Speed cameras in cats eyes

[littlebasher 11]

Originally posted by DanSumption

If you're that bad at judging speed then I suggest you drive at 20mph until you improve, no chance of getting a fine and points then. Alternatively, buy a car with cruise control.

 

I imagine the speed cameras will be paid for by speeding fines. You can't really have it both ways: one minute these things are a stealth tax, the next they are a drain on the public purse

 

What you on? I challenge anyone here to be able to judge your speed within the 3 - 4 mph grace that a speed camera would allow.

 

Perhaps Robocop could achieve such a feat, but frankly i would rather give the majority of my attention to looking out for children running into the road than trying to drive at exactly the speed limit.

 

Being rude does not help get your point across.......

[cloudybay 17]

Originally posted by DanSumption

And it's still just nit-picking. Whatever the percentage of deaths are directly attributable to speeding, they are still unnecessary deaths, and even if the percentage is tiny I am certain that it represents a greater number of people than are murdered each year.

 

Proof that speed cameras don't work then? Even if we all lived in your Utopian speed-free society, people would still get killed on the roads, but to our credit, we have the safest roads in Europe. Dishing out speeding fines for minor transgressions is failing to see the bigger picture and addressing the major issue of bad driving on our roads.

[Pseudonym 10]

Originally posted by DanSumption

...very few accidents are caused by speeding alone, very many accidents are made worse by speeding...

Glad to see that we agree on the first part of your statement...

 

As for the second part I would have thought that it was safe to say that virtually ALL accidents are made worse by speeding... The solution then being a blanket 5mph speed limit? No? Not practical? Exactly... So before we condemn drivers outright for speeding and make it as anti-social a habit as drink-driving (which the powers-that-be would LOVE to see happen), let's look at how many accidents are a direct result of speeding, eh?

 

BTW I'm talking about going slightly over the limit, not 20-30mph over it... that would be dangerous/reckless driving and rightly deserve a high penalty.

[Jamie 10]

<typical_road_user>

 

When driving along, my attention is not on the road, it's not on other road users or looking out for possible dangers, no, it's looking out for speed cameras.

 

</typical_road_user>

[DanSumption 10]

Originally posted by emperor_ming

What you on? I challenge anyone here to be able to judge your speed within the 3 - 4 mph grace that a speed camera would allow.

There is no law against driving under the speed limit, if you can't judge a 3-4mph difference then make sure you drive at what feels like 5mph below the speed limit (incidentally, you are not allowed 3-4mph grace, the advised leeway is 10%+2mph, which is 5mph in a 30mph limit). Once you get a bit better at judging your speed, you can push the needle a little closer to 30.

 

Besides which, if you are in a situation where you are having to be extra vigilant for children, e.g. a residential street with parked cars, then your speed should really be closer to 20mph anyway and you shouldn't have any worries about accidentally straying over the limit.

Originally posted by emperor_ming

Being rude does not help get your point across.......

No. Neither does being stupid.

[DanSumption 10]

Originally posted by Cyclone

Being hidden won't stop the cameras being plotted on gps, and so won't make any difference as gps detectors become cheaper and more common.

So road fatalities will go up rather than down.

The cameras won't be plotted on GPS until the plotters know where they are, and as cats eye cameras also become cheaper and more common then they will be in too many places, or be added to too quickly, for GPS to keep up with them.

 

Or will we reach a situation where your GPS says to you "slow down before the 3rd cat's eye. OK, now you can speed up for another 7 cats eyes, then slow down again..."

[DaisyBoo 10]

I have 3 points for speeding, when people find this out they laugh because i am a slow driver but i was just unlucky that one day i was doing 7 mph over the limit. (The road isn't an accident black spot there are no schools/houses etc).

 

What im getting at is, why should i be fined and treated the same as someone who drives round at 15-20 mph over the limit on busy/built up roads?

 

There should be a tier system and points/fines should be allocated accordingly, ie

 

5-8 mph over = £40 fine

9-15mph over = £60 fine + 1 point

16 + mph over = £60 fine + 3 points

 

This is more is much more fair system and would still earn the government their cash.

[DanSumption 10]

I agree with you, there should definitely be a tiered system, and I think something similar is under consideration.

 

I also have 3 points for a similar offence, and have had two other speeding tickets in recent years in situations where a police officer would have let me off without a second thought. But, as they say in Italy, che sera sera. I have adapted my driving as a result, and actually sticking to 30mph is not as hard as I'd expected (except for the queues of impatient motorists which sometimes build up behind me). It doesn't even seem to take me any longer to get where I am going, and I certainly arrive there less stressed.

 

From introspection on my own gut feelings, it seems to me that many people are opposed to speed cameras because of blind self-interest. Certainly my experience of this and other threads is that people will grasp onto the smallest of straws if they think it bolsters their argument a little, and yet ignore the reality that cars are deadly weapons (the biggest killer of under 16-year olds in this country) and a little humility is sometimes appropriate.

[DanSumption 10]

Damn! must press "edit" not "quote"

[cloudybay 17]

Originally posted by DanSumption

I also have 3 points for a similar offence, and have had two other speeding tickets in recent years in situations where a police officer would have let me off without a second thought. But, as they say in Italy, che sera sera. I have adapted my driving as a result, and actually sticking to 30mph is not as hard as I'd expected (except for the queues of impatient motorists which sometimes build up behind me). It doesn't even seem to take me any longer to get where I am going, and I certainly arrive there less stressed.

 

From introspection on my own gut feelings, it seems to me that many people are opposed to speed cameras because of blind self-interest. Certainly my experience of this and other threads is that people will grasp onto the smallest of straws if they think it bolsters their argument a little, and yet ignore the reality that cars are deadly weapons (the biggest killer of under 16-year olds in this country) and a little humility is sometimes appropriate.

 

There we go then. Dan has obviously achieved perfection in his quest to be a none speeding driver. I just hope that one day i can attain similarly high standards. How's that for humility Dan?

[DanSumption 10]

Originally posted by cloudybay

There we go then. Dan has obviously achieved perfection in his quest to be a none speeding driver. I just hope that one day i can attain similarly high standards. How's that for humility Dan?

Cool

[chickmonk 10]

Does anyone know (or have any idea) how many accidents on motorways are directly caused by speeding?

 

Does speeding on motorways (say driving at 85 mph) make a massive difference to your chances of having an accident / killing someone if you do?

 

I only ask because I can see why speeding in built up areas / 30mph zones is dangerous, but think that motorways (where cats eyes are usually found) is a different issue altogether.

 

70 mph is usually ignored and does seem a little slow imho...