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

[theclaud]

Its not about excuses its about element of danger, which of course is entirely variable. Speed cameras are just a lazy mans sledgehammer to crack a perceived road safety nut.

Perceived? We want to slow people down. Cameras are a good way of doing it.

 

[green1]

Perceived? We want to slow people down. Cameras are a good way of doing it for 50 yards.

FTFY

 

[Paul J]

Perceived? We want to slow people down. Cameras are a good way of doing it.

So is a Police Officer

 

[Linford]

Perceived? We want to slow people down. Cameras are a good way of doing it.

They rarely work on locals though

 

[benb]

It's widely been reported that some cameras rake in millions. Rot, I think not.

Got any actual evidence though?

 

[benb]

So is a Police Officer

They both work. Speed cameras are great because they are always on duty, but we'd all like to see more traffic police as well.

 

[Linford]

Got any actual evidence though?

I used to be, but given how generous the remuneration packages are for civil servants, the hidden costs of keeping the depts and seats warm must be very substantial - I would guess that was why some of the depts were abandoned a couple of years ago.

 

[benb]

And the argument that speed cameras are useless because they only catch speeding, and not other dangerous driving is stupid.
It's like complaining that CCTV in a supermarket doesn't stop someone being mugged down a nearby alleyway.

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

So is a Police Officer

I think theclaud should have said "cost effective" rather than "good". A police officer is not.

 

[Inertia]

And the argument that speed cameras are useless because they only catch speeding, and not other dangerous driving is stupid.

I agree, any tasks we can take from police surely means they have more time to do other work that a camera cannot do.

 

[green1]

I agree, any tasks we can take from police surely means they have more time to do other work that a camera cannot do.

Yeah, The roads are crawling with traffic police now that they have one less task to look out for on the roads.

 

[Linford]

And the argument that speed cameras are useless because they only catch speeding, and not other dangerous driving is stupid.
It's like complaining that CCTV in a supermarket doesn't stop someone being mugged down a nearby alleyway.

Does it not worry you that this type of 'policing' will never pick up on the drunk and drug using on the roads ?

I feel that it is lazy enforcement, and is only really effective against those who are by and large law abiding users. There are examples I've seen of poor driving which are far more dangerous than what Smeggers has just fessed up to.

 

[Linford]

I agree, any tasks we can take from police surely means they have more time to do other work that a camera cannot do.

The thing is though, if a patrol stops a speeding driver, they can check for driving unsder the influence - sight test if they suspect that the drivers vision isn't up to it, condition of the tyres, unsafe load etc etc

They will do all this when they stop someone.

 

[Inertia]

Yeah, The roads are crawling with traffic police now that they have one less task to look out for on the roads.

I imagine there are a lot more of them on the roads now instead of parked on mini hills on the side of motorways watching traffic slow down and speed up as they are passed. A monkey in a car could do that job.

I don't think anyone said we don't want traffic cops out there, I do, I want them out looking for dangerous driving, uninsured drivers etc.

 

[CopperCyclist]

CCTV is contentious. Nearly everyone seems to be against it, until they become victim of a crime. Let's use a robbery (mugging) for example. At that point, suddenly everyone is pro-CCTV. The victim says "You'll be able to catch them, there was CCTV". The offender when arrested always says "Check duh CCTV, proofs it's nots me innit". (They say this even when guilty, I suspect they have been trained to do so by defence solicitors due to the following point).

The modern view of CPS tends to be a complete fear to charge an offender unless they are guaranteed a 'win' at court. This means we need some irrefutable evidence, like, you've guessed it, CCTV. For me the issue with CCTV isn't 'impinging my civil liberties' - hell if I'm out in public then why do I care about being filmed - but the fact that when it comes to criminal proceedings, rather than being the 'icing on the cake' in the evidential process, it seems to have become the cake itself.

Half the time the CCTV isn't a great help unless there's actively been a controller watching the proceeding and zooming in anyway.