Do Speed Cameras Save Lives?

[neil01]

Common sense dictates that a speed camera can only save lives if it is placed in an area where speeding is a threat to life.

Common sense then dictates that a speed camera can only be effective as a safety measure if its presence actually reduces peoples speed, which in turn can only result when a warning is given.

However, statistics can be misleading. I know of a road with the over application of speed limits enforced by cameras where many people simply use an alternative (less safe) route, because driving on that road as it currently stands, is far too frustrating and stressfull (recognised causes of accidents and premature death - but not usually where the statistics apply).

[cantgetlost]

hese people at the AA and RAC who spin out governement rhetoric based on somewhat iffy data should be shot.
It is about time the RAC and AA started attacking governement for lack of road building and road charging.

Traffic flow is what needs addressing, inproved junctions and reductions of stopping points such as traffic lights.
Some idiots on Plymouth replaced a very safe underpass with lights and a crossing. Keeping pedestrians and cars seperated is what keeps pedestrians safe on Motorways !
So HELLO powers that be ,if you want safer roads seperate pedestrains with barriers from dangerous crossing points. Speed cameras are a menace, people brake when they see them and speed after they pass them.
When a road has had a number of accidents whoi decides that speed is the factor that caused it.
Driving skills are what need improving not an increase in speed cameras.
In France where there are dangerous bends or accident black spots they have radar contrilled flashing chevron signs. If you approach a dangerous bend to fast the chevrons light up like Harrods at Christmas and are far more effective than hidden or carefuly placed speed cameras,
The French have flashing strobe type lights high above dangerous crossing points on main roads, the lights can be seen often from over a mile away giving drivers warning of black spots.
Continental motorways also have signs in the middle of the motorways in a lot of places and they have less traffic than on our roads. Signs between the centre armco barriers so that drivers are well warned of junctions because their view has been obscured by large trucks would save a lot of accidents near junctions.
Improving many of our roads safety is not rocket science and does not need rip off cameras.
All the motorway accidents near junctions should tell RAC , AA and the idiots advisers the government uses that junction exits and entrances to M ways need improving.
Exits that have traffic queued down on ths inside lane for a mile or more lead to accidents !
Get the cars off the motor ways using flyovers and slip roads not roundabouts and lights and the idiots will save lives and keep traffic flowing leading to less frustration and more saved lives!

[Crad]

Has anybody considered the fact making roads safe is about as easy as making a knife that will not cut a cook – even the best chefs get cut! The only way to reduce the ksi to zero would be to reduce the speed limit to the same figure, believing anything else is simply self delusion.

I would love to hear form anybody who can demonstrate an error in this assertion.

Personally I believe that the post 1994 levelling of ksi level is due to speed cameras, but there is another possibility; the ksi is as low as can be achieved as long as the are cars on the roads.

So that leaves only two reasons to use automated speed detection / fine devices.

a. To chase the impossible.
b. To raise revenue by stealth taxation.

If the authorities truly wished to reduce accident rates then they would legislate to improve the basic safety of cars (but there is, of course, no money to be made in this).

The facts are fairly undisputed in that; human error causes accidents not speed.

Ask yourself who you would rather be in the path of ;

a. a driver doing 30MPH looking down at his speedo.

Or

b. a driver going 35 MPH with his eyes firmly focused on you.

Okay maybe the point is a bit simplistic, but drivers are now forced to spend much more of their attention ensuring that they do not drift over the speed limit – to do this they must spend far more time studying their speedometers.

As for camera sites, I suggest you study traffic around them (perhaps the camera partnerships should also). Typically cars slow down to far below the posted speed limit. At face value this seems like a good thing, but truth be told it leads to sudden braking, queues and frustration, and most of the drivers doing this are already within the speed limit, but feel they “must make sure.” If anybody believes this contributes to road safety then I would like to know how.

[neil01]

Unfortunately you can prove anything by the selective use of statistics.

One major concern of mine, is that the reductions in one situation, do not take into account increases in another.

Examples
Reduced speed limits in road works to protect the workforce - even when no work is being done - result frustration/delays and possibly accidents down the road.

Too many cameras as Crad mentioned causing people to concentrate elsewhere - but at least the child won't be as badly injured as they would have been if you were travelling faster. Since this is not now a 'speed related injury' the statistics are better - but this totally ignores the possibility that a driver spending more time looking at the footpaths rather than the speedo might never have had the accident in the first place. Just to clarify what I mean, I am not suggesting that you shouldn't check your speed, just that in an area where you are likely to be penalised, it is human nature to check the speedo far more often than is required to ensure that you stay within the speed limit.

Traffic calming measures - again take more of the drivers concentation and cause delays/frustration with possible effects further down the road.
Now with calming measures we actually know that many cost far more lives than they saved - the increase in deaths caused by delays to ambulances proved it (or was that just statistics!), and as a consequence many have now been removed/modified.

No doubt there are many other examples where the statistics may not be as clear as they appear, but I wil pass my soap box on to someone else for the moment.

[Skippy]

[neil01]

[Crad]

[GPS_fan]

Part of the problem is the LOCATION of speed cameras - they tend NOT to be placed outside schools and other places where safety is a perceived issue.

Different police forces seem to enforce the rule of the law differently - there should be only ONE rule (eg 10% + 2mph) across the land, so that everybody knows exactly where they stand.

The more strictly the law is enforced, the more likely you are to get speedo watchers instead of road watchers.

'Safety measures' have been implemented along the road where I live - but instead of reducing the speed of cars, these measures just seem to encourage "boy racers" to drive faster and bus drivers to 'barge through' simply because they're bigger.

I mentioned this to the county council highways department and was told "we know what we're doing"....but these are the same people put solar panels for warning signs facing NORTH...

...so I'm just waiting for the first serious accident so that I can go to the press with copies of e-mails and say "I told you so"

We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?.
Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!