Skip to content

Discuss This Safety groups’ ‘misleading’ speed camera claims General news

You are in... Forums > Discuss This > General news > Safety groups’ ‘misleading’ speed camera claims

This is a discussion topic

This discussion topic is linked to an article on this site. You can navigate to the article by clicking on the article name in the first post.

Go to most recent reply

Anonymous

Joined:

Posts:

Steve Farrell  says:

Safety groups’ ‘misleading’ speed camera claims

Safety groups have been accused of ‘misleading’ the public over claims speed cameras save lives. A joint statement from groups including the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, the AA and national cycling body CTC said: ‘Speed cameras help to save lives - an estimated 100 lives a year in the UK.’ But the study cited as the source...

Reply to this Topic  
  • Posted 4 years ago (27 August 2010 16:27)

Post a message in General news

Fields marked with an asterisk * are required

   

Please note. You cannot submit more than 4000 characters as a message.

Upload image(s) from your computer (up to 3 images)

  1.  
  2.  
  3.  

Terms of use

Use of our community areas and forums is subject to important terms of use. By joining our community and using the features you agree to be bound by these terms. See terms of use below. 

Cancel
panmanPete

Joined:

Aug 10

Posts: 22

panmanPete says:

Lies, damn lies and statistics

The old saying "Lies, damn lies and statistics' says it all. I seem to recall that Swindon switched off its cameras last year!! and has recently confirmed that they have not seen ANY increase in accidents or injuries at the camera sites. Perhaps MCN could have a chat with the council to run an accurate update on this. Talking to some police at a recent Bikesafe event, the introduction of fixed cameras has (allegedly) increased minor accidents further along the road that did not happen before the cameras were installed. Also, the use of 'comparative' data from one year before installation is known to be flawed as it is often skewed by a single big accident. Much more accurate is to look at the full 5 years before and after installation; and it shows no statistical benefit at all!!! Mind you - truth and facts are not headline grabbing, unlike the misguided emotional outbursts on local and national TV recently.

Reply to this Topic
anyonebutmurray

Joined:

Jan 10

Posts: 46

Misleading?

Why is it that when certain  groups of people tell blatant lies, this is referred to as "slightly misleading"?

I expect it from ROSPA and the CTC, who would'nt see the truth if  it hit them in the face, but the AA?? They have obviously forgotten why they were founded in the first place - my subscription will certainly  NOT be renewed in October!!

Reply to this Topic
nickyb65

Joined:

Jan 10

Posts: 201

nickyb65 says:

When cameras are deployed in places of high accident areas, such as nearby schools, junctions etc they will certainly help to reduce accidents. This is how the cameras started all those years back, however since that time there usage has been abused by councils across the land as a revenue generator. Personally I have no issue with these cameras (specs, gatso etc etc), if a driver or rider obeys the law then there is nothing to worry about.

A more serious issue being a biker is the number of car driving w*nkers that STILL use mobile phones while driving along, that scares the shit out of me. To me (at least) this is far worse than general speeding as, at least when speeding, the driver is at least concentrating on the road ahead I assume.

Answer. Okay, drop the cameras but increase the fines on mobile phone use while driving, something like this:

1. First offence using mobile phone - £2,000 plus 4 points

2  Second offence using mobile phone - £3,000 plus 5 points

3. Third offence - at least 6 months disql. + driving re-test + £4,000 fine

That might help.

Reply to this Topic
afccarrick

Joined:

Jul 10

Posts: 139

afccarrick says:

.

To Claim that Speed Cameras save lives is daft.

Accidents and road deaths are something that is never constant. At lets face it. Noone knows when an accident will happen. So how can a figure which would vary on a regular basic anyway be used to prove or disprove the use of these cameras.

Reply to this Topic
HOSBUSA

Joined:

Sep 09

Posts: 391

HOSBUSA says:

 

In basic terms one of the corner stones of any civilisation is the element called TRUST.

When you take away the element of TRUST, you lose the foundation of civilised society.

No one trusts the authorities or the state anymore, because they lie.

