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

13468923

Comments

  • Car_54
    Car_54 Posts: 8,939 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    brat wrote: »
    Too much attention to the posted limits or too much rigid adherence to them is not the safest way to drive. And drivers are at risk of concentrating too much on speed imits and their speed through fear of getting points on their licence.

    This is one reason why, in my view, the expansion of the safety camera industry coincided with the worst trend of accident figures ever.

    Can you provide any evidence for that claim?

    All the published figures show a REDUCTION in injury accidents almost every year since at least 1980.
  • matttye
    matttye Posts: 4,828 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Combo Breaker Debt-free and Proud!
    Car_54 wrote: »
    What is wrong with earning revenue?

    As a source of government funding, collecting fines from criminals is preferable to raising taxes for the law-abiding.

    Nothing wrong with it per se but at least have the balls to bloody admit it.

    Telling us these cameras are all about safety is bull.

    If these cameras are for safety then there's no justification in putting one just before a higher speed limit sign.

    If they're for revenue earning, put them wherever you damn well please. But be honest about the purpose of these cameras.

    It's the sheer dishonesty that bugs me.
    What will your verse be?

    R.I.P Robin Williams.
  • brat
    brat Posts: 2,533 Forumite
    Car_54 wrote: »
    Can you provide any evidence for that claim?

    All the published figures show a REDUCTION in injury accidents almost every year since at least 1980.

    From 1996 to 2003 speed camera prosecutions increased from less than 300,000pa to more than 1,500,000.
    The fatality rate per bvm (billion vehicle miles) had for the 20 years prior to 1996 been reducing steadily at ~7% per annum, year on year, thanks to improvement in medical intervention, road engineering improvements and vehicle safety improvements.

    During precisely the same period of growth in camera based speed prosecutions, the steady trend of fatality reduction faltered quite dramatically, only recovering in 2004 when (coincidentally?) the government halted the expansion of the speed cam industry, and prosecution numbers steadied.

    Whatever the reasons for the loss of trend in fatality reduction, had the trend been maintained, many thousands of fatal accidents would have been avoided.

    There are many good reasons why the increase in numbers of speed cameras combined with the consequent reduction in road policing may well have contributed to poorer road safety. And while it's impossible to directly link speed camera policy to more road deaths, the figures during the period of change certainly don't offer any ringing endorsement of their road safety credentials.
    Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler.
  • Richard53
    Richard53 Posts: 3,173 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    Car_54 wrote: »
    All the published figures show a REDUCTION in injury accidents almost every year since at least 1980.



    The KSI figures show a steady decline since the 1960s, which levels out somewhat and almost flatlines since the early 90s. And guess when motoring policy changed from bobbies in cars to cameras? The early 90s.


    As for the apparent reduction in accidents, I refer again to 'regression to the mean'. Basically, if you put a speed camera on a stretch of road that has recently had a spike of accidents, the figures for the following year or two will almost inevitably show a reduction. That reduction, however, is simply the random nature of accidents reasserting itself, and not the result of the camera.


    Edit: agree with brat above, cross-posted.
    If someone is nice to you but rude to the waiter, they are not a nice person.
  • sh0597
    sh0597 Posts: 578 Forumite
    I doubt speed cameras drastically reduce fatalities or increase them. They are there to try and enforce the speed limit and are more cost effective than a policeman.


    They do an ok job but obviously a machine cannot use common sense, but then a policeman won't always either.
  • Richard53
    Richard53 Posts: 3,173 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    sh0597 wrote: »
    They do an ok job but obviously a machine cannot use common sense, but then a policeman won't always either.



    As has often been said, a camera can't spot a drunk driver, an unroadworthy vehicle, a dangerous overtake, a driver texting or reading a newspaper, etc etc.


    But it can spot you doing 44 in a 40 limit, on an empty road in broad daylight, and make you face the consequences.


    Speed and red-light cameras have their place (dangerous junctions, schools, main roads through villages), but all too often the place they are in is not helpful to anyone but the local authority finance director.
    If someone is nice to you but rude to the waiter, they are not a nice person.
  • PenguinJim
    PenguinJim Posts: 844 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture Combo Breaker
    I feel my blood pressure rise when I see armchair pundits (who speed) complaining that police shouldn't be wasting their time catching people speeding when there are still murderers, rapists and foreigns out there to be caught.

    Of course the police shouldn't be wasting their time catching people speeding! DON'T SPEED AND THEY WON'T HAVE TO!!! :mad:

    Personally, I love driving, and I love the rules. I love the challenge of getting from A to B in the fastest time possible within those rules. Breaking the speed limit, driving through a red light, making an illegal manoeuvre are the equivalent of entering a cheat code on a video game - they just show that you're not very good, that you lack the skills, and need to cheat to "win".

    I also don't understand people who slow down for speed cameras. Ashamed of your speed? Grow a pair and own your speed. Take it to court and defend it if you believe your speed was right. If you believe your speed was wrong, then why were you doing that speed in the first place?
    lister wrote: »
    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...
    I don't understand why adults would need this point explaining to them! A line has to be drawn somewhere. Where the line is drawn, you can't complain that you were "just" over/under it. That would move the line. And then people who were "just" over/under where you were can complain the same thing. And that would move the line. And so on.

    No!

    The line must be drawn HERE! This far, NO FURTHER!
    Q: What kind of discussions aren't allowed?
    A: It goes without saying that this site's about MoneySaving.

    Q: Why are some Board Guides sometimes unpleasant?
    A: We very much hope this isn't the case. But if it is, please make sure you report this, as you would any other forum user's posts, to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com.
  • Richard53
    Richard53 Posts: 3,173 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    PenguinJim wrote: »

    So ACPO are wrong when they advise a certain tolerance over prosecution of offences around the legal limit - the 'limit + 10% + 2' policy?
    If someone is nice to you but rude to the waiter, they are not a nice person.
  • PenguinJim
    PenguinJim Posts: 844 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture Combo Breaker
    As I understand it, that is to allow for variances in speedometers.
    Q: What kind of discussions aren't allowed?
    A: It goes without saying that this site's about MoneySaving.

    Q: Why are some Board Guides sometimes unpleasant?
    A: We very much hope this isn't the case. But if it is, please make sure you report this, as you would any other forum user's posts, to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com.
  • Car_54
    Car_54 Posts: 8,939 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    PenguinJim wrote: »
    As I understand it, that is to allow for variances in speedometers.

    No. The days when speedos were allowed to under-read by 10% are long gone.
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.