Top 10 Speed Cameras in Wales

DennisN · Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2015 9:19 am Post subject:

Are you sure? Could you remind us of the opposing poses adopted by each side (and the sizes of their respective percentiles)?
_________________
Dennis

If it tastes good - it's fattening.

Two of them are obesiting!!

M8TJT · Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2015 11:21 am Post subject:

Nar. No percentiles at all mate. Evil or Very Mad

Tafia14 · Regular Visitor Joined: Jan 29, 2014 Posts: 86

M8TJT · Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2015 11:41 am Post subject:

Much better now thank you, although my post was meant to be more facetious than bad tempered due to my apparent lack of statistical knowledge. I'm really sorry if you misinterpreted it, and apologise unreservedly.
So the 85th percentile business will mean that only 15% of people travelling along the road will be done for speeding if applied to the speed limit then? Or have I got that wrong as well?

Tafia14 · Regular Visitor Joined: Jan 29, 2014 Posts: 86

What a nice man. Yes that is correct.

Here is a mail received from a Canadian this very morning. Not just UK then.

Begins:

Edmonton runs predatory speed enforcement scams for revenue, and this is 100% wrong, 100% of the time.

The city needs to FIRST - reset all main road speed limits to the 85th percentile speed of free flowing traffic under good conditions, rounded to the nearest 10 kph interval. This will eliminate the predatory speed trap areas where the posted limits are set far below the safe and comfortable speeds that most people travel in order to facilitate high ticket rates for revenue. This change to posting the safest 85th percentile speed limits will also gut the profits from running the predatory speed camera program and likely get it stopped altogether, because the cameras will then lose money and the money grab camera program will almost certainly end.

Second, the enforcement by officers needs to be focused entirely on finding drivers to cite that are actually causing safety hazards. This returns the function of police to being those who "serve and protect" instead of having them assigned to "stop and collect". It is also proper to concentrate enforcement in areas that have unusually high crash rates, NOT in areas where the most money can be made with under-posted speed limits.

The public trust in Edmonton's speed enforcement programs is gone. The only way to restore the public trust is to entirely stop enforcement for revenue by resetting all the main road speed limits to the safest 85th percentile speeds and entirely changing the focus of traffic enforcement to safety, not revenue.

Unfortunately, the city is likely addicted to the loot from predatory speed enforcement.

James C. Walker, Life Member - National Motorists Association

M8TJT · Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2015 1:13 pm Post subject:

I was not disputing the idea, I just didn't understand the theory behind your post. Good article. The concept seems eminently sensible, but it seems that no fund raising department is going to employ common sense if it interrupts their cash cow revenue flow.

Tafia14 · Regular Visitor Joined: Jan 29, 2014 Posts: 86

Some call the Welsh Go Safe speed trappers "Go to your safe and pay us"

They say they get £35 for each driver who attends a speed awareness course. Not a lotta people know that.

ACPO has conveniently raised the level at which drivers are eligible for this wonderful session of brain remodelling. ACPO also gets a search fee when naughty drivers are caught as the DVLA has handed them drivers details. ACPO then check to see if miscreants 'qualify' for the course.

DennisN · Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2015 10:24 pm Post subject:

OMG I'm glad I'm not paranoid, or you lot's outlook would send me screaming up the walls.

Here I was hoping this thread could move off into a discussion on speeding, or not speeding, in order to avoid fines etc. As I said recently, whatever the posted speed limit is, other road users have every right to expect "you" to observe it at all times and it is "criminal" for "you" to decide to drive otherwise, just because "you've" got a bigger percentile than others.

But instead it has developed into the usual soundbites on scamera bashing, which will have precisely zero effect on their placement and operation.

Surely we should be asking the author to confirm that the Welsh cameras in question are included in the PGPSW database? (As a matter of smugness on PGPSW's part, I am surprised it wasn't included in the report. Y'know, something on the lines of "These 10 cameras have hauled in £zillions, BUT NOT FROM PGPSW USERS, because they are warned about every one of them.")
_________________
Dennis

If it tastes good - it's fattening.

Two of them are obesiting!!

Tafia14 · Regular Visitor Joined: Jan 29, 2014 Posts: 86

Poor Dennis doesn't understand the term '85th percentile' We do not have an individual percentile. It refers to the behaviour of 85% of drivers along a given stretch of road.

The careful actions of reasonable people should be considered legal. ( I have probably slightly misquoted that but you will get the gist.)

As for the trap points being on the database, as far as I am aware, three local trap points, one of which has been used for years, the others for two years, were not in the database. I submitted them and someone (much later) confirmed one of them thus extending my subs. The other two seem to be still unconfirmed.

Would Dennis agree that the red light scamera trap where the amber time is shortened to trap drivers is also acceptable?

Tafia14 · Regular Visitor Joined: Jan 29, 2014 Posts: 86

I have found the correct quote now:

Canadian common sense.

This recent Canadian report (Review and Analysis of Posted Speed Limits and Speed Limit Setting Practices in British Columbia) has a clear view of the role of speed limits and speed enforcement.

We'd rate this as a "must read", and it includes such straight forward common sense items as:

The majority of motorists drive at a speed they consider reasonable, and safe for road, traffic, and environmental conditions. Posted limits which are set higher or lower than dictated by roadway and traffic conditions are ignored by the majority of motorists.

The normally careful and competent actions of a reasonable person should be considered legal.

A speed limit should be set so that the majority of motorists observe it voluntarily and enforcement can be directed to the minority of offenders.

DennisN · Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 10:52 am Post subject:

As a general comment, I tend to disbelieve 85% of all soundbite rubbish, not least those offered by the people who are brilliant at determining speed limits, based on apocryphal reports of what 'they' say and what 'they' did.

And I DO understand the term '85th percentile'. What some people don't understand is that there is no percentile when there is already a posted speed limit - was it M8TJT who said it only works on unrestricted roads?

What some people don't understand is that from time to time I like to poke fun at serious fanatics who are talking out of their proverbials.
_________________
Dennis

If it tastes good - it's fattening.

Two of them are obesiting!!

M8TJT · Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 12:24 pm Post subject:

Para 2. Yes it was me. I didn't say it only works on unrestricted roads though, I think I said that it would only work on unrestricted roads. Slight difference.
Para 3. So do I Very Happy

Tafia14 · Regular Visitor Joined: Jan 29, 2014 Posts: 86

Dennis,

Of course there is a percentile on all roads. That's why when limits are set too low, hundreds/thousands of folks driving ( without actually being aware of it) within or at the 85th percentile are penalised.

Most of us know by experience what feels the right speed for the conditions and most of us drive at that speed. We drive along in convoy not wanting the driver in front to speed up, not feeling the need to overtake and not driving too slowly for the driver behind to feel impeded.

That is the 85th percentile in action.

If you wish to poke fun then give us a clue with a smiley. Then we know you are not being serious

	PocketGPS
	Web