• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "So speed cameras are dangerous"

Collapse

  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by Alf W
    While we're at it, let's pop flashguns in drivers' eyes as well.
    They do it - many cameras will flash in the face of the driver if its single carriageway, you can and in fact likely so to be prosecuted: in one court case scamership people used ruler to extend white marks on the road to prove driver was speeding.

    Leave a comment:


  • Alf W
    replied
    Exactly. When you think about it, creating a situation where motorists spend their time checking their speedometers and scouring the roadsides for cameras whilst cars around them are swerving and braking erratically is bound to increase accidents. While we're at it, let's pop flashguns in drivers' eyes as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mailman
    replied
    [QUOTE=zathras]Absolutly. What happens is that drivers speeding brake sharply on approaching the camera which has obvious safty implications.[QUOTE]

    I think Ive spotted the small problem with your arguement

    Mailman

    Leave a comment:


  • zathras
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW
    The Scameraships say people are just dieing around the corner now, ie in different place, even though it clearly says cameras don't work (you can't have camera on every street), they push for more cameras because their jobs depend on it: Gordon Brown made them live off revenues they earn from ripping off motorists.
    Absolutly. What happens is that drivers speeding brake sharply on approaching the camera which has obvious safety implications.

    Interestingly drivers with warning devices telling them they are approaching a camera also have less accidents and do not get caught. So what do the supporters of Cameras say. Ban warning devices. Which just about gives a lie to the idea that Cameras are a safety device. They are a money raising device, although it would help if some speeds were appropiate to the road they are on.
    Last edited by zathras; 19 July 2005, 14:30.

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    The Scameraships say people are just dieing around the corner now, ie in different place, even though it clearly says cameras don't work (you can't have camera on every street), they push for more cameras because their jobs depend on it: Gordon Brown made them live off revenues they earn from ripping off motorists.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bagpuss
    replied
    How do you measure success?

    It assumes there has to be a steadyish number of accidents each year. Imagine if the number of accidents went as follows

    Year 1 20
    Year 2 18
    Year 3 21
    Year 4 40
    Year 5 20

    Councils tend to compaire year on year with basic stata. Which would imply accident rates halfed between years 4 and 5 but its obvious year 4 was not representative so we get a false positive (accidents are really going back to a natural level).

    Leave a comment:


  • darmstadt
    started a topic So speed cameras are dangerous

    So speed cameras are dangerous

    The UK government recently suspended the deployment of more speeds cameras pending the outcome of of a University College London probe into whether they actually save lives.

    We have no doubt, then, that the investigators will be taking a close interest in the Motorcycle News revelation that road deaths have risen dramatically in those areas favoured with the most Gatsos.

    According to the MCN figures - joyfully reported in today's Sun - Hertfordshire saw a 24 per cent rise in speed camera numbers between 2003 and 2004. In the same period, road fatalities rose by 34 per cent.

    Likewise in Wiltshire, camera numbers went up 14 per cent, and those killed 22 per cent. In County Durham, meanwhile, a lone Gatso oversaw a 22 per cent drop in fatalities.

    The Sun is also delighted to report that in North Wales, where "Gatso fan Chief Constable Richard Brunstrom has a league table for traffic cops", 56,247 speeding tickets were issued although this had little effect on safety, with an 18 per cent increase in road deaths.

    The reason? Simple, says safety expert Paul Smith: “Crashes are avoided by making a safe plan based on what you see. Cameras move attention away from hazards to speedometers.”

Working...
X