Why are people against CCTV and speed cameras on the roads?

[growingvegetables]

OT - but

 

[theclaud]

Ah, this will be some that "faux solidarity of empathetic whinging", that TeeCee was wibbling on about will it?

Wibbling? How very dare you!

 

[Linford]

Of course, and have probably travelled faster than yow (and been caught too).

It isn't big, and it isn't clever !!!!

 

[400bhp]

It isn't big, and it isn't clever !!!!

Stop it - you'll be saying it is wrong to speed next.

 

[Linford]

Stop it - you'll be saying it is wrong to speed next.

I had one of these before my current bike

Glad to get rid as it was boring chugging it everywhere.

 

[benb]

Driving under the influence of alcohol or other substances removed the ability to accurately make any appraisal of the circumstances as they present. I find this argument to be a bit of a straw man. Irrespective of the speed travelled at, if the maxim is followed, then it matters little what speed is attained as long as enough time is made to react correctly to it. If a car hit you head onat 40 mph, you would be no less likely to survive than if at 50mph

We have no other choice than to trust the judgment of other on the roads in their vehicles as we have seen on here a few instances where a car has been used as a weapon that people have died.

It's not up to you, and nor should it be. The speed limits are there to make the road safer for everyone - why do you insist that you should be allowed to ignore the laws, because you think you can do so safely?

 

[benb]

Are you still wobbling on, I can almost here your adenoids from here?

I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Feel free not to read my posts if you like - I won't mind.

 

[Norm]

It's not up to you, and nor should it be. The speed limits are there to make the road safer for everyone - why do you insist that you should be allowed to ignore the laws, because you think you can do so safely?

The problem with speed cameras for me is that they only enforce the limits for cars.

A van doing 60 on an NSL road is, IMO, a greater danger (momentum, vehicle ability etc) than a car doing 70 and both are equally 10mph above their limit, but only one will trigger a camera.

 

[benb]

Do you drive a car?

If so, please provide make, model and annual mileage.

Thank you.

Why do you want to know?

 

[benb]

The problem with speed cameras for me is that they only enforce the limits for cars.

A van doing 60 on an NSL road is, IMO, a greater danger (momentum, vehicle ability etc) than a car doing 70 and both are equally 10mph above their limit, but only one will trigger a camera.

I don't understand this argument. Just because it doesn't detect all motoring offences, doesn't mean there's something wrong with it. CCTV in a supermarket doesn't prevent someone being mugged nearby.

I agree that both are a problem, but short of GPS speed limiters, only traffic police can detect the van. I have consistently said I also want to see more traffic police as well as cameras.

 

[Linford]

A GSXR is faster accelerating whilst doing a wheely than a Lambo??!!!

Erm - yes, the performance is balistic. As a reference of not just the acceleration, but the braking as well, it could do the 0-100-0mph in 10.5 seconds - or 1 second slower than a Veyron, or 5 seconds faster than an Audi RS4 - I was happy to hand it back as you can't enjoy something like that on the roads and stay on the right side of the law - 1st gear was very tall to keep the front wheel down and it would do a ton in 1st because of it. Few riders who ride them on the track have the ability to use all of the performance, and you certainly can't ride it in a spirited manner for any length of time and keep your license on the road.

 

[Norm]

I don't understand this argument.

Oh, sorry about that, and it's not an argument, just an opinion.

Speed cameras are put about as some sort of panacea (usually, as seen above, alongside the BS that speeding drivers cause 1/3 of all fatalities). IMO, they are one weapon in the arsenal against crap driving and not a very significant one at that.

 

[Linford]

It's not up to you, and nor should it be. The speed limits are there to make the road safer for everyone - why do you insist that you should be allowed to ignore the laws, because you think you can do so safely?

I'm not insisting anything though - each and every one of us irrespective of what we ride or drive have the ability to break the laws (show me someone who hasn't)

I did, got caught, and have been frank enough (like smeggers) to share that with you.

It doesn't mean I do that all the time, it started out as a quick spin on a fine day on the last day of the autumn before the bike was laid up for 5 months, and I let the spirit of the moment run away with me after deciding to run up the hill instead of takin gthe exit and dropping in to see my mate.

 

[benb]

Oh, sorry about that, and it's not an argument, just an opinion.

Speed cameras are put about as some sort of panacea (usually, as seen above, alongside the BS that speeding drivers cause 1/3 of all fatalities). IMO, they are one weapon in the arsenal against crap driving and not a very significant one at that.

OK. I would agree that cameras are only one part of road safety, but I firmly believe that speeding should be firmly clamped down on - we need to remove the attitude that speeding is OK. It's not.

Speeding may not be the direct cause of most collisions (I wish people would stop calling them accidents) but as I have already said, all other things being equal, speeding will make any collision more likely and more serious.

Speeding is a serious problem, and should be stamped out - along with other dangerous driving.

This is worth a read - I haven't read it all, but:

Almost 50% of the accidents were judged to be speed related but among drivers
aged under 25 years speed was a factor in between 65% and 75% of their accidents
(see Figure 3.2). Men were found to be involved in a far greater number of ‘to
blame’ speed-related accidents than women (57% and 31%, respectively). Men were
more likely to commit deliberate risk actions than women and are more likely to
exceed the speed limit or deliberately drive too fast for the conditions. By contrast,
women were more likely to have been ignorant of the correct speed limit or to be
travelling too fast for the conditions rather than deliberately speeding (Clarke et al.,
2007).

Because some drivers cannot be trusted to safely exceed the posted limit, then I'm afraid we must insist that no drivers may exceed it. That means that drivers that can safely exceed the limit are inconvenienced, but that's just tough.

 

[benb]

So you agree that speed cameras are indiscriminate then, at last, about loody time too, peace to all men etc etc.

I never said otherwise, but so what? I don't want people to speed - regardless of whether they think they can do so safely.