Safe Speed Forums

From a mathematics coffee room:-

When some regions cut back on speed cameras before other regions, one would expect groups like motorcyclist etc moving their "Sunday runs" to those regions. This might distort accident statistics in the short term, in a way that could be used against you. If, however, you were aware of such effects, and mentioned them in advance of occurrence, it would look better for you.

Also, people who have a choice of routes, might pick those with the least cameras. Again, this is likely to increase the accident rates in those areas, at least for a while.

Those against you, will use this information to show (wrongly) that speed cameras did work, and will want them back based on such observations.

Note that I am only talking about a short term effect here, during a transitional period.

_________________
http://kalvis.com/

I think Safespeed have referred to "displacement" before in the other direction, on the basis that if a road is heavily speed-enforced then some road users will seek alternative routes, thus making the road possibly safer purely due to the reduction in traffic.

I think it's unlikely this will happen at a county-wide level to such an extent that it will distort the figures. It was claimed that "speeders would flock to Swindon" but that never seemed to happen.

And motorcyclists will already be choosing camera-free roads for their weekend runs – removal of cameras from some areas will just spread it out a bit more.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

It depends on how the statistics are collected. If by region, you may well see an effect of this kind. I know of some motorcycle clubs, who are already changing their plans for Sunday runs, as a result of what they have been reading in the papers.

_________________
http://kalvis.com/

Something to throw into the argument against camera pot -possibly mentioned ,but I've never seen it ,a reverse idea to that mentioned .Possibly accidents,due to a decrease in traffic occurred at camera sites ,but instead of the camera getting the credit for prevention ,perhaps it's presence should be taken into account for any decrease ,and also any increase in the nearby roads .In other words ,traffic moved elsewhere ,reducing the volume and hence the risk .

_________________
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

People have been avoiding camera routes too, so to a degree they are 'returning' to roads too.

There has been a mass distortion for years now on routes and timingd of journeys.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

I am moving this thread to Speed, Safety Driving and the Law
link to follow ...

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

The concern was the pattern of the changes is very different at the moment, and occurring over large regions. Time will tell.

_________________
http://kalvis.com/

If there is arise in accident figures for the areas removing speed cameras it would be interesting to see if it there is a similar drop in areas such as N Yorks and Co Durham which never had a widespread camera usage.