Ban speed cameras, the only way to keep your licence safe

[nokhaz]

i hope its posted in right place, sorry otherwise.

Have a look on this petition

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/scrapcam

Sign this petition on Prime Minister's website to ban the speed cameras.

[dmg24]

Here's a novel idea ...

Don't speed

[alwaysonthego]

Here's a novel idea ...

must agree I find it very annoying when I am doing the speed limit especially in 30 areas and an impatient person has to drive right close behind me, when I have the tots in the car with me. Whats if I have to stop suddenly, it does happen?:mad:

[ronaldo175]

I never let ANYONE who tailgates me make me go faster, if anything I slow down to the exact speed limit. I appreciate it would be different if I had kids in the back.

We have lots of roadworks around at the mo, I waited for about 3 minutes at this complicated set of lights at 11pm last night. It went to green, halfway down the road some idiot comes around the corner and had to swerve into traffic cones :mad:

[alwaysonthego]

I never let ANYONE who tailgates me make me go faster, if anything I slow down to the exact speed limit. I appreciate it would be different if I had kids in the back.

I don't let them bully me into going any faster, I always stick to the speed limit and go mad with dh if he speeds. We are never in a rush, so I find speeding to be pointless and idiotic

[tripled]

I find speed limits to be pointless and idiotic based on the fact that they are set by national criteria. I know roads with a 60 limit which should be 30 or even 20, and roads with low limits where you could drive faster quite safely.

What winds me up is people who sit in the middle lane on motorways and dual carriageways poodling along at 60 miles an hour without any consideration to those trying to squeeze past.

[anewman]

must agree I find it very annoying when I am doing the speed limit especially in 30 areas and an impatient person has to drive right close behind me, when I have the tots in the car with me. Whats if I have to stop suddenly, it does happen?:mad:

You turn it into a fantastic money making opportunity. Full lock your brakes, they go into the back of you and it's legally their fault for being too close. All you have to say is a child/dog (whatever) ran out in front of you, and the insurance companies need never know him/her was there.

I am of course not *really* suggesting people scam other peoples insurance as it is wrong, but it obviously goes on!
http://www.safefromscams.co.uk/StagedAccidentScam.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolpda/ukfs_news/hi/newsid_6248000/6248515.stm
However it would teach them the error of their ways, increase their insurance costs, and you would actually benefit financially.

How To Avoid The Scam
The main way to avoid this scam is to follow the rules of the road, and not follow another vehicle too closely. In practical terms, especially on roundabouts, that's not always feasible. So remain very alert. Keep an eye on the vehicle in front. The occupants may turn to look at you or may even make a gesture just before the trap is sprung.

But a practical suggestion - increase the distance between you and the car in front, if they overtake then you got rid of them. If something happens in front then you have more opportunity to slow slowly reducing the chance of being ploughed into.

[amcluesent]

>ban the speed cameras<

YES! The scamera partnerships only continue by ever increasing the tax burden on the motorist, so they resort to ever more devious means of entrapment. 30mph limit on dual carriage ways or the infamous 50, 40, speed camera, 50 nonsense.

[mattymoo]

i hope its posted in right place, sorry otherwise.

Have a look on this petition

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/scrapcam

Sign this petition on Prime Minister's website to ban the speed cameras.

Yeah like that's going to work isn't it.

[dzug]

Why not go the whole hog and start a petition to scrap all speed limits? I'm sure that's what you'd really like.

[anewman]

If you want to enjoy speed, go on a race track for the day.

If you want to drive on Britain's roads, please keep to the speed limits. They're there to stop people getting hurt. If you're late, then you should have set off earlier. Remember travelling slower can actually use less petrol. Most cars reach max MPG at about 55-60mph, do 70 and you get less miles per gallon.

I can understand the argument that speed cameras are just a cashcow, but there's really no reason not to stick to the limits.

[balsingh]

If you want to enjoy speed, go on a race track for the day.

If you want to drive on Britain's roads, please keep to the speed limits. They're there to stop people getting hurt. If you're late, then you should have set off earlier. Remember travelling slower can actually use less petrol. Most cars reach max MPG at about 55-60mph, do 70 and you get less miles per gallon.