Reply to this Topic
Meaty79

Joined:

Nov 09

Posts: 156

Meaty79 says:

Thank you nickyb65 I agree that the amount of drivers using mobiles whilst driving is more scary than people exceding the speed limit a bit as I have recently been very nearly knocked  down on a crossing by some one on a phone because they where so busy concentrating on there conversation that they didn't see the red traffic light.

Would at this point like to say I was walking due to being just out of hospital with a damaged back (crushed vertibrae) after being knocked off my bike by someone pulling a u turn without looking properly across my lane of traffic (2 lanes both ways not filtering) because he didn't want to sit in a queue speed cameras would not have helped in either of these incidents as they where both at a fairly low speed.

Reply to this Topic
norris

Joined:

Nov 02

Posts: 1311

norris says:

Cameras

Have been a blatant cash generator for years. Where I live cameras have been placed every 100 yards for at least 10 miles(a road that has been a 40 limit for as long as I can remember, but one which has been reduced to 30 for much of its distance which is frustratingly slow for the type of road it is) on a road that I travelled on daily for 10 years and never saw or heard of major accidents. Within 6 months of cameras being installed there were numerous accidents.

MCN reported last year I believe about a motorcyclist hit from behind when braking for a camera, that is another road near me that has seen many accidents over the years despite the presence of cameras, one has actually been hit 3 times due to its location (downhill section of dual carrigeway on a bend that is usually wet due to run off from the hill), yet instead of removing it, the council erected armco to protect the camera.

Re nickyb65..To say 'if riders/drivers obey the law then there's nothing to worry about,' is not true..We are not robots and everyone but everyone goes over the prescribed limit, especially when they're up and down 30..40..50..30..40..60 plus many are deliberately hidden..I've done it myself, early morning road clear mind on where I'm going and forgot there's a camera placed exactly where they've reduced the limit from 40 to 30, then back to 40 once past the camera..

Another road from Huddersfield to wakefield has just had cameras installed again every 100 yards for 10 miles stating its due to accidents, again this a road I travel on daily and have yet to see any evidence of accidents.

As been stated elsewhere, these cameras are alienating a lot of generally law abiding people from the authorities/police.

 

 

Reply to this Topic
scottyblade

Joined:

Jul 10

Posts: 23

scottyblade says:

i suppose the reasons for these "safety" groups keep saying these kind of things is beacuse if there was no result... thered be no need for them!!  ...  they need to justify the reasons for them.  Personally i dont agree with speed cameras,  these have been used as cash cows and safety was the excuse given... yet if people have not noticed there are 1 million plus drivers on the road today without insurance, tax, mot....... but sadly cameras cant catch them, nor do cameras catch drunk and or drugged drivers, and they certainly dont catch drivers who have not registered their cars, so the only people who get penalised by these cash cows are the law abiding honest people who have payed their dues and gone to the trouble of mots, taxing etc etc only to have a brief moment of confusion and gone a buggatti bating 5 mph over the limit past one!!!  ..... in return they get £60 fine + £15 victim surcharge then 3 points, and a massive jump in insurance!!!!!  ....   cetainly not a fair system for the honest joe blogs, i know they broke the speed limit but honeslty!!!!  ....  we all speed whether its intentional or not!!  .... no ones perfect!!!!  least of all me!! ......  ive still think the police should bring back the good old traffic cops!!!   (some forces got rid of theirs and replaced them with speed cameras)  .... at least theyd spot dangerous and drunk drivers!!!! 

Reply to this Topic
wombat4

Joined:

Jan 04

Posts: 16

wombat4 says:

BMF

I hear the BMF are supporting speed cameras just what planet are they on?

Reply to this Topic
chmer20

Joined:

Oct 09

Posts: 90

chmer20 says:

jobs

replacing cameras with actual traffic police would not only cut down on reckless and drink drivers, but it will also create jobs.

On another note, I am planning a biking trip to Ireland next year and was wondering what kind of presence speed cameras have there. anyone?  thanks

Reply to this Topic

Page

Compare Insurance

Save money by comparing quotes. It's quick and easy

Motorcycles for sale

 

It's only £13.99 to advertise your motorcycle on MCN

Sell your Motorcycle