I'd like to know what everyone else thinks of them.

Personally I think they've been put up just for financial purpose.

What are your opinions?

 

P.S. apologies if the poll doesn't come up, first time doing it :\

P.P.S. ok, it's up

No poll mate, but i have mixed feelings.... A local school near here had one of its students run down and killed last year. Since, a speed scamera has been set up to enforce the 30 mph speed limit, as it was in fact a speeding driver that hit the child. This i have no problem with. About town and in areas of vunerable people such as the elderly / children / blind people etc.

 

However.... on roads of 40, 50 and 60 (especially the latter) i think that 99% are there purely for revenue generating / taking road users off the road to force them to use public transport and reducing congestion. Personally i believe that scameras on large roads are appauling, especially dual carriages. Anyone from near stafford will agree, that 12 scameras between stafford and stoke on the A34 (60 mph duel carraigeway - 13 miles long!) is obscene and a gross waste of money.

 

The truth is they didnt generate as much revenue as they would have wanted by just placing cameras in towns, as there is less chance of speeding due to congestion.

 

Also i don't believe it is purely for monetary purposes, reducing congestion (get caught 4 times and take a year off!) and the number of road users, also means that public transport will flourish (to start off with, but then collapse) due to increased demand.

 

Thats my 2 pence anyway...

I agree.

 

Potentially they're a very useful tool to save lives, but as usual greedy @rseholes chuck them down all over the place to trap people rather than to reduce road speeds in the places where speed-related accidents frequently occur.

 

The public now have NO respect for them whatsoever, which much decreases their effectiveness in the places where they're actually needed.

 

PistonHeads had a good article a month or so ago saying how road deaths were not decreasing in areas littered with scameras, and IIRC were actually increasing.

 

So a big WELL DONE to local authorities, you've scuppered that one.

 

Mark

 

I in no way condone breaking the speed limits, which has various legal and safety related consequences!

I in no way condone breaking the speed limits, which has various legal and safety related consequences!

Nice little discalmer there mate :D Personally I dont drive but i urge all you drivers out there to speed as much as humanly possible!

 

Only jestin !! :hyper:

theyre usefull for the 10 meters after it. then u can just speed up again. the average speed detectors are a better idea.

you have to remember that if no one sped then there would be no cameras. so if you dont want them, drive at the right speed, then they:

A. wouldnt spent £10k+ installing one

B. would end up loosing money because they werent paying them off. there for not be able to afford to put up more.

its your choice.

you cant beat the system so play it.

When speed cameras came out I was all for them. They were introduced to us as being a traffic carming instroment for accident black spots and "if you weren't paying attention to the warning signs, therefore endangering someone elses life the you deserved to get find".

 

However the guide lines for instalation have been abused by local Police forces because they can keep half the money raised by the camera. "Very wrong kind of incentive and not in the perdestrian or driver interest".

 

The guide line states that a static Camera can only be place within 400 meters of an accident black spot. Which means we have cameras like the 1 on the M6 North bound shortly before the Blackpool junction. It has collected more revenue per anum than anyother Camera in the contry. Yet the accident black spot it supposedly serves is 393 meters away on a T junction on the A6.

 

This year alone 4 people have been killed on that junction While no one has been killed on the M6 within a mile of the camera in the last 3 years. Yet countless numbers of people have lost there licences for travelling at sub standard EU motorway speeds.

(lets remember that our speed limits were set in 1958. Shit I wouldn't dream of doing 70 in a 1958 Ford Pop, or Austin 7.) The Camera is not the reason for no deaths on the motorway.

 

Then of course there is the mobile unit. Which it has be proven beyond all question that they are completely unreliable. These have been employed in ambuse techniques.

Waiting round bends on fast A roads. So even though you can see clearly up the road you cannot see the Van as its in the trees and off the road. (clicky click)

I won't go into the reason for why they are unreliable, but you can visit BBC open eye web and seach speed cameras. Or search the web for info on the Camera they use (get the name off the BBC site) and read the US manufacturers operation manual and why you should do so.

 

Yes it is true tha Cameras could and should be used to save people lives, but the implemention of the cameras and the incentives to the police has been flawed. As usual we have a police force run by Paranoid crooks who do not have to answer directly to the people the are suposed to serve, but choose to see as the enemy.

 

The alarming result is that road Deaths have risen on average by 20% in the reagons were speed cameras have been employed and believe it or not (but it is true and forms part of a government report) the areas and regions were cameras have not been used road deaths have actually fallen by 17%. It is because of this report that there has been a national freeze on sighting and use of any new Static and mobile cameras until a sellect comitee pulishes its findings.