I can understand the argument that speed cameras are just a cashcow, but there's really no reason not to stick to the limits.

I agree with your comment but I think the speed limits need to be more realistic. Remember, they were decided back in the 60s when most cars could barely do 80mph tops. Nowadays, cars are safer, have better brakes, steering, tyres etc. While cars have moved onwards and upwards, the speed limits haven't adapted at all.

[pompeyrich]

My feeling is that it is better to drive at a SAFE speed, whether that be 5 or 35 M.P.H. but be fully concentrating on the road and any likely dangers, cyclists, pedestrians, children or whatever, rather than driving around at or just under the speed limit, constantly staring at the speedo in case you drift over the set limit and get a ticket.

[rdwarr]

Why not just ban the police?

Just more petition:spam: :spam: :spam:

[p1an0player]

I am not against speed limits but I do think some of the 30 zones and 40-limit dual carriageways are almost impossible to stick to consistently.

I manage it by putting the cruise control on, and am usually the slowest car on the road when I do that. I notice how police cars (not on emergency calls) routinely exceed 30 limits.

I have trouble believing these people who make out they never speed - I suspect many such people perceive that they are going slowly but are in fact speeding, eg on a quiet wide road in a 30 zone, they might be travelling at 38.

If all speed limits are realistic and fair, we need to fit cars with speed limiters such that you press a 30 button or a 40 button to limit the speed, or which kicks in automatically based on road sensors.

Yet to do this would have a big effect on the economy, almost all taxis and delivery vans routinely exceed speed limits and to slow them down would make the services they provide more expensive.

[Crabman]

Yeah like that's going to work isn't it.
What happened to the petition on road pricing? The minister is still rabbiting on about trials.

This government don't give a monkeys for the people who elected them. Democracy is nonsense.

[anewman]

This government don't give a monkeys for the people who elected them. Democracy is nonsense.

There's no such thing as democracy. Blair is a dictator who states what happens in our country. He's not so different from Saddam, only difference is we elected them, but can elect them out for other people who will simply make choices on our behalf. We never get the opportunity to make choices for ourselves and election promises are always broken. What we really need is e-democracy where people vote on issues and the government actually takes notice and acts on what the people want. All this political ignorance can only last for so long.

[Quietgirl]

When i pass my driving test i intend to obey the law & stick to the speed limits. The amount of money it costs for driving lessons & tests i shall be treating my license with respect. I believe speed limits are put there for a reason. If everyone obeyed the law there would be no need for speed cams.

[alwaysonthego]

When i pass my driving test i intend to obey the law & stick to the speed limits. The amount of money it costs for driving lessons & tests i shall be treating my license with respect. I believe speed limits are put there for a reason. If everyone obeyed the law there would be no need for speed cams.

especially now if you get 6 or more points it an automatic licence revoke and both theory and practicle test to be taken again

[piggeh]

I think the point of the original post was that speed cameras do not make the roads safer. IMO they create more danger then they avert as drivers have to carefully monitor their speedos to make sure they don't creep over the limit and get fined for it! This is even more so in an average speed camera zone. If it's not very busy you have to constantly look down to make sure you're in the speed limit. I don't see how that's safe. Speed cameras should be disposed of and we should have more patrols to stop genuinely bad & dangerous driving.

I have got caught speeding by a camera once, when I moved from a 70 into a 50 (and got caught at 59). To avoid getting zapped I would either have to slow down before entering the zone and get shafted up the backside by one of the numerous cars who zoom off down the sliproad just beforehand, or suddenly brake to 50 as I enter it (and get shafted up the backside once again). I don't see how it makes the road safer when there wasn't even the required criteria for a speed camera there in the first place. If there was a patrol car in the area then it would be a lot safer and would stop the speed-slow down-speed up philosophy that we now have.

[anewman]

This is even more so in an average speed camera zone.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23370879-details/Drivers+can+avoid+speeding+tickets...by+changing+l anes/article.do

A massive flaw in a new generation of speed cameras means motorists can avoid fines and points on their licence simply by changing lanes.

