We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Speeding offence

1246723

Comments

  • matttye wrote: »
    It's a scam because these cameras are sold to the public as "safety" cameras, supposedly to help with excessive or inappropriate speed

    Although I didn't do any research on whether it's a scam but I don't believe the headlines about it in Daily Fail. This is the only piece of research I'm aware of that was done regarding speed cameras.
  • brat
    brat Posts: 2,533 Forumite
    A lot of research time and effort has tried to show that speed cameras make our roads safer. Most research concludes that they do, but they are very unconvincing, necessarily incomplete analyses, and probably very wrong.
    Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler.
  • Nick_C
    Nick_C Posts: 7,631 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Home Insurance Hacker!
    AdrianC wrote: »
    probably 95%+ of people have an "above average" number of limbs.

    That depends which average you are using.
  • AdrianC
    AdrianC Posts: 42,189 Forumite
    Eighth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Nick_C wrote: »
    That depends which average you are using.
    Well, the average average is the mean.
  • facade
    facade Posts: 7,728 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    edited 25 August 2014 at 3:33PM
    AdrianC wrote: »
    Well, the average average is the mean.

    Which illustrates perfectly how you can manipulate data to show pretty much any result you want. (The Government do it all the time!)

    A trouser designer would use the modal number of legs to produce trousers. The mean number would result in trousers that would be suitable for hardly anybody. ;)

    If 100 people take a single question test, 99 get it right one gets it wrong then if you use the mean result (a score of 0.99), 99% of the candidates are above average.
    I want to go back to The Olden Days, when every single thing that I can think of was better.....

    (except air quality and Medical Science ;))
  • Ebe_Scrooge
    Ebe_Scrooge Posts: 7,320 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    brat wrote: »
    A lot of research time and effort has tried to show that speed cameras make our roads safer. Most research concludes that they do, but they are very unconvincing, necessarily incomplete analyses, and probably very wrong.

    To anyone that knows the A68 between Edinburgh and Jedburgh - admittedly a fairly twisty, potentially dangerous road. But all the speed cameras are sited on the only clear straight bits where you have an opportunity for overtaking the Sunday afternoon drivers pootling along at 45 mph. To safely overtake someone doing 45mph you're probably going to be doing slightly more than 60 mph for a short period, just where the speed camera is. The result is that you daren't overtake where it's otherwise safe to do so, then frustration creeps in after half an hour and you try to overtake where it's not safe, but where you know there are no cameras.

    "Safety Cameras" my !!!!!.

    < rant over >
  • Richard53
    Richard53 Posts: 3,173 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    macman wrote: »
    I went on a speed awareness course recently, and one of the questions asked was 'do you consider your driving average/above average/below average?': Of course, 90% said 'above average': which of course is statisitically not possible.


    Sun headline I saw once: "Half of Britain's kids leave primary school below average in reading."
    Iceweasel wrote: »
    If you moved the sign 20 or 30 feetback those same drivers would just speed up a bit earlier.

    There isn't a 'transition zone'.

    The sign has to go somewhere.


    I call this the 'digestive biscuit' argument, after someone said to me that they thought McVitie's could solve the problem of the last biscuit in the pack being always broken by just leaving out the one at the end.


    Having said that, I can see Mattye's point. I can think of two occasions (one of which caught me out) where the derestriction sign is placed a long way after the end of the hazard, and the speed camera a few feet inside the limit sign. The law is the law and all that, but these did look like deliberate attempts to catch out people who were otherwise driving reasonably and safely.
    brat wrote: »
    A lot of research time and effort has tried to show that speed cameras make our roads safer. Most research concludes that they do, but they are very unconvincing, necessarily incomplete analyses, and probably very wrong.



    And when you take 'regression to the mean' into account, there is often no demonstrable safety effect at all, whatever the headline figures suggest.
    If someone is nice to you but rude to the waiter, they are not a nice person.
  • Shayboy786 wrote: »
    It is important to note, this particular stretch of 3mile road is littered with Speed & traffic light cameras.