 

This is why we are being bombarded with surveys every where, because the Pod want to keep em and suppress the truth about mobile units and the sellect comitee findings. If they don't then the subsequent legal cases for damages will bancrupt most forces.

Brunstrum is a meglomaniac and should be comited. We talk about Sadam Hussain and verious Hyotolas. In my veiw this man is up there with the rest of them.

 

How come the rest of Europe don't have this problem? Why isn't Japan buying cameras by the million? There Counry is roughly the same size as the UK, but the population is almost the same as the USA.

 

Rant over

stick em on every 30mph stretch (and slower), every 100 yards.. dropping to 20 yards around schools, playgrounds, hospitals etc.

 

everywhere else -> replace them with the signs that flash the speed limit and "SLOW DOWN".. as these tell you you're speeding, approaching a possible blackspot, and are very unlikely to be hidden behind a bush / signpost / bridge / etc..

 

:)

It is because of this report that there has been a national freeze on sighting and use of any new Static and mobile cameras until a sellect comitee pulishes its findings.

 

So are they still using the mobile vans that they currently have then? i only ask as ive gone past a couple recently.

So are they still using the mobile vans that they currently have then? i only ask as ive gone past a couple recently.

 

Yes they are

 

So if you've got nabbed by one check out the BBC Eye web site. The guy who will help you prove that evidence from a mobile unit is unsafe is called Dr Michael Clark from some University.

 

+ There is a solicitor in Deans Gate Manchester Call Andrew Freeman of Freeman & Co. who can get almost any motoring offence thrown out on technicallities, because the police and more so the crown prosicution service are for ever procceding on incorrect information or equipment usage. If you aren't in the know why should a magestrate know.

 

He's not cheep though (average about £450 to read the charge sheet and write a letter telling them why it cannot stand up in court), but if your licence depends on it then it's worth it.

In portugal they have speed detectors (warns you before u approach) that if you are approaching over the speed limit it will turn the traffic lights red and make you stop (well if u can or want to) because they dont have a camera there anyhows. found out this year as everytime ma dad went passed dem they always turned red for some reason. den we found out why. lol

I won't go into the reason for why they are unreliable, but you can visit BBC open eye web and seach speed cameras. Or search the web for info on the Camera they use (get the name off the BBC site) and read the US manufacturers operation manual and why you should do so.

Gatso is dutch and made in Holland, Who is the US manufacturer?

Gatso is dutch and made in Holland, Who is the US manufacturer?

 

Gatso is static and completely acurate. I think the mobile units use the LPT20 and its made in the USA and must be on a fixed static tri-pod to work and there must be no operator inteferrance or the reading's are incorrect. So if you stick one in a Van that moves in the wind on its springs, or moves as it is buffetted by passing car and HGV's + a unsupervised Plod moving around and bingo descrepancies up to 58mph.

Gatso is static and completely acurate.

 

Errrr no mate, that's a load of bolliox!!!

 

Take a look here...

 

Clicky clicky!

Errrr no mate, that's a load of bolliox!!!

 

Take a look here...

 

Clicky clicky!

 

Shit the bed!!

 

None of em are being used properly so all cases are unlawfull?

 

Its far worse than I thought. This info should be made much more public.

This info should be made much more public.

 

That's the barmy thing- there's so much data is out in the public domain PROVING that cameras as they are being used aren't saving lives, yet somehow it doesn't change anything...? :confused:

 

Surely it's just a matter of time before they take the godforsaken things away.

Gatso is static and completely acurate. I think the mobile units use the LPT20 and its made in the USA and must be on a fixed static tri-pod to work and there must be no operator inteferrance or the reading's are incorrect. So if you stick one in a Van that moves in the wind on its springs, or moves as it is buffetted by passing car and HGV's + a unsupervised Plod moving around and bingo descrepancies up to 58mph.

u mean this

http://www.lasertech.com/ulproduct.html

swansea the city of gatso + the pigging dvla + speed bumps + camera vans bump bump

North Yorkshire - a county with NO fixed speed cameras!! :D

I'm surprised how PC the votes are - Cameras are revenue generators - just more indirect taxation.

