Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Mon Nov 10, 2025 17:42

View unanswered posts | View active topics


Board index » Discussion Forums » General Chat

All times are UTC [ DST ]



Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
  [ 9 posts ] 
  Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
Gizmo
PostPosted: Wed Nov 16, 2005 23:39 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 09:16
Posts: 3655
http://www.motoring.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=2996331

Quote:
London, England - The British Automobile Association has been accused of "gross irresponsibility" for selling technology that can warn drivers of the presence of speed cameras.

The organisation is to offer the system as an "optional extra" on its in-car satellite navigation set, AA Navigator. Drivers will be alerted by a noise or a screen message if they enter a camera zone.

A parliamentary Bill outlaws equipment that can detect speed cameras through the use of radar or laser technology but allows the use of satellite navigation equipment.

The AA device constantly refers to a regularly updated map of camera speed trap locations and, knowing the car's geographical location, can warn the driver

The driver has to pay a regular subscription to keep the information up-to-date.

The road safety charity Brake expressed concern that the devices would give drivers the opportunity to exceed the speed limit.

"Responsible organisations should encourage their members to observe speed limits at all times, regardless of whether there are speed cameras," it said.

"The locations of speed cameras should not be made public - if drivers were not aware of the locations of cameras, they would have to stick to speed limits at all times to avoid being caught, and our roads would be many times safer."

Paul Kenny, acting general secretary of the GMB general union, which represents AA staff, said: "The AA was once a byword for road safety

. Now owned by venture capitalists, it is trashing its own reputation by encouraging dangerous driving and thereby putting road users at risk in its relentless search for profit."

He said the Department of Transport should find a way to "neutralise" the devices or make them illegal.

An AA spokesman said: "We are not encouraging people to drive dangerously. Speed cameras are located in accident black spots. If drivers are aware of the dangers, they will drive more safely.

"This is in line with the policy of the police." - The Independent, London


Hold on..I was not aware that detectors have been made illegal yet!

Anyway I remember that informing members of speed traps goes back to the very origins of the organisation. They are just keeping up tradition.

Another classic make-statistics-up-as-you-go-along rant from BRAKE

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Ernest Marsh
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 08:04 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere
What would BRAKE rather have - a car which breaks the limit, gets pinged and a ticket but CARRIES ON at the same speed, or one which slows down? :x
This is where the term SAFETY camera falls down, there is NOTHING safe, even if they are placed in a location where speeding is genuinely a problem. The motorist they catch continue on their way unhindered!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
stackmonkey
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 10:02 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 16:02
Posts: 372
I believe that the AA, when originally formed, used to send men out andfind the local speed traps set by the police and then warn oncoming member motorists so that they could slow down in time.

It's good that the AA is keeping to its traditions. :D
Top
 Profile  
 
Steve
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 10:13 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
Brake wrote:
..........they would have to stick to speed limits at all times to avoid being caught, and our roads would be many times safer."

Where do they get this mis-information from? Even if the claimed effectiveness of speed cameras is correct (40% reduction – which we know is bull), this still cannot qualify for the statement of ‘many times safer’.

The statement is clearly wrong and definitely misleading.

Is a PR in order?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
antera309
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 14:05 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 01:42
Posts: 686
Any device which encourages people to slow down should be encouraged by BRAKE, not condemned.

Remember, Speed cameras are supposed to be located at accident blackspots, so isn't warning people as they approach an accident blackspot a good thing?

GPS detectors improve general speed awareness and the deterrant value of speed cameras. They also enable drivers to keep their eyes on the road rather than having to check the speedo every 30 seconds.

I don't see what their problem is. GPS detectors don't detect mobile speed patrols, so saying that a driver can speed with impunity whenever their GPS detector is not going off is just plain wrong.

_________________
“For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.” - H. L. Mencken


Last edited by antera309 on Thu Nov 17, 2005 17:58, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
SafeSpeed
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 14:14 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
smeggy wrote:
Brake wrote:
..........they would have to stick to speed limits at all times to avoid being caught, and our roads would be many times safer."

Where do they get this mis-information from? Even if the claimed effectiveness of speed cameras is correct (40% reduction – which we know is bull), this still cannot qualify for the statement of ‘many times safer’.

The statement is clearly wrong and definitely misleading.

Is a PR in order?


I'll certainly look at it. The text is credited to The Independent. Anyone seen the original article?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Rigpig
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 14:26 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 09:59
Posts: 3544
Location: Shropshire
Hmmm :scratchchin:

Quote:
An AA spokesman said: "We are not encouraging people to drive dangerously. Speed cameras are located in accident black spots. If drivers are aware of the dangers, they will drive more safely.


How can drivers be made aware of 'the dangers'? The system only informs them of the presence of a camera zone, not the danger it is supposedly covering - what are they supposed to look out for?
Thus, they are being indirectly advised to obey the speed limit.
Which means, according to the quote, 'they will drive more safely'.

So in effect, the above statement unwittingly says the same as

Quote:
"they would have to stick to speed limits at all times to avoid being caught, and our roads would be many times safer."


Which we all know is bunk. Don't we?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
antera309
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 17:43 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 01:42
Posts: 686
Rigpig wrote:

Quote:
"they would have to stick to speed limits at all times to avoid being caught, and our roads would be many times safer."


Which we all know is bunk. Don't we?


Absolutely. This statement assumes that people will crawl around everywhere out of fear, and this is just not hapenning even with the vast majority of drivers that do not have a GPS detector. All we're seeing is an attitude of rebellion and the number of prosecutions going up and up.

Road Safety organisations like BRAKE are failing in their duty to get to the core of the problems that are causing death & destruction on our roads. It is OBVIOUS that the decision to allow the Partnerships to keep the money from speeding fines has destroyed public respect for the law. A law that is not respected will not be adhered to, regardless of how many fines are doled out. If they really want people to slow down, they should be calling for an end to the empire-building partnerships and fines reclamation RIGHT NOW.

Instead they persist in backing a proven ineffective road safety strategy. Why?

_________________
“For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.” - H. L. Mencken
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Gizmo
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 20:38 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 09:16
Posts: 3655
antera309 wrote:
Instead they persist in backing a proven ineffective road safety strategy. Why?


It’s psychological. I think it is like the villagers complaining about cars speeding through their village. It’s not speed that is the problem it is the fact that they have traffic at all. Speed cameras are seen as a way of punishing drivers full stop. In the case of BRAKE we have seen numerous cases of someone who has lost a little Jonny in an accident (usually nothing to do with speeding) and wants revenge against motorists.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
  [ 9 posts ] 

Board index » Discussion Forums » General Chat

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.014s | 12 Queries | GZIP : Off ]