We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 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!
Britain's most effective revenue camera
Options
GingerBob_3
Posts: 3,659 Forumite
in Motoring
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/03/britains-lucrative-speed-camera-raises-much-money-medium-sized/
Clearly this device is not working. Its stated purpose is to reduce speed to protect the workforce. Why has it not been removed and a more effective alternative put in place?
TfL's head of strategy and outcome planning, Lilli Matson, said: "The limit on the A406 Gunnersbury Avenue has been reduced to 30mph from 40mph to ensure the safety of all road users and contractors. There is clear signage in the area to advise drivers of this."
(my highlighting)
But it isn't bloody doing that! How do you go about knocking sense into an idiot like this?
Clearly this device is not working. Its stated purpose is to reduce speed to protect the workforce. Why has it not been removed and a more effective alternative put in place?
TfL's head of strategy and outcome planning, Lilli Matson, said: "The limit on the A406 Gunnersbury Avenue has been reduced to 30mph from 40mph to ensure the safety of all road users and contractors. There is clear signage in the area to advise drivers of this."
(my highlighting)
But it isn't bloody doing that! How do you go about knocking sense into an idiot like this?
0
Comments
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/03/britains-lucrative-speed-camera-raises-much-money-medium-sized/
Clearly this device is not working. Its stated purpose is to reduce speed to protect the workforce. Why has it not been removed and a more effective alternative put in place?
Read it again. That is the stated purpose of the speed limit, not the camera. The camera is working very well, the speed limit less so.0 -
-
Garbage. The camera is supposedly there to stop people speeding. It is not doing so. It is failing.
No. People are failing to open their eyes and keep their speed down. If they (or I) get caught, hard luck. If you fail to spot a speed limit sign, and then also fail to spot a camera and get caught by it, then your observation skills are so poor, I'd question what you are doing driving a car. I mean those roundels on the road are massive.0 -
Read again. It's not that the camera isn't doing the job of preventing speeding, it's the alleged, insufficient signage which is the issue.
If a driver is unobservant to the signs in the area (and they are there, I've driven that rod a few times since the speed limit changed) how do they miss those huge roundels by the speed camera?0 -
Mercdriver wrote: »No. People are failing to open their eyes and keep their speed down. If they (or I) get caught, hard luck. If you fail to spot a speed limit sign, and then also fail to spot a camera and get caught by it, then your observation skills are so poor, I'd question what you are doing driving a car. I mean those roundels on the road are massive.
Massively missing the point.
Supposedly the camera has a single objective, to reduce the speed in road works, thereby making a safer environment for the workers. It is not doing so. Consequently the workers' safety is being compromised. Regardless as to why it's not working, signage or whatever, the fact remains it isn't. To point out that people shouldn't be driving if they can't spot the camera is totally irrelevant and, as I said, massively missing the point.0 -
Massively missing the point.
Supposedly the camera has a single objective, to reduce the speed in road works, thereby making a safer environment for the workers. It is not doing so. Consequently the workers' safety is being compromised. Regardless as to why it's not working, signage or whatever, the fact remains it isn't. To point out that people shouldn't be driving if they can't spot the camera is totally irrelevant and, as I said, massively missing the point.
The speed limit on the North Circular isn't, as far as I know, a temporary one for road works, I might be wrong, but I don't think they are. The speed limit is to slow people down, the cameras are there to enforce the speed limit. Why else would they be there?
If people decide for themselves that speed limits are voluntary, they can't moan about getting caught.0 -
Massively missing the point.
Supposedly the camera has a single objective, to reduce the speed in road works, thereby making a safer environment for the workers. It is not doing so. Consequently the workers' safety is being compromised. Regardless as to why it's not working, signage or whatever, the fact remains it isn't. To point out that people shouldn't be driving if they can't spot the camera is totally irrelevant and, as I said, massively missing the point.
Where do you get that idea? AFAIK no-one has said that. It's the limit which is in place to reduce speed, and which apparently isn't working.
You are right however that someone is missing the point ...0 -
Massively missing the point.
Supposedly the camera has a single objective, to reduce the speed in road works, thereby making a safer environment for the workers. It is not doing so. Consequently the workers' safety is being compromised. Regardless as to why it's not working, signage or whatever, the fact remains it isn't. To point out that people shouldn't be driving if they can't spot the camera is totally irrelevant and, as I said, massively missing the point.
As you are obviously suggesting Speed Cameras do not reduce the speed someone is driving at. But they are a good way to detect how effective the reduced speed limit is on the road. Plus sending out fines encourages people to reduce their speed in the future.
Removing the camera would allow people who are breaking the speed limit to get away with it, so that would be a stupid idea. That's like saying "lots of people get murdered each year in this area so we should stop sending the murderer's to prison and try something else".
Personally I think there should be more speed cameras hidden in built up areas with 30 or 40 mph limits. The revenue generated from these cameras should then be spent on deploying more traffic police in the areas to get the bad drivers off the road.0 -
Mercdriver wrote: »The speed limit on the North Circular isn't, as far as I know, a temporary one for road works, I might be wrong, but I don't think they are. The speed limit is to slow people down, the cameras are there to enforce the speed limit. Why else would they be there?
If people decide for themselves that speed limits are voluntary, they can't moan about getting caught.
But they are not doing so!! At least not very effectively.
And why else would they be there? Well, since they are singularly failing in their objective to "enforce the speed limit", but they are raising vast amounts of money, I think you have answered your own question.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.6K Spending & Discounts
- 244K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.9K Life & Family
- 257.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards