02-06-2003 14:31									#1
	Speed Cameras Should Be Used More Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

The main objections that I hear to the existing or increasing deployment of speed cameras are as follows.

i) They make you drive too slow

- I'd agree that this is the case on most motorways and indeed, some 60mph and 50mph zones. One example near to me is St. Peter's Way. It used to be a 60mph zone. You could safely travel 70mph on it. However, they then decreased the speed limit to 50mph, and brought in two speed cameras about half a mile apart.

Result? People braking in order to avoid the speed cameras. And then accelerating. Very dangerous. While cases like this have to be dealt with pragmatically, I'm sure the majority of car drivers would accept residential speed limits of 20mph that were strictly enforced, in addition to increasing the limit on motorways to 80mph.

ii) They are just trying to catch drivers out; speed cameras should be brightly painted and visible

- Absolutely awful argument. Perhaps police officers should publish details of where they will be at certain times as well?

By stating where law enforcement is carried out, speed cameras only slow people down for short periods - very dangerous, especially in moderate to heavy traffic. If, however, you were told on approaching a 10 mile stretch of motorway that speed cameras were in operation (as every bloody speed camera should be at all times), you would rationally stick to the speed limit throughout that stretch.

The vast majority of speed cameras should be hidden, except in one or two areas where a lot of accidents have happened due to speed. Here, they should be very, very obvious.

A combination of the two is wise - not one or the other.

iii) They are just trying to get more money out of motorists!

- The amount of taxes levied on other motorists in other areas is another argument; there is absolutely nothing wrong with making proven criminals (which is what speeding drivers that are pictured are) pay a fine.

Wouldn't it be better for everyone in society if the general tax level were reduced as a result of criminals paying more for their actions?

---

The only valid argument as I see it is i). Perhaps speed limits do need to be changed on motorways in order to represent that advancements in car engineering and safety that have occurred. This could be coupled with a reduction from 30mph to a strict 20mph limit in residential areas.

Arguments ii) and iii) are ridiculous ones that only serve to discredit the car lobby.

	02-06-2003 14:38									#2
	Remove this text

I disagree with the way you stated point ii, even though I actually agree with most of what you said.

The main problem with the initial speed camera policy was that it was used to generate revenue by putting the cameras on roads that weren't dangerous but that people always sped on. Downhill stretches of straight road etc.

The new policy is to put clearly visible cameras on dangerous stretches of road where there are lots of accidents. The idea now is accident prevention and saving lives rather than trying to catch people speeding which I think is a much more valid reason for their deployment.

The cameras that are hidden just as extra revenue gatherers are little more than an extra tax on motorists. I'd rather all the money for speed cameras was spent putting them in places that will increase safety.

	02-06-2003 14:41									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Cameras on long straight bits of empty motorway eg the M62 to Hull after the A1 junction is stupid, they should be on accident blackspots and outside schools

	02-06-2003 14:43									#4
	Increase Your PM Length

Mike, don't you see that if drivers knew that speed cameras were in operation on most roads - but didn't know where they were, they would be compelled to drive at safe speeds all the time?

"The cameras that are hidden just as extra revenue gatherers are little more than an extra tax on motorists"

They are a tax on criminals, not on motorists. I would be happy enough to see all revenues gained from speed cameras to be invested into the road network - hence the speeding drivers effectively subsidise those that keep to the rules of the road.

"The new policy is to put clearly visible cameras on dangerous stretches of road where there are lots of accidents. The idea now is accident prevention and saving lives rather than trying to catch people speeding "

As I said, I'd recommend a combination of both, visible and hidden. It's not acceptable to see that accidents happen in one place and merely target that place. That is implicitly giving the motorist the impression that it is OK to exceed the speed limit elsewhere.

	02-06-2003 15:11									#5
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Fahr'n, fahr'n, fahr'n auf der Autobahn... I'm all for increased control in inner city areas and suburbs, but I'm not too concerned about the highways, or freeways, or motorways, or whatever the correct word is.

	02-06-2003 15:39									#6
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Increase speed limits in highways, increase patrolling in inner-city.

Our speed limit is 110kmh, and that is on a single road. most of the highways are 100/90. like someone's going that speed. I usually go 100-140 on intercity highways.

	02-06-2003 15:57									#7
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Speed limits here in NZ are stupid. We have a basic, 50KM/h in town, 70KM/h on the lesser built up areas, and 100KM/h everywhere else.

This means you can go 100 on country roads where it is unsafe to go 50, and get a speeding ticket on the motorway where it is safe for 160.

And the police here always patrol in spots with a lot of safely speeding traffic ... the desert road for instance. A road that can safely be run at 150 most of the way.

	02-06-2003 16:00									#8
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

there are deserts in NZ?

	02-06-2003 16:02									#9
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

A Desert in NZ is where it only rains twice a day

	02-06-2003 16:24									#10
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Azazel ... nope.

The road has tussock growing along it all the way .

	02-06-2003 17:22									#11
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Beats me why we allow the production of non-emergency service vehicles that can go faster than they are allowed to.

It would put a lot of traffic cops out of work - they'd have to do some real police jobs instead.

