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

piggeh

Crabman wrote: »

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

balsingh wrote: »

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

Voyager2002 wrote: »

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.