Not sure if this specifically refers to removing cameras or just the funding, probably my misunderstanding..
For myself, the presence of a camera would make me doubt whether it is active or not, despite what anyone said or any assurance. So I guess you could say it would still be a deterrent and where those cameras are at a genuine black spot I would not be opposed to leaving them in situ TBH. (With emphasis on ‘genuine’ and only at a black spot; not a few hundred yards further up the road where it conveniently drops from 40 to 30 and where there’s never been an accident).
As someone said here the other day, you could make an argument that if the cameras had never been introduced in the first place you would not need such a large police presence as you may need now; now that everyone has been force-fed speed kills and automated I-Spy.
When you highlight something you weren’t that bothered about and then take it away it leaves that seed in your head which in turn could make you think you can now take advantage of it, if that makes sense?
I’m sure, as a result, there will be some who will declare 'open season' on our roads who would not have gotten that attitude were it not for their introduction. They would instead have grown up in fear that a traffic police could be just around the corner, not just watching your speed but with eyes burning into your every move…
_________________ The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed. You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.
|