Safe Speed Forums

You are right in a way and if anyone had been caught up in the two incidents, and died then there may well have been some bloody awkward questions to answer.
But I see this very much as a chicken and egg situation; which you believe comes first depends entirely on your view of the kind of driving (i.e. their speed) that led to the two drivers crashing when they saw the camera.
Some would argue that if they hadn't been speeding then they wouldn't needed to have reacted that way. And, had it been anything else other than a speed camera van that casued them to brake then the results of driving at speed and having to react suddenly are graphically presented. It is also provides an argument in support of hiding the cameras and vans
On the other hand it can also be argued that had the camera not been there then there is every liklyhood that the two drivers would have passed on their way quite safely and with no drama - apart perhaps from some tutts of dissaproval from anyone who thinks they shouldn't be goign at such speeds. And, of course, cameras were made to be visible in the first place because it was claimed that they were there to save lives in 'dangerous places' and slow drivers down; how could they know there was 'danger' if they can't see the camera
A merry-go-round debate that one can hop onto at any point in the cycle.

_________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Of course we should all believe the BBC

Now if there is evidence that all these crashes are caused by speeding it has now been wasted by using the BBC to spout it! Most people I know firmly belive the BBC tell us all a load of Boll** at the best of times.

Anyway, if a crash occured at 45mph in a 40mph limit would it have been CAUSED by speeding if the limit was 50mph????????????


I can hear cogs whirring now!

Speed is a factor in all accidents - as are wheels, tyres and engines.

Bad driving ,lack of driver education/experience etc.............................................( leaves room for others to fill in more gaps in the BBC knowledge base)

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

I agree, but a factor involved in a crash often has little or no relationship to the cause, only the sequence of events following the cause,speed in excess of the limit causes no more or less deaths than speed within or below. I think Im getting to the end of discussing speed, we live in a country where the average speed of traffic has fallen consistantly over years along with speed limit reductions on many many roads, yet the overall crash rates,though fluctuating, remain roughly the same or increase year on year, the death tolls fluctuate over months yrs or 10 yearly figures and depending who plugs the latest stats depends on the needs of the end user and the method the info is collated as to its accuracy. The death toll has changed in some peoples minds because of the efforts of government/police and road safety campaigns, yet the improvements in motor veh safety (seat belts,crumple zones,air bags, abs,tyres etc)is often overlooked as is improved medical response and treatment ( better trained ambulance staff,paramedics,helecopters, location of ambulances at peak times and in key areas,better equipped hospitals and highly trained emergency staff) these often determine life or death more so than the nature or speed of the crash concerned (just imagine the services of 30 yrs ago and veh standards of that era being in use today, the death toll would be enormous)and after all that, again I stress that the average speed has fallen,vehs have improved etc etc BUT THE CRASH RATES STILL KEEP RISING and every crash has the potential to kill it all depends on circumstances.So its very easy for all to focus on one small area that is a cash raiser without public question, that of speed. But after all these years of measures taken focussed mainly on speed result in traffic crash increases then hasnt someone got it wrong somewhere? Crashes are caused by driver error, I witness driver error of the extreme every day, we live in a very very lucky country (no wonder so many lottery winners ) and I cannot understand why there are so FEW crashes and so FEW fatalities, maybe next year the luck could run out...I do hope not.

Quite simply put - the official views on accidents are such that they can view cures in financial terms - in other words ,like everything else , accident prevention has ceased to be abouit safety ,but more about how little we can spend to get a (never mind how puny,the spinmerchants wil make it look good) minimal reduction .

Old saying springs to mind -

spend cheap , buy dear .--like fitting extreme budget range tyres on a Ferrari and wondering why you get a blowout at 75 .

Thats the UK road safety policy -a 1920 Bentley being expected to run at full throttle ,on poor quality oil, on remould tyres without breaking down or suffering a blowout .(OH, and asking it to stop at full throttle on modern roads without ramming something else up the jacksie)

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

I can't argue with any of that and in particular, why there aren't more crashes and injuries resulting therefrom. It's interesting to note that from insurance company figures, most minor accidents take place in supermarket car parks where speed is a miniscule factor if any. The overiding emphasis on mere speed is blinding everyone to the root causes and as a motorcyclist of some years standing, I see the most appalling transgressions of anything that may be described as common sense. Common decency seems to have gone out of the window as the motto seems to have become 'anything goes providing you stay within a notionally correct speed limit'.

It's tragic that accidents are still on the increase with the attendant trauma and distress. My question is that despite all the reductions and as tragedies are still increasing, just how far will authority continue to drop limits before they at last admit failure?

They will never admit failure. However they are slowly revisiting campaigns that were hastly dropped when they discovered speed cameras. The champions of the camera will never admit they were wrong. The speed camera will slowly disapear as those councillors and ministers are deposed.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

As I posted elswhereon this site ,things have changed - it's not about speed and danger now ,forget the children - it's all about carbon - drive too fast and you are killing the planet with all the extra emmissions (according to a Police Cameras Action recently)

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

Well, maybe the time has come to say "bring it on"! It would mean, of course, that anyone in a Bentley or Range Rover would have to get prosecuted at the limit plus (say) 1% and people on bikes or in small, light sports cars could get away with (say) the limit plus 50%!

In days gone by, they would have said that such a system would have been unworkable, but now they (ooops, "WE") have forked out for all this automated enforcement, the cameras can work out every car's CO2 emissions anyway. It would mean that they'd have to come to an arrangement for pre 2001 cars - perhaps leaving them as they are now, at "limit-plus-10%"?

The problem, of course, is that it takes no account of the bloke who only takes his Ferrari out for 1000 miles a year, thereby generating a much smaller carbon footprint than Mundaneo Man in his 50,000 mile-a-year repmobile - but hey, who ever said speed limit enforcement was fair or sane at present anyway?!

If CO2 reduction is important to them, this would actually make a difference!

Ah yes, and like the BBC, anything that Alistair Stewart says must be true.

One question that sprang to mind while reading this thread - do they take into account accidents on the German autobahn? A large proportion of the autobahn has no speed limit and so technically there's no such thing as "speeding" on these roads.

Totally agree about cameras being given a "quiet burial".

From memory -don't think it was Alister Stewart - think that was why I noticed it -but agree on him - bit like putting one of the train robbers in charge of PR at a bank .

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

OK....so you raise the penalties for "speeding" to such a ridiculous level that it's less painful to go and murder someone, introduce all the technology available to catch you, call you a child killer when you've never had an accident of note, change the law for YOU because you drive a car you DON'T have the protection of Magna Carta from the year 1512. You have to prove your innocence, they DON'T have to prove delivery of summons, notification of court hearing, etc etc. and you, have lost your job, your career, your home, maybe your marriage and your name (unlike a pervo child murderer which is sub judicy) is broadcast in every local paper....... so you brake heavily when you see the camera!

They are then surprised when pointing a camera at someone driving a car causes panic braking and an accident!.......

Bloody control freaks!..........


We have reached the stage now that if anyone takes a camera to a motorway bridge...or maybe a van! will witness an accident...simply because ..They are there!

Maybe the: "U TUBERS" will now find a new ....outlet for their talents!