anyone from taunton - i got caught speeding and usually careful

p1tse

yeah will do, easiest way

but usually careful, i had my parents, wife, and 6 month old in the car, so to speed is a rare occasion with all those on board. i suppose i never saw the sign.

but i still think some of these are just money making traps

DirectDebacle

p1tse wrote: »

but i still think some of these are just money making traps

1996 - approx no. of fines for speeding 600,000

2006 - approx no. fines for speeding 2.3 million.

Over the same period reduction in accidents where speed was a factor - negligble.

Crime doesn't pay but cameras do.

Inactive

p1tse wrote: »

but i still think some of these are just money making traps

I agree, but it still better to not let them " trap " you.

CvPiper

Its definitely a 30, as you leave Bathpool, over the railway bridge, there is a turn to Monkton Heathfield on the left, and a few big new build houses straight after that, they park on the grass kerbside under the trees.

Goes to 40 about 15 yards after where they park.

p1tse

thanks, but i was heading towards taunton

boliston

p1tse wrote: »

i know past the range rover garage there's the residential area, with the little small back brigde there, so i know i would have been doing 30.

does it change quite quickly just after the garage?

i grew up there and been on those roads loads before ;-(

The map link I posted actually shows the point where the speed switches from 40 to 30. You can actually see "30" and "40" printed on the tarmac as well as the shadows from the actual signs.

The link: http://www.bing.com/maps/default.aspx?v=2&cp=sh4sxkgrbfs4&scene=11607930&lvl=2&sty=o&eo=1&where1=Taunton%2C%20Somerset

Inactive

A trip to Specsavers would seem to be in order.;)

DrScotsman

DirectDebacle wrote: »

1996 - approx no. of fines for speeding 600,000

2006 - approx no. fines for speeding 2.3 million.

Over the same period reduction in accidents where speed was a factor - negligble.

Crime doesn't pay but cameras do.

Bad statistics much? There's constantly an increase in the number of vehicles on the road. What were the fines per driver(/vehicle/1000 drivers/etc.) in 1996 and 2006? And were the accident figures you were looking at total accidents or accidents per driver?

I'm not dismissing your point (before seeing the actual figures), but the increase in drivers will definitely be enough to make a difference.

DirectDebacle

DrScotsman wrote: »

Bad statistics much? There's constantly an increase in the number of vehicles on the road. What were the fines per driver(/vehicle/1000 drivers/etc.) in 1996 and 2006? And were the accident figures you were looking at total accidents or accidents per driver?

I'm not dismissing your point (before seeing the actual figures), but the increase in drivers will definitely be enough to make a difference.

Fair comment.

The ideal stats (I couldn't find them) would be accident rate at a site before camera installed c.f. accident rate after. That was the main reason given for their initial introduction.

I would expect the initial reduction rate to be high and then reducing as more cameras were introduced as revenue raisers rather than accident reduction.

Speed cameras do have a role to play in road safety but are over and mis-used IMO.