Safe Speed Forums

At present we dont seem to be getting any change on scameras.

Maybe we should look at lobbying for a change first rather than abolition?

Looking at this issue, one of the worst effects that arises from scameras is the worry and vast economic penalty incurred by a driving ban.

The scameras themselves just need funding from the penalties.

One Scamera estimates that 20% of their cases go to Court.

That would represent 600k cases pa in UK.

The CPS say that they handle 1.5m cases (all issues) pa.

So cutting out the 600k would represent a considerable cut in the CPS workload. Not 40% but maybe 20% as driving cases are probably simpler than the average. But it would free up CPS (and Court) time to focus on real crime.

It would also leave us with a simple speed camera = a fine which then leads to scameras becoming more of tax issue and less safety.

Meanwhile people whose livelihoods are threatened by scameras have a great weight lifted.

Only Traf Pol penalties could then lead to points, which would restore traf pols to their key role of policing bad driving.

An election winner for some party?

IMHO it is the exact opposite we should be lobbying for - points and no fines!

As hinted in the original post, if you take the points away then the whole exercise turns into even more of a revenue collection exercise than it already is. Why on earth should safe drivers be subjected to some sort of "velocity tax"?

Under such a regime we really would have "a camera on every corner" and the repercussions for road safety would be dire.

No, lets go the other way: abolish the fines but keep the points, and fund enforcement out of central funds - like it should be. Once the direct revenue stream for the camera partnerships were cut off and they had to justify their existenece in pure terms of casualty reduction then I'm sure their life expectancy would be days!

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

I agree that points are far better than fines. Points are a leveller - they hurt no matter how much money you have. Fines would just allow rich drivers to speed as much as they liked.

I strongly disagree that enforcement should come out of central funds. Motorists should pay for the enforcement, not general tax payers, and bad motorists (speeders and people with other driving malfunctions) should pay the most.

_________________
I stole this .sig

But what about the real hardship being imposed through the bans?

That's a deterrent - people are supposed to consider it as they lead up to a ban. When they get thier first 3 points, they get a little worried, when they get to 6, the heat is on. When they get to 9, it 'oh my God', and after that, if they still can't keep a lid on it until the first of thier points have expired, they're on the bus. I suppose it does cause some hardship bringing back the groceries on the bus, and getting a job closer to home, but that is the point of the deterrent. I actually think 3 points is a bit heavy for a small matter. 1 or two is more like the right level for that. I also think it's wrong to sock it to everybody - they should go after the worst 25% who drive stupidly before tightening the ratchet down on us all. The best thing to do to avoid hardship is to take the pledge - don't speed.

_________________
I stole this .sig

How small? Is it important at all? Is it really a matter of road safety or was it just a technical infringement of an overly-cautious "lowest common denominator" speed limit?
In these cases, any punishment is not justified, counter-productive and a waste of enforcement effort.

Exceeding a speed limit should only be punished in cases where it is a component of a dangerous driving incident, and the punishment should then be based on the dangerous driving.

That way, speeders would have free reign, except for the odd hit and miss case where a copper actually catches one. Nope, the easy way is to use these machines to identify the worst 25% who are way over the line at known black spots and town centres (I'm talking about the scums bags rev'ing up and down, showing off and being idiots) and let 'em have it.

_________________
I stole this .sig

It doesn't work.

* Averaged over 24 hours some of the highest speeds will also be safe in the middle of the night.
* Local boy racers will always know where the cameras are even if they are hidden.
* High speeds in bad conditions are frequently more dangerous - yet may be lower than the speeds at the same location in better conditions.
* 25% is way to much - the safest drivers are usually around the 85th to 90th percentiles.
* Even above the 90th percentile we'll find experts driving safely in good conditions, as well as a few nutters.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Agree with your opinion, basingwerk as it would stop the minor infringements being penalized for the sake of it. However, this would only be a really beneficial change if we could ensure that all speed limits are set sensibly, which some are clearly not.

Paul,

Maybe basingwerk means the top 25% of people exceeding the 85 percentile limit, this would mean 25% of 15%, or around 4%?



Dave

Basingwerk said

I would entirely agree with your statement.

Problem is that Speed cameras with points and fines are a blunderbuss which completely miss out Drivers who are unlicenced......

These drivers cause a significant % of fatal accidents as well. (Comment from Ian a policeman)

But speed cameras do nothing to tackle such drivers.

Hence why we need a shift for safety improvement through more traffic police. But while we try and build that momentum, lets drop the points from cameras to stop the largely inappropriate damage on registered drivers.

It would also be better for the scamera business as it would keep honest registered drivers on the road as customers.

That's exactly what I mean. Take a swathe of the worst ones out. That way, respectable drivers who blip over the limit now and again don't get it in the neck, but the speed merchants get a good going over. I'd even make the points last a shorter period (say a year) so that you can clear a backlog quicker if you show respect for the law. But for the worst - game over!

_________________
I stole this .sig

You're the only one who does. I'm loosing it today. Bugs and dumps everywhere, but that is nothing to do with speed cameras. Thanks anyway.



I know, but to get there, we have to be systematic. The reason cameras have everybodys’ backs up is because the system is not tuned up. We shouldn't blast everybody. We should get the information straight, then go after the bad guys. To do that, we need a staged approach - nobody should zoom around regardless, but some are worse than others, and the system should respect that. The trouble is, nobody wants to make hard choices. To give the coppers the tools they need, we will have to make massive investment in both rational legislation and systematic record keeping systems. Right now, the system (tax, MOT, insurance, policing etc.) is an abysmal hodge podge of manual and electronic nonsense, and it is time to take it apart and put it together properly. I know it’s daunting, but good records are the only way to get the boneheads on the bus.

As for dropping points, the rich would like that – hit the little guy the most!

_________________
I stole this .sig

OK. that would be a vast improvement over the present system. But it still wouldn't deliver 'justice' for the reasons I mentioned earlier. Smart software with an awareness of traffic by time of day would help, but you'll never get the local boy racers...

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Need to scrap the cameras completely, they have a negative effect on safety. Need to make the driving test harder, better training and on-going training and testing. Same as you do to use some types of machinery. Simply using a camera or even plod to issue fines and points will never work.

Addressing poorly set speed limits is necessary. For instance Motorways and good quality NSL dual carriageways need the limits reviewing and raising where necessary.

If the majority of road users are exceeding the limit without a large number of accidents happening, then it is the limit that's wrong.

I wonder how many drivers have one or more speeding convictions on their license but a completely blame free accident record (and max no claims bonus!)?

The problem's not the enforcement per se, but the actual laws that are being enforced!