Breaking Up The Socialist Nanny State - SPEED CAMERAS AXED AS WAR ON DRIVERS ENDS

THOUSANDS of speed cameras around the country are to be pulled down within weeks following a decision by the Government to halt the war on motorists.

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/189155/Speed-cameras-axed-as-war-on-drivers-ends

Here we are under 3 months into Conservative rule and already the dreary Socialist Nanny State is being broken up and freedom is once again start to pulse through the veins of Britain. Welldone David Cameron!

Yeah that's great for drivers, not so great for the people drivers crash into.

Yeah that's great for drivers' date=' not so great for the people drivers crash into.[/quote']

 

When speed cameras were removed in Swindon last year the number of deaths on the town's roads didn't increase

THOUSANDS of speed cameras around the country are to be pulled down within weeks following a decision by the Government to halt the war on motorists.

 

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/189155/Speed-cameras-axed-as-war-on-drivers-ends

 

Here we are under 3 months into Conservative rule and already the dreary Socialist Nanny State is being broken up and freedom is once again start to pulse through the veins of Britain. Welldone David Cameron!

Actually it's more to do with cutting costs

When speed cameras were removed in Swindon last year the number if deaths on the town's roads didn't increase

Was that when the councillor who made that decision got awarded his own throne on Top Gear?

Actually it's more to do with cutting costs

And it's up to the individual councils concerned, not the ConDems.

It's happening here in Oxfordshire because the council will no longer fund the partnership cameras. I think I'm right in that other (police) cameras will still operate.

So I still can't put my foot down on the run-in to Oxford in case the cameras I pass are still live.

I drive between 30,000 and 40,000 miles a year with work, and my view is that most cameras are put in places to raise cash although cameras such as the one on the A36 in Wellow should be kept as its a notorious black spot for accidents. But say the cameras going in on the Bournemouth spur road are totally there to make money, maybe keep one there but three.....c'mon.

Does this also mean that speed camera vans are being stopped aswell? As these are the ones that get up my nose!

Actually it's more to do with cutting costs

To an extent this is true, but there is no way a Conservative government would have erected the numbers that Labour did during their drive to create a big brother nation.

Does this also mean that speed camera vans are being stopped aswell? As these are the ones that get up my nose!

It's the average speed checks that I deteste. IMO they create more danger than they prevent because you spend more time watching the speedo rather than the road.

It's like those signs they stick up in places like on wheelie bins, telling people to slow down in 30 mph areas. You have to take a good look to read what it says on those and you have to take your eyes off the road. . .

Good news, speed cameras don't do a great deal for road safety IMO.

It's the average speed checks that I deteste. IMO they create more danger than they prevent because you spend more time watching the speedo rather than the road.

Actually I quite like these - they keep traffic flowing through road works without the stop start.

Actually I quite like these - they keep traffic flowing through road works without the stop start.

Plus, it's always entertaining to laugh at the feckwits who don't understand what 'average speed' is and slow down just before the cameras and put their foot down again once they are 'safely' through the camera

And they say GCSEs aren't getting easier

People who have bought sat navs with speed camera detection may be ****ed off. It's not the speed cameras that annoy me, it's easy to learn where they are, it's the average speed cameras. Can't stand them. I understand why they're there but I get a heart attack if I climb one mph over the limit.

When speed cameras were first introduced they were put in sensible places such as outside schools, hospitals etc - unfortunately what then happened was that they were put on perfectly save dual carriageways, A roads etc and limits were reduced disproportionately from 60 to 40 and such like - in short they became a money making scheme and this rightly turned the tide of public opinion against them. I hope those bloody vans get booted out too or at least forced to only operate where there truly is a risk to the public/other drivers by speeding vehicles.

Plus, it's always entertaining to laugh at the feckwits who don't understand what 'average speed' is and slow down just before the cameras and put their foot down again once they are 'safely' through the camera

 

And they say GCSEs aren't getting easier

I never understood the problem; there are these funny metal signs at the side of the road, round with red borders and black numbers on a white background. If your speed, as displayed on your dashboard, ( or even possibly on a heads-up ), is not in excess of the number displayed on these signs, ( exceding which is against the LAW !!! ), the camera does not take your picture, and no revenue goes to the Traffic Safety Partnership / HMG / Polce Authority ( * delete as you feel necessary ).

Simples.

There is that bloody word again, 'Socialist', one more time for the muppet at the back, NEW LABOUR WERE NOT SOCIALIST!!!

Actually I quite like these - they keep traffic flowing through road works without the stop start.

I normally stick on the cruise control and crawl through. I have a theory that they cause long tailbacks just before the roadworks. The problem is that once you get slowed doen you can't make up the gaps again. The average speed through the works is far less than the 50mph specified as a maximum. For those who are interested, there is a concept called 'superflow' which is getting the maximum vehicle flow rate through a traffic lane. I think it's something like 53mph and 25 feet separation, or something like that. Traffic will continue to flow smoothly from 50,000 vehicles per hour per lane until it reaches 80,000 and then the flow gets unstable and the average flow then drops below 50,000 which is why you get those 'waves' of stop-start traffic. The ideal is to keep the flow just below instability which is why you sometimes have traffic lights at the entry lanes to motorways.

There is that bloody word again, 'Socialist', one more time for the muppet at the back, NEW LABOUR WERE NOT SOCIALIST!!!

Well they weren't (aren't) really 'Labour' either, were they?