The Home Office admitted last night that drivers can avoid being caught the by hi-tech 'SPECS' cameras which calculate a car's average speed over a long distance.

[Searcher]

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23370879-details/Drivers+can+avoid+speeding+tickets...by+changing+l anes/article.do

That link is from October last year

[Crabman]

That link is from October last year
And I think that loophole's being closed as we speak with expensive construction of new cameras. Can't have them missing out on their revenue. I mean, improving safety.

[anewman]

That link is from October last year

Haven't seen anything saying that the loophole had been closed yet.

[Crabman]

Haven't seen anything saying that the loophole had been closed yet.
Maybe not the loophole - just I noticed something on the news with pictures of half a carriageway ripped up for the sake of installing a central reservation based SPECS camera or two. I think the idea there is to ensure all three carriageways are covered, not to avoid the lane changers, though I may be wrong :o

[ManAtHome]

I prefer the Clarkson approach - just after you've passed the first one, pull onto the hard shoulder and read the paper for 5 minutes, then you're ok for 10 minutes at 120...

[piggeh]

I think the loophole is that the cameras are only type-approved for one lane. This is unlikely to have changed for that specific camera. So unless they've changed the type of camera (which given rollout schedules, purchasing, deployment, etc, is unlikely) then it's still the case imo. It's unlikely to make a different to a magistrate though, so if you wished to contest it on type approval arguements you would probably have quite a drawn out process.

Saves looking at your speedo continuously though.

[alanrowell]

I have got caught speeding by a camera once, when I moved from a 70 into a 50 (and got caught at 59).
Given the visibility of speed cameras these days I'd be a bit worried being anywhere near someone who saw the camera so late they were unable to slow from 70 to 50.

[astonsmummy]

I can see some peoples point of view but i dont quite understand 'the only way to keep your license safe' wtf is all that about?
Surely the only way to keep it safe is to not drive like a tw@t?

[Crabman]

Given the visibility of speed cameras these days I'd be a bit worried being anywhere near someone who saw the camera so late they were unable to slow from 70 to 50.
I'd rather they were looking out for pedestrians/other obstructions on the road.

[derrick]

I agree with your comment but I think the speed limits need to be more realistic. Remember, they were decided back in the 60s when most cars could barely do 80mph tops. Nowadays, cars are safer, have better brakes, steering, tyres etc. While cars have moved onwards and upwards, the speed limits haven't adapted at all.


But the one thing that has not changed is the moron behind the steering wheel, and that will never change, also different people have different time reactions, you have to have an average that will hopefully include everyone.

There are also some vehicles from the 60s still on the road.

[piggeh]

I'd rather they were looking out for pedestrians/other obstructions on the road.

Indeed. I have normally found it more prudent to be looking at the road and what other vehicles are doing than looking at what's on a seperate overpass. I will have to remember that next time I'm entering a new speed zone to continually watch my speedo and look at the passing bridges, as apparently this would be a safer way to drive??

[Voyager2002]

I agree with your comment but I think the speed limits need to be more realistic. Remember, they were decided back in the 60s when most cars could barely do 80mph tops. Nowadays, cars are safer, have better brakes, steering, tyres etc. While cars have moved onwards and upwards, the speed limits haven't adapted at all.

Except that speed limits protect (inadequately) pedestrians and cyclists. Pedestrians are likely to survive being hit by a car doing 30, but will probably be killed if it is doing 40 or more.

Really, there is no need to drive at more than 30 mph through a built-up area.

[taxiphil]

Except that speed limits protect (inadequately) pedestrians and cyclists. Pedestrians are likely to survive being hit by a car doing 30, but will probably be killed if it is doing 40 or more.

Really, there is no need to drive at more than 30 mph through a built-up area.

But what never gets discussed is the role of the pedestrian in all of this. If they weren't in the road in the first place they wouldn't get hit, no matter what speed the car was doing.

Three times this year I've had to do emergency stops because children and elderly people have stepped off the kerb without looking and casually walked out in front of my car.

Pedestrians are supposed to obey the Highway Code just as motorists are. We need better education and enforcement of the law against all road users - not just motorists - if we are to cut accident levels.