Safe Speed Forums

I heard a news report about cameras but unfortunately I must admit that I was listening to Radio 1 so it was not very in-depth. It said that the DfT claimed that 100 lives per year are saved by speed cameras. Has anyone heard of this statistic?

If this is genuinely what they are claiming - that speed cameras reduce casualty numbers by about 2-3% - are cameras really an efficient or effective way to reduce casualties? If there are approx 5000 speed cameras then each year only one in 50 of them would save a life, and that is not counting mobile speed cameras. Couldn't we expect a better than 3% decrease in casualties if the millions of pounds spent on speed cameras were spent on training etc?

Paul Smith was also quoted in the report talking about regression to the mean.

Oooops - total non argument as far as the government is concerned as it is costing THEM nothing. In fact it turned over a £14million profit according to today's figures, so it doesn't matter how inefficient they are at saving lives compared to their unnecessary catch rate...

And if any of you believe this "fact", i've got fairies at the bottom of my garden would love to have a chat with you

_________________
Semper in excreta, nur quantitat variat.

Sick of listening to the radio today!! Reports suggest that 75% of "us drivers" fully endorse the use of Speed Cameras to reduce fatalities and severe injuries. How bizarre! Im sure there isnt a motorist alive that if told having a camera here is going to save someones life would you endorse it? eerrrrrrrr think pretty much 100% would surely say yes. Its just a fact that these figures are complete bull****. I wonder if its perhaps the ABS and the halfdozen airbags that have made the most significant improvements. Even worse in my area (The Central Midlands Region) tonights news actually featured a load of 7 year olds stating "The man who drives his car to fast is a bad man and doest care about peoples lives" There even brainwashing children now. They have this fascination that driving over the speed limit is dangerous. this alone really annoys me. I know several people who have been involved in little prangs and the fisrt thing they say is " I wasnt speeding" - I think "What the f***! You pulled out on a bus cos you werent paying attention or you dropped your fag and didnt see the car in front stop. But cos they werent "speeding" that makes them a good driver........yeah right!!!!!


Glad got that off my chest - feel a little better now!!!!!!!

I don't believe it, but usually they claim that cameras reduce casualties by 35% or whatever. If they are only *claiming* 100 lives saved, a very small percentage, then even their own 'optimistic' figures show that speed cameras are not working; certainly not as the central feature of road safety policy, eg. speed camera partnerships. When even the strongest supporters of speed cameras claim that they reduce casualties by only 3% I think people will find it easier to believe that there are more effective ways to reduce casualties and that apparent reduction from speed cameras are due to regression to the mean etc.

And yes, I realise that speed cameras don't cost the government anything but someone has to pay for them and if cameras are percieved as a success it is less likely that money will be spent on effective road safety schemes. Of course, the way cameras are used also criminalises millions of people.