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

[acrybb]

I agree yes there are a lot of muppets which these systems are taking care of. (ann common ground). I do think that gatso cameras do have the potential to create a panic braking which is why they have to be brightly marked.

My point is that they don't stop all the problems hence more police argument.

Like I said if uk wide there was a bigger police pressance then people would have to drive in a safer manner all of the time.

To answer your question. They cannot perform their function. If they are more visible and more plentiful then the element of surprise is removed then do is the danger associated with it

 

[mangaman]

...
2. How many pages was the longest speeding thread?
...

Crikey - this is a relatively sensible one. During Linford's previous incarnation these speed camera threads would go on for hundreds of pages with fewer and fewer posters (usually just Linford and MrP (who hasn't appeared on here for some reason) still left.

Pantomime posting - "Oh no it isn't" vs "Oh yes it is" ad nauseum.

It got so much fun Admin made them their own little room called Room 101 to play in.

This thread still has a variety of posters and plenty of legs left in it I fancy

 

[Glenn]

To my mind the answer is driver education, how many current road users including cyclists, would pass a theory test if they had to sit or resit it? http://blog.moneysavingexpert.com/2012/02/13/i-challenge-you-to-take-the-driving-theory-test/ I scored 47

 

[acrybb]

I don't want to limit it at all I believe that automated traffic enforcement is limited as it is automated it is a black white assessment of a situation a snap shot.

So ultimately I would like to see the same thing. I think what differs is our opinions on how it best enforced. So I think it's best that we agree to agree. A weird situation.

Personally in an urban environment I don't speed. On country roads I'll drive to the speed limit within my own ability and road conditions. On the motorway again road conditions time of day.

On 12 years of driving I have never had a proper accident a couple of car park altercations. Nothing more. I have also held a clean licence. So altogether not a bad driving record.

 

[ufkacbln]

If you are actually waiting for someone to justify the position of the ABD, can I suggest you get yourself comfortable with a good book, as you may be there some time.

Someone already has!

 

[MacB]

The answer will be to alter the technology, speed cameras and traffic calming measures will become history as the technology is moved into the vehicles. It doesn't matter how much people bleat about driver freedom or driver education the writing is on the wall.

The question should be how many years before insurance companies insist on black box technology followed by legislation to make that data freely available to the police?

 

[Linford]

The other myth about "more Police" is the "patrolling" one.

Firstly they are no more effective than a GATSO or other system as they too can cover only a hundred metes of road at an time. THey also (allegedly) impose the same dangers with panic braking and distracting motorists used to dismiss any other enforcement of the law.

Then let's take a speeding motorist...

The Police pull them over, and "have a word" that leaves the road "un-patrolled" for the next few minutes.

The whole "more Police" is more about lowering the chances of getting caught, hence the bleating, wailing and tantrums when the Police presence is increased

What happens with ours is that the unmarked cars have illuminations in the back of their vehicles, and cams running all the time. When the pull someone over, the illuminations go and passing users become aware of the presence, and that the cars look very very normal when they are switched off makes people generally a lot more wary about where and when they might be tempted to wind it on.

 

[acrybb]

I think there will be a bigger limiting factor than that sooner

Cost of fuel

 

[ufkacbln]

What happens with ours is that the unmarked cars have illuminations in the back of their vehicles, and cams running all the time. When the pull someone over, the illuminations go and passing users become aware of the presence, and that the cars look very very normal when they are switched off makes people generally a lot more wary about where and when they might be tempted to wind it on.

Briliant!

But does not address the issue of what happens outside their limited area or how the area is supervised whilst they are dealing with that driver.

As for looking "normal" that is (allegedly) the dangerous part!

...... people end up looking for the unmarked cars therefore concentration is not on the road.

 

[acrybb]

Yes maybe so.

How about this? Let's be overt. Everybody knows they are there. Someone being caught covertly means they have already been a danger. So would it not be bette to have a highly visible prevention rather than a cure?

 

[acrybb]

I would also say that the very reason the gatso is as ineffective is the very reason the extra visible police could be successful.

Gatso: people see it know its there slow down.

Would it not be conceivable that the same logic would apply to a bigger more visible police pressance? People know its there and therefore slow down for it and drive safer?

 

[snorri]

To my mind the answer is driver education, how many current road users including cyclists, would pass a theory test if they had to sit or resit it?

The group most likely to pass a theory test will be the group who have most recently passed a driving test, the same group which insurance companies seem to consider to be higher risk.

 

[srw]

Will insurance take it out of most of our hands anyway?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/apr/05/car-insurance-premiums-telematics-satellite-box

Not impossible, if insurance companies can ever work out how to cope with the volumes of data generated. They're used to one piece of data per policy per year, plus an additional one every five years or so (premium and claims respectively). Telematics introduces the possibility of one piece of data per policy every minute. That's more than a step change.

As far as I know, all the telematics experiments so far have been "pay as you drive" - the risk is assessed outside of the telematics box, and you pay a premium which is a pure function of the distance you drive. I believe that even the experiments with differential pricing by time of day have been abandoned. You'd need to go to "pay how you drive", which is very different, and very difficult.

 

[Rahul Sapariya]

Yeah like i say gatsos are a great deterrent for about a hundred yards or what ever they are. They are also useless once everyone knows where they are. Having more visible police on the roads are a deterrent everywhere all of the time. There is no point in preventing speeding for a small portion of a road. You can still drive dangerously at 30mph as you lot will know.

The problem with having more police is that there aren't enough police to go around. If you hire new police officers then that costs money and that is something this country doesn't have unforuntately. Also, police don't police them enough. 10mph higher than the speed limit seems to be alright for the police to let go however doing more than that and they go after them. The laws are the laws, right?

 

[MacB]

Not impossible, if insurance companies can ever work out how to cope with the volumes of data generated. They're used to one piece of data per policy per year, plus an additional one every five years or so (premium and claims respectively). Telematics introduces the possibility of one piece of data per policy every minute. That's more than a step change.

As far as I know, all the telematics experiments so far have been "pay as you drive" - the risk is assessed outside of the telematics box, and you pay a premium which is a pure function of the distance you drive. I believe that even the experiments with differential pricing by time of day have been abandoned. You'd need to go to "pay how you drive", which is very different, and very difficult.

which are a series of technological problems well within existing tech to solve. Personally I'd say the Telematic database would need to be a seperate entity, ie not tied to one insurance company. Both drivers and insurance companies pay for membership...after a while it would become compulsory like VED. Then it's just a case of initial setup of parameters and alerts based on those parameters being exceeded. The requirement and practicality of storing all data and updating it realtime is maybe a bit beyond current tech. You just need to have vehicle classifications and trigger points for alerting insurance agents or the police. It would have the USP of enabling insurance per individual rather than per demographic.

IMO the only thing that'll stop this is a collapse in vehicle useage due to fuel costs.