IMO i think that the money spent on speed cameras and those f****** vans should go on improving the skills of the drivers using the roads. our driver training is out of date and some people take 4 or 5 tests before they pass. maybe there should be a maximum number of tests that someone can take and if they don't pass then sorry your not safe enough to drive on the roads. in any event most accidents on the roads are the event of driving without due care/whilst under the influence etc. speeding is a contributary factor. more police cars on the roads can spot these dangerous drivers whereas static or mobile cameras only catch speeders, most of whom rarely go much over the speed limit. policemen on patrol can also give a bit of leiniency depending on conditions. for example 80mph on a 3 lane motorway at 2am.

 

in short: more police cars, less cameras, better training. (anyone get lessons how to drive on a motorway?)

 

anyway thats my pennies worth. hope it makes sense to you all.

theyre usefull for the 10 meters after it. then u can just speed up again. the average speed detectors are a better idea.

you have to remember that if no one sped then there would be no cameras. so if you dont want them, drive at the right speed, then they:

A. wouldnt spent £10k+ installing one

B. would end up loosing money because they werent paying them off. there for not be able to afford to put up more.

its your choice.

you cant beat the system so play it.

Yes, but not but yes but no.....but if the system is flawed or just down right stupid (which in most cases it is!!!!!) then why should we HAVE to play it? This is a democratic country, apparently, but I'm sure if the majority was asked where they would want them then I don't think that motorways, dual carriageways and 60mph A roads would get any votes!

IMO i think that the money spent on speed cameras and those f****** vans should go on improving the skills of the drivers using the roads. our driver training is out of date and some people take 4 or 5 tests before they pass. maybe there should be a maximum number of tests that someone can take and if they don't pass then sorry your not safe enough to drive on the roads. in any event most accidents on the roads are the event of driving without due care/whilst under the influence etc. speeding is a contributary factor. more police cars on the roads can spot these dangerous drivers whereas static or mobile cameras only catch speeders, most of whom rarely go much over the speed limit. policemen on patrol can also give a bit of leiniency depending on conditions. for example 80mph on a 3 lane motorway at 2am.

 

in short: more police cars, less cameras, better training. (anyone get lessons how to drive on a motorway?)

 

anyway thats my pennies worth. hope it makes sense to you all.

 

Is it just me that thinks the following points are just stupid when it comes to driving tuition / tests....

 

Checking all round the car when pulling off....surely if you are pulling off forward, what is to the side or rear of you is not important?

 

Checking behind you before changing up....Surely by changing up you are intenting to accelerate or maintain speed, so what is behind you is irrelevant?

 

Driving in the 10-to-2 position....this makes my arms ache and I lose the sure-fire grip on the steering wheels after a while

 

Checking your mirrors every 10 seconds when driving along...it seems to me that what is in front of you is irrelevant completely !?!?!?!?!?!

 

Oh and if you use the horn when driving you fail

 

Oh and if you allow someone the right of way (being polite) by flashing your lights you fail....ok ok so it isnt in the highway code but it has been adopted by EVERY SINGLE DRIVER on the road as a form of allowing someone right of way.....again apparently we live in a democratic country.....?

There are only two reasons for the placing of speed camera's

1 - Accident blackspot

2 - Excessive speeding in vicinity

Not a question of revenue generation, a mandate by6 government to reduce fatal accidents and increase road safety.

Apparently a fatal road traffic accident costs £1,000,000 to investigate, minimum. Now is it a wonder that there are speed camera's etc...?

There are only two reasons for the placing of speed camera's

1 - Accident blackspot

2 - Excessive speeding in vicinity

Not a question of revenue generation, a mandate by6 government to reduce fatal accidents and increase road safety.

Apparently a fatal road traffic accident costs £1,000,000 to investigate, minimum. Now is it a wonder that there are speed camera's etc...?

£1m? Personally I think that people are being paid too much for doing too little! A million quid is stupid. Make the system more efficient. Not for revenue generation.....BOLL0CKS

 

Also have a look at what else the police have been up to

http://www.notsoaccurate.com/Page%2023.htm

In urban areas where there is a solid case for speed control chicanes should be installed with a nice flower bed in them.

 

I regulary post pro sports car posts in the Guardian web site blog section. I say that amazingly some people still like to enjoy life and not eat museli and think i owe the world three meals a day cos i dont happen to be mired in poverty.

Why do sports car drivers get hammered so much, surely your're average sports car has better handling, better safety and better brakes than you're ford mondeo? Ok so this is because it is faster, but you can drive your mondeo at 120mph of you are a dick, so what difference does it make if you have a sports car? :rant: