Speed Camera's - Cash Cows.

[joiner andy]

remove the cameras! and traffic wardens!

[HeadingNorth]

However, what miffed me more about the issue is that you can get pulled for warning others that a mobile speed camera was operating. If you flash someone to let them know there's one about and the police see it you'll get a 60 quid fine.

 

But surely flashing someone to let them know makes them reduce their speed, which is the intention in the first place

 

Speed limit signs are in place to tell people to reduce their speed within the limit. Cameras are in place to catch people who ignore the signs; it makes perfect sense that warning lawbreakers they are about to be caught, is itself illegal.

[MickeyLove]

Speed limit signs are in place to tell people to reduce their speed within the limit. Cameras are in place to catch people who ignore the signs; it makes perfect sense that warning lawbreakers they are about to be caught, is itself illegal.

 

But warning other drivers is more successful in reducing speed that signs ever were. So there's no logic in it. Unless it reduces revenue for the local authorities..

[HeadingNorth]

But warning other drivers is more successful in reducing speed that signs ever were.

 

That's a nonsensical sentence. The signs are the warning. People who ignore them don't need to be warned, they need to be penalised.

[DT Ralge]

Getting to the heart of the "lies" discussion:

In one corner there are those that repeat endlessly the "scamera" argument.

In the other corner ... well, you know the rest.

Take the Elkesley junction, not a lot of pedestrians but in many circumstances (volume and alignment of vehicles ahead of you) very poor vision of vehicles crossing, turning, emerging, hence a real risk of crashes were the prevailing speed around the junction not moderated down from 70. There's a history of crashes.

If the scamera voices here don't allow themselves to read into the lower limit and its enforcement as a serious attempt to scream out "high risk area, so slow down AND look out for the hazards" and only see it as a way of inconveniencing and soaking the hapless driver there's not a lot of hazard perception and "driving to the conditions" going on, in my view. That a driver can suggest he/she forgot to do something about the size and volume of signage on that road prior to the limit change and only react just short of the camera is plainly autopilot driving and unhealthy. Rather than offer "tear them down", how about a touch of self evaluation, self criticism and willingness to learn from this trigger event?

[Mr_Squirrel]

You didn't think it was laughable when you complained that speed cameras cannot be persuaded to let an offence slide.

 

I didnt imply that speed cameras should be persuaded to let an offence slide, neither did i suggest that Police officers should be persuaded (Or bribed as you put it) to the same effect. I made the case that an intelligent Police officer can hold better judgement and educate the motorist much better than a machine can.

 

Put another way.. I like my mashed Potatoes to be made by a person with culinary skills.. im sure in your world you would prefer it if we all ate packets of Smash.

[Mr_Squirrel]

Speed limit signs are in place to tell people to reduce their speed within the limit. Cameras are in place to catch people who ignore the signs; it makes perfect sense that warning lawbreakers they are about to be caught, is itself illegal.

 

Hence the 'cash cow' debate.

 

If road safety was paramount in the authorities rationale for the use of Speed safety cameras, surely warning other drivers to slow down should not be an offence and should be considered 'public duty'?

 

A bit like grassing up drunk drivers.

[Xt500]

If that were true, there would be no speed limits at all!

 

That wouldnt be good for business would it?

If there were no limits in sensible places then there would be fewer accidents because that would not only eradicate bunching but bad attitude too.

[ronthenekred]

Hence the 'cash cow' debate.

 

If road safety was paramount in the authorities rationale for the use of Speed safety cameras, surely warning other drivers to slow down should not be an offence and should be considered 'public duty'?

 

A bit like grassing up drunk drivers.

 

That would be fine if the intention was to warn others of their speeding because you disagree with their speeding..it isn't, it's to warn others of a police or camera presence through empathy

 

Would you similarly warn a benefit thief or a burglar that the police or authorities were "on their case" in order to reduce crime? Or would it be for reasons of empathy?

[HeadingNorth]

If road safety was paramount in the authorities rationale for the use of Speed safety cameras, surely warning other drivers to slow down should not be an offence and should be considered 'public duty'?

 

A bit like grassing up drunk drivers.

 

No, it's exactly the opposite of "grassing up" drunk drivers. Instead of taking an action which ensures a lawbreaker will be punished, by flashing your lights you are taking an action which ensures they will not.