Safe Speed Forums

Last sanctuary from speed cameras set to disappear
By David Millward, Transport Editor
Published: 8:00AM BST 10 Apr 2010

The country's last sanctuary from the speed camera is set to disappear within months.

Detailed plans for a mobile unit have been drawn up by the 95 Alive York and North Yorkshire Road Safety Partnership, which has identified 28 different sites where the cameras can be used.
The area had, until now, held out against introducing speed cameras which, it is estimated, raise around £100 million a year in fines from motorists across the country.

Its decision to fall into line with the rest of the country will dismay campaigners who argue that the cameras are a stealth tax aimed at hard-pressed motorists.
The proposals have been drawn up at a time when the Tories have said they will choke off funding for new speed cameras if they win the election.
Robert Goodwill, the party's shadow roads minister, is also a local MP.
Only two police forces had declined to take part in the National Safety Camera Programme which was established in 2001 – Durham and North Yorkshire.
Durham has since had a change of heart, leaving North Yorkshire on its own.
A report prepared by North Yorkshire County Council, City of York Council and North Yorkshire Police suggested that introducing a mobile speed camera could save 31 people from being killed or seriously injured over the next four years.

But the proposals were condemned by Claire Armstrong of the anti camera group, Safespeed.
"This is utter madness," she said. "When will the authorities understand that it is not about money, it is about education and understanding what good driver behaviour is.
"Good policing and appropriate enforcement are the keys to road safety. Bringing these cameras in will do nothing to improve the rift between the police and the public."

Mr. Millward has mentioned how much it is estimated is collected in fines but fails to mention and you fail to consider how much it would cost to operate the system. When the costs are taken into account

Where's the flaw in the road safety policy that includes speed management?

There are no notable opinions that disagree that speed management that includes the use of speed cameras is counter-productive to the improvement in casualty reduction.

Mr. Millward has mentioned how much it is estimated is collected in fines but fails to mention and you fail to consider how much it would cost to operate the system. When the costs are taken into account then it cannot be simply about the money can it?

Where's the flaw in the road safety policy that includes speed management?

There are no notable opinions that disagree that speed management that includes the use of speed cameras is counter-productive to the improvement in casualty reduction.

There are no notable opinions that agree that speed cameras are productive when factors such as RTTM and 'bias on selection' are accounted for.

Now you are using an [i]Argument from Authority[/l] which you have already dismissed http://www.safespeed.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=5354&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=180 as a great fallacy

I do find it most odd how you pick up on what you (wrongly) thought was my fallacy, but didn't even mention anything about the original fallacy that came from greenshed - which I had clearly demonstrated was itself flawed anyway