    It is probably more important to note that although that particular stretch of road may be "littered" with cameras, your father either didn't notice them or he did notice them and just didn't care.
    Shayboy786 wrote: »
    The old man has been a safe driver and still is.
    I honestly don't see how you can refer to someone who gets caught for speeding and ignoring red traffic lights 3 times in one month as being a safe driver.
  • Iceweasel
    Iceweasel Posts: 4,887 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Combo Breaker
    Richard53 wrote: »
    Sun headline I saw once: "Half of Britain's kids leave primary school below average in reading."

    The best one I ever saw was that the overwhelming majority of people in the UK have more than the average number of legs.

    Perfectly true - it only needs one amputee to bring the average number of legs down to 1.9999999. :p
  • lister
    lister Posts: 239 Forumite
    Shayboy786 wrote:
    It is important to note, this particular stretch of 3mile road is littered with Speed & traffic light cameras.. Once the road users clear that miserably congested zone after sitting in unnecessary staggered traffic / lights..the end quarter mile road widens up into two lanes, downhill with no residential area.. Several motorists fly down that stretch..including Police vehicles with varying speeds I have observed. The only purpose to deploy a dweeb in a Smart car on that stretch of road with speed traps is to generate revenue.

    I would love to see a streetview link of the road in question. I very much doubt the 30mph zone is there for no reason, albeit that perhaps the limit is a shade on the over cautious side.

    It concerns me deeply that you regard a section of road with speed and light cameras as 'miserable' - the implication is a disturbingly poor attitude towards driving - essentially you feel you can judge what is safe and to hell with the rules. Well here's the thing - if everyone was good at judging what was safe and what wasn't on the road, there wouldn't be any collisions...

    All research shows that the vast majority of ordinary drivers are shockingly bad at judging what is and what is not safe (our brains are not evolved to work effectively at speeds above a fast run after all). That accidents and casualties are limited to current levels is not to do with judgement, but is entirely to do with the implementation of road traffic laws, road design, car design and most importantly is a statistical artefact.

    I assume the road in question is one your father is very familiar with as he was going to a doctor's appointment. In which case doing 51 in a 30 zone is not a momentary lapse in attention, it isn't due to unfamiliarity with the road and missing a change in limit, it was a conscious decision to breach the limit by a substantial degree. I hope he comes across in court better than you are suggesting here.
    matttye wrote: »
    I appreciate that speeding is against the law but you should consider the mischief the law is supposed to prevent. Speeding up just before an NSL sign is not, in any sense of the word.

    In which case, where would you put the limit change? If you would keep the limit where it is, how much leeway are motorists allowed? Can everyone decide their own leeway? Perhaps 100m - might sound fair to most people? I might like to assume 1km as my leeway - is that reasonable?

    If we allow a set amount of leeway, say 100m, how do people judge that? Can you judge 100m accurately when driving at 30mph +? Would it then be fair for the Police to do you for speeding if you sped up 110m away, or are you allowed leeway on the leeway? Perhaps we could put up a sign marking where the leeway starts so every limit has two signs? Good use of public money?

    See how difficult it is?

    Alternatively we could perhaps come up with a system that will make all this easier. My idea is that once we have picked an arbitrary point (but based on a series of logical evaluations of the prevailing road and traffic conditions) where the speed limit changes we will put up a marker. I think I will call it a speed limit sign. That way people will know exactly where they need to be doing the new speed slowing down, and where they can start to accelerate entering a new zone. For some reason that system begins to sound familiar...

    Everyone thinks that writing laws is easy - it isn't! Making a law which says what it needs to, covers every situation, and is unambiguous is very hard.
    matttye wrote: »
    I don't even think police would bat an eye lid about people accelerating before the sign, but I am admittedly shooting in the dark with that one. I'd be happy to admit I'm wrong if you can show examples of the police stopping people who accelerate just prior to limit changes.

    The Police frequently conduct speed checks from just inside a higher speed limit, catching people speeding up early. Likewise, another favourite trick is to sit just inside a lowered speed limit catching people slowing down late. And yes - they will have guidelines about how much leeway to allow, probably several hundred metres before they typically prosecute.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.2K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.5K Life & Family
  • 258.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.