	02-06-2003 17:23									#12
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

They should blow speed cameras up.

	02-06-2003 18:03									#13
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Hydey They should blow speed cameras up.

Don't say that!

The UK went through a spell of putting cutouts of police cars on bridges over motorways "to deter speeding" . If some idiot at the Department of Transport hears what you are saying we will have millions of inflatable yellow speed cameras all over the place.

	02-06-2003 18:12									#14
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Boddington's Mike, don't you see that if drivers knew that speed cameras were in operation on most roads - but didn't know where they were, they would be compelled to drive at safe speeds all the time? .

Bodd dont u see that if drivers knew that cops were in operation on most roads - but didn't know where they were, they would be compelled to drive at safe speeds all the time?

	02-06-2003 18:16									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Zero Bodd dont u see that if drivers knew that cops were in operation on most roads - but didn't know where they were, they would be compelled to drive at safe speeds all the time?

Cameras are more cost effective. They also free up police for tasks that do actually require immediate human intervention.

	02-06-2003 18:17									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by MikeH I disagree with the way you stated point ii, even though I actually agree with most of what you said. The main problem with the initial speed camera policy was that it was used to generate revenue by putting the cameras on roads that weren't dangerous but that people always sped on. Downhill stretches of straight road etc. The new policy is to put clearly visible cameras on dangerous stretches of road where there are lots of accidents. The idea now is accident prevention and saving lives rather than trying to catch people speeding which I think is a much more valid reason for their deployment. The cameras that are hidden just as extra revenue gatherers are little more than an extra tax on motorists. I'd rather all the money for speed cameras was spent putting them in places that will increase safety.

I agree wit you. Theres an intersection near my place known for drivers running thru red light. They installed a cam and since then virtually no one does it anymore. So saftey overall has been increased Except, one of my friend once pulled a stunt by driving on the opposing lane 3AM in the morning when he was speeding too fast to stop during yellow. (camera doesnt cover the opposing lane for obvious reason)

	02-06-2003 18:18									#17
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Boddington's Cameras are more cost effective. They also free up police for tasks that do actually require immediate human intervention.

That statement above is true. But it still doesnt change anything I mentioned.

As long as you dont have cams covering the entire city, ppl are gonna speed.

	02-06-2003 18:22									#18
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: As long as you dont have cams covering the entire city, ppl are gonna speed.

That's why I recommend hidden cameras.

What you've just said is like saying, "unless we have police covering every shop, people are going to shoplift".

It makes no sense to pubish the whereabouts of every camera, just as it makes no sense for crime prevention to state where every police officer will be at a certain time.

	02-06-2003 18:25									#19
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Boddington's That's why I recommend hidden cameras. What you've just said is like saying, "unless we have police covering every shop, people are going to shoplift". It makes no sense to pubish the whereabouts of every camera, just as it makes no sense for crime prevention to state where every police officer will be at a certain time.

Duh! and has not knowing where cops are right now ever stopped people from speeding and shoplifting?

	02-06-2003 18:28									#20
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Because police coverage is too thin, and they are far more spottable than a hidden camera.

	02-06-2003 18:28									#21
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Actually, enforcing speed limits on Straight-line, safe highways is damaging the economy, making goods flow at slower speeds, etc.

	02-06-2003 18:29									#22
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Economy over lives!

	02-06-2003 18:34									#23
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

For once I completely agree with Bods.

	02-06-2003 19:02									#24
	Got spare money?

quote: Economy over lives!

What's the risk to lives on a well-kept straighline expressway?

	02-06-2003 19:08									#25
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

I completely agree with Bods as well.


No sense in publishing where cameras will be.

The goal here is to make everyone stop breaking speed limits.

What speed limits are set, and whether they are reasonable is a whole different question. I'm sure that someone will always demand changes.

But that doesn't mean that this law should be broken as often.

	02-06-2003 19:09									#26
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Azazel - speed doesn't cause traffic accidents. It really doesn't.

Our slow reaction time, though, at times does.

Also, the higher the speed, the worse the accident is going to be. Thus, in case an accident happens (and at times they are unavoidable), you better want the two vehicles driving as slow as they reasonably can.

	02-06-2003 19:46									#27
	Increase the size of your Attachments

There was a bit on our local TV news a couple of days ago. There is a trial scheme starting up in the UK run by someone at Leeds University testing cars which are linked to sensors at the point you enter or leave each speed limit area and the car will not accelerate above the speed limit. So you can't speed even if you try.

Needless to say all the motorists the TV crew stopped and asked about it were against the idea.

	02-06-2003 19:47									#28
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

I would like to see cameras in public places, traffic and otherwise.

	02-06-2003 19:48									#29
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by CerberusIV There was a bit on our local TV news a couple of days ago. There is a trial scheme starting up in the UK run by someone at Leeds University testing cars which are linked to sensors at the point you enter or leave each speed limit area and the car will not accelerate above the speed limit. So you can't speed even if you try. Needless to say all the motorists the TV crew stopped and asked about it were against the idea.

They want their freedom!

	02-06-2003 19:51									#30
	Support Apolyton

Yes, according to many motorists the freedom to put other people's lives at risk for no good reason is inviolable.