead well before I can see it by the yellow reflection off the gatso and can take appropriate care, as well as slowing down.
WHERE THEY DON'T WORK
Where they are required to make a judgement call, or think because they can't.
1. Judging Relative Speed
I know people who have been given fines and 3 points for going 33 and 34 mph respectively in a 30 mile zone - an offence like that is as likely to be caused by the vaguries of their speedometer, however often it's checked, then a cavalier disregard for speed limits or human life.
2. Dangerous Driving is not always about speed.
Honest, it's true.
There is a common myth that those of us who are evil and reprehensible enough to break speed limits every now and again - or at least brave enough to admit that we do - approach driving like some goulish version of Paperboy, mounting the pavements in our carsto see how many young mothers and children we can splat and generally behaving in a manner the spawn of Satan, would be ashamed of. Actually, we're all quite normal, and for the most part we are simply people who like to drive fast.
When I say fast in my case, I mean that I strictly adhere to all 30 and 40 mph speed limits and any others that aren't denoted by a white circle with a black stripe across the middle. Since my car's speedo recallibrates itself every time I switch on the ignition it's probably more accurate than most.
An ex-traffic policeman once told me that if your speeding ticket is down to two people in a jam sandwich it's not the speed you drive that gets you done, it's how you drive. This is where speed cameras slip up. They can't make the required judgement call.
3 They aren't as effective as getting stopped by humans.
When it comes to the police, I have been stopped, and given a severe ticking off 3 times in as many months, one trying to escape a lunatic who appeared to wish to run me off the road and twice in a new car when I was going much faster than I realised. When it comes to the speeds in question, they got progressively lower each time and I certainly haven't got near them since I was last stopped. Had I been caught on camera I'd have 9 penalty points, no, actually my license wouldn't have survived to be caught a second time. A friend who got 6 points for setting off a camera at 34 and 78 mph feels unrepentant and cheated. When I was stopped by humans I felt ashamed, and sorry, the last time was 2 years ago and I unless I end up doing a mercy dash, it's unlikely to happen again.
In my defense, I would say that the speed limits of 60 and 70 were set 30 or 40 years ago, before traction control and a.b.s. brakes. In a lot of cases these technological developments mean cars can stop more quickly and be cornered just as safely at higher speeds, even taking into account the reaction times of the nut at the wheel.
4. If they start to replace traffic patrols other far more dangerous forms of anti social driving will go unpunished.
When I'm on motorways, I drive the same speed as everyone else, lorry speed in the inside and middle lane, 80 if I can get away with it in the overtaking lane - although since everyone else is usually going faster it sometimes has to be 90. I don't like going 90 unless the road is straight, the conditions are good and there's nothing else around for miles so I usually hang back to establish a stopping distance between myself and the car in front. Sometimes I find the person in the vehicle behind tries to maneouvre themselves actually into the car with me. If they're in that much of a hurry it's only courteous to let them by but a few seconds more slowly than I would if they waited politely.
In my view, this is where speed IS dangerous when people drive too close to the car in front (nobody who can drive properly tail gates outside the confines of a race track) or when they continue to drive fast when grip or visibility is poor. Too fast in some conditions may still be within the speed limit so the driver's dangerous driving won't be caught on camera. A speed camera isn't going to catch anybody doing these antisocial things, once again, the only truly effective cure for that is two people in a panda car.
5. It's totally unfair.
No, not because there's no appeal I mean because of the way it's set up....
A speed camera takes pictures until it runs out of film, it doesn't watch what's happening and discriminate between drivers and it doesn't save its film so it can take pictures of the people who are driving particularly badly or dangerously. The result, lots of people going 66 or 77 get tickets at rush hour and there's no film left for the car full of idoits which goes through it at 130 mph just after the pubs shut.
DOES THE SPEED CAMERA GET THE THUMBS UP?
In some ways, yes it makes you think about speed and slows up motorists at black spots.
In other ways no.... It takes any fairness out of the equation and adds a new factor; chance.
SO WHAT'S THE ANSWER?
Make if fairer. You can't just concentrate on one single thing when there are so many equally important factors to be taken into consideration and addressed. Use the revenue to put more human traffic cops back onto the roads who'll do something about the dangerous stuff like tailgating and using mobile phones (absolutely NO excuse without a hands free kit).
AND FINALLY.....?
Have you ever wondered why people do tailgate? Well, yes, sometimes it's because they're plonkers or because they haven't left enough time for their journey but not always, sometimes it's frustration. Good driving means you're aware of other road users, this means that whatever speed you drive you should be aware of where other road users are and anticipate what they're likely to do, and you should anticipate what's happening BEHIND your vehicle, too.
So at the risk of sounding a teensy bit sanctimonious I'd like to think that on the occasions I move into the overtaking lane on the motorway, I can see how fast the car behind me is approaching and ensure I'm able to finish overtaking before they're likely to be inconvenienced by my slower speed. Even if they look like they're doing 100, I'm not going to hold them up, I'm not the police so it's not up to me how fast they go, anyway, they might be the police for all I know. Consequently, I also hope that if I have to go slowly on a fast road, for example running in an engine at 30 on a 50mph trunk road, I am courteous enough to pull in regularly to let traffic trapped behind me pass. I think one of the fastest ways to cut deaths on the roads would be to put more onus on punishing ALL forms of discourteous driving and make a concerted effort to educate people who inconvenience others by driving too slowly as well as those who drive too fast.
I don't mean that people shouldn't be able to drive at a speeds well below the speed limit especially if those are the speeds at which they feel most in control or comfortable, but I think it's just as wrong as speeding when they act as if it's their moral duty to limit everybody else's speed to theirs. And they do, I've sat in cars with them and watched them do it.
Obeying the law is righteous and good but self righteousness is not.
I'm prepared to believe the frustration these drivers cause results in just as many deaths as the excessive speeding of their opposite numbers and I believe this kind of intransigant attitude is just as bad as, if not worse than, speeding.
In summery, keep it balanced. That's my view.
How helpful would this review be to a person making a buying decision? Rating guidelines
exceptional by (10%):
very helpful by (88%):
helpful by (2%):
