Safe Speed Forums

No problem, although one of my better received posts was compiled while at the wrong end of a night supping malts! And the topic was similar to that at the top of this thread.

But it sometimes just allows one to be a little less reserved!

_________________
Fixed ideas are like cramp, for instance in the foot, yet the best remedy is to step on them.

Ian

one might be so bold as to suggest that this is NOT using cameras correctly. If we expand the 'user group' for speed cameras to include drivers, that is, and not just the operators of the devices.

_________________
COAST Not just somewhere to keep a beach.

A young loner on a crusade to champion the cause of the innocent, the helpless, the powerless, in a world of criminals who operate above the law.

well there's an obvious solution to that but I don't think we want to go there...

I think Handy makes a good point here. Let's remember that the original idea was to put speed cameras in known black spots where engineering the problem away was either impossible or impractical. It could well be that slowing traffic down for a mere 100 foot was all that would be needed in some cases.

Just imagine if they had stuck to this idea in the first place. Not sure how many gatsos and truvelos there'd be, but nowhere near the 5000 odd we have now. If Durham's single camera was typical it would be under 100 probably. There'd almost certainly be no partnerships and no talivans, and probably a damn sight more trafplods. And we wouldn't be here arguing about it . I suspect I'm in a minority here, but I'd be quite happy to have the really necessary gatsos remain and just the money spinners and honey traps chucked on the scrap heap. Some may feel it's too late and gone too far to go back to the initial idea of small numbers of cameras as a last resort in real black spots, but I think it's worth a try.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

now I'm concerned that you were talking about me!

_________________
COAST Not just somewhere to keep a beach.

A young loner on a crusade to champion the cause of the innocent, the helpless, the powerless, in a world of criminals who operate above the law.

You'll have to join to find out!

But seriously we have had quite a few discussions about getting far better input from the other side of the debate - something that has proved to be remarkably elusive. If I recall correctly (and I don't have time to search) you came up as a shining example of a rare breed...

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

stevei makes a good sparring partner too.
Basingwerk is just irritating . Come back Basingwerk, we all love you really .

Handy wrote

There is some truth in that. Cameras are over used, in the wrong place and just seen as part of motoring hasle.
In the past having one or two convictions on your licence was realy rare and somthing to hide.

I would argue that having points on your licence is the norm now.

Because they have been placed in the wrong place they have no respect. This board and others like it would not exist if they were respected. The camera partnerships are not respected because thier press statements spout lies and rubbish and thier members are not elected or chosen in any transparent or logical way.

I generally support red light cameras as long as they are not too finely set. I think that people don't realy mind the car tax cameras but feel a little like their privicy is being invaded.

When it comes to speed cameras it is true,I don't actually think there are any good speed cameras that couldn't be done better with a speed activated display. Possibly you could re-inforce those with a speed camera where required.

There are thousands of junctions that could be better. There are sightlines that are disapearing just because someone decided to save some money. Roads that need better drainage.

Andy - I am sure the investigation team will be doing their best to find out why these crashes occurred.

However, in one case - driving rain.. small car .. perhaps "fey spirited" youngsters... see it all too often. Speed camera definitely would not have prevented tragedy in that kind of scenario - and there is just that chance that they may have "challenged the police car" if one had been patrolling. In such cases - you have to know when to back off and use the intelligence to try to prevent a tragedy.


We do try in this area. We do liaise with schools and colleges to try to get the COAST idea across and point out that a truly skilful driver observes and reads the road and gives a very smooth ride.

As for speed cams and all the doo-dahs....we use them in the cars to confirm a speed blat - but policy here is more safety led and advice rather than simply punish. We do issue fines when we have to .. but we also strive to educate as well. There is little point in creating feelings of resentment where road safety is concerned. I think this is where the current policy fails...discretion and professional judgement do indeed benefit road safety in any case.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

This road should have been replaced by a dual carriageway with central reservation separation using bypasses etc.

Problem is the expense and planning objections.

So we continue with traffic going 50mph - 60mph running side by side. If one vehicle strays into the others path in a momentary error we get a 100mph to 120mph impact.

Maybe the pre1983 death rate on roads started moving against the trend with the end of the rate of new motorways, dual carriage ways and central reservations?

Here's a few observations from today's journey home:


Small village Oxfordshire 30mph limit:

WOman in front, Ford Mondeo, approaches speed camera, 25mph brakes fairly hard then drifts towards kerb whilst doing so, speeds back up tp 25mph.

Same woman in Mondeo in 50mph limit, drives between 35-45mph rather than a consistant speed, traffic building up, driver behind attempts to overtake, pulls in front of me then proceeds to overtake the mondeo driver, she speeds up as he is doing so.

Same woman through next village, 35mph, flashing speed sign indicating the 30mph limit, slows down without heavy braking etc, she has clocked the flashing sign well in advance.

Due to the nature of this 'ladies' driving, i can only assume that she was spending more time concentrating on her odometer as opposed to her driving (she missed the 30mph sign in the second village and relied upon the flashing sign), she may have been within the limit but her driving was actually quite aggressive in that she was inconsistant and far from smooth. Following this type of driver is quite tiresome and unpredictable, I also have no doubt that she would not have been able react to an emergency because clearly she wasn't paying attention to the road. I also believe that she assumed because this chap was overtaking (within a safe and legal manner I might add) that she either assumed he was a boy racer who needed to be taught a lesson or that he was invading her driving space and felt the need to speed up to prevent this manouvre. The end result of her 'race' could have been the deaths of the driver overtaking and some poor bugger coming the other way. Fortunately the other driver had a car that was able to accelerate faster than her which meant that he had to exceed the speed limit to counter the actions of this moron. In short she was 'racing' the other driver.


It is an unfortunate side affect of the 'speed' kills message that we all have to incur, some people believe they are safe drivers by virtue that they stay within the limits. These same people then believe they have a right to self police the roads if another driver exceeds what they preturb to be 'safe' ie that somebody would dare to overtake them when they are being 'safe' etc.

The bottom line is that cameras won't catch these people and I can see why cameras aren't reducing accidents. What is clear however, is flashing signs appear to have more of an impact on speed and safe driving than a speed camera would have any day of the week and i am now all for them.

What the Governments road safety policy has gone on to create however, is a breed of drivers whom are less able to think and act for themselves. Instead of a quest for better driving standards as a whole, driving has become subserviant to a causation factor, that being of speed. One can only assume that such driving will become the norm within the next 5 years and as such we will be seeing a far higher casualtie figure as a result.

That is so dangerous. There really ought to be a bit in the Highway Code that explains that once someone overtaking you is alongside it's clearly in everyone's best interests that the manoeuvre is completed as quickly and safely as possible, 'cos as obvious as it is idiots like this don't seem able to grasp it.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

That's half the problem Gatsobait IMO, overtaking is now seen by many as something to be frowned upon if not discouraged. This is why the councils and highways agency are so insistant on painting their lovely collation of lines in the road. Fine if you're in a car but not on a motorcycle.

http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/15.htm


Maybe this part of the Highway code could do with some emphasis. Finding a place for a MUST NOT might be a bit tricky though.