I normally stick on the cruise control and crawl through. I have a theory that they cause long tailbacks just before the roadworks. The problem is that once you get slowed doen you can't make up the gaps again. The average speed through the works is far less than the 50mph specified as a maximum. For those who are interested, there is a concept called 'superflow' which is getting the maximum vehicle flow rate through a traffic lane. I think it's something like 53mph and 25 feet separation, or something like that. Traffic will continue to flow smoothly from 50,000 vehicles per hour per lane until it reaches 80,000 and then the flow gets unstable and the average flow then drops below 50,000 which is why you get those 'waves' of stop-start traffic. The ideal is to keep the flow just below instability which is why you sometimes have traffic lights at the entry lanes to motorways.

Called compressions and rarefractions I do believe

It's the average speed checks that I deteste. IMO they create more danger than they prevent because you spend more time watching the speedo rather than the road.

If you have to "spend more time watching the speedo ... than the road" to maintain a generally consistent speed then you're either a very inexperienced or poorly skilled driver.

About time too. Really good move by the government, whatever colour they are. Mind you this lot seem to be better than the last lot.

There is that bloody word again, 'Socialist', one more time for the muppet at the back, NEW LABOUR WERE NOT SOCIALIST!!!

I was gonna say that, Im glad the cameras are going, I think they are a hallamrk of a FASCIST state, socialists look out for each other and you Mr Dune x

'Breaking Up The Socialist Nanny State - SPEED CAMERAS AXED AS WAR ON DRIVERS ENDS'

There was no socialist state, and their was no frigging war on drivers. Speed cameras do save lives, and if people keep within the speed limits, then why are people worrying? Also, I have a rule... never trust a tabloid headline in caps.

Speed cameras do save lives

Source?

There is that bloody word again, 'Socialist', one more time for the muppet at the back, NEW LABOUR WERE NOT SOCIALIST!!!

Aye, but he gets plenty of bites.... ;-)

Never a particular fan of the things, because of the objections a lot of people have (large numbers inappropriately placed, speed only one factor in accidents, more traffic officers using their own discretion would be a better investment, etc.) but they were certainly better than having nothing at all and giving the Clarksonite arseholes free rein to splatter people over the road.

Doesn't bode well for road safety, as it's not like the new lot are going to be putting any other or better measures in place.

Very interesting take on the matter in today's Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/26/evidence-real-war-motorists-look-mortuary

I used to be against the use of speed cameras, when they were introduced, but they do make a lot of sense. People will not police themselves, and as cars have become safer to those who drive them, and feature comforts that were only dreamed about 20 years ago, people have cluttered the roads in them, in a pursuit to go about their business in their capsule of freedom. But speed cameras remind them of their responsibility to others and that hurts. I've been caught by speed cameras 3 times in my life, and all 3 were 36mph in 30mph dual-carriageway area incidences. So I have every reason to feel annoyed by them, because a policeman might have understood my explanation for why I was just over the speed limit. But since going back to biking, in the last couple of years, I've not had a single problem. I don't need to speed because I'm never held up and never feel I have to play catch-up. A little spurt around this car or that, and my road is clear. It's not my outright speed that allows me the freedom - that would get me caught, but the simple fact that no car can out-accelerate me or take up as little room. I can pootle along at 30 mph and still get away.

Now traffic lights are something else..! But even then, I'm invariably at the front of the queue.

When speed cameras were first introduced they were put in sensible places such as outside schools, hospitals etc - unfortunately what then happened was that they were put on perfectly save dual carriageways, A roads etc and limits were reduced disproportionately from 60 to 40 and such like - in short they became a money making scheme and this rightly turned the tide of public opinion against them. I hope those bloody vans get booted out too or at least forced to only operate where there truly is a risk to the public/other drivers by speeding vehicles.

The most sensible post on this thread although St Landrew makes some decent points below as well. I'm not a fan of cameras outside of schools, hospitals or proven accident blackspots where there is a clear moral and statistical need for them. The mobile cameras in particular are stupid - I saw one in June on the M74 nearing the English border on a bridge when there must have been about three cars on both sides of the carriageway and also one earlier this month on a steep hill hidden in the undergrowth by the side of the A35 just over the Dorset border. The hill was so steep that there is no way they were going to catch anyone, you would have to cane your engine to break the limit on that incline. It did make me cross with regard to the needless overtime being paid out.

However, it does show you not to believe everything you read in the Daily Mail & Express (the latter a family values paper owned by a porn magnet) and that those papers do publish nonsense sometimes. I'm sure that we all remember the right wing tabloid argument about speed cameras being cash cows etc? Well, if they are being cut to save money it obviously ain't so! Many of the cameras in my view are misguided and I'm not sorry to see the back of them but it would help if we all drove a little more responsibly. Granted, there is the odd camera (Victoria TFL one) that is highly sneaky and makes lots of money but that is the work of civil servants, not any one political party.

Welldone David Cameron!

Maybe it was Nick Clegg's idea?

Source?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/jul/16/transport.speedcameras

Maybe it was Nick Clegg's idea?

I don't think it's anything to do with the ConDems. In fact I know it isn't. It's up to the local authorities because they fund the local traffic partnerships. It's the local authorities making cuts and deciding not to fund these partnerships anymore.

Hear hear does my head in .

If you have to "spend more time watching the speedo ... than the road" to maintain a generally consistent speed then you're either a very inexperienced or poorly skilled driver.

That's exactly the point though isn't it? We all see plenty of examples of drivers who aren't confident and can be worse than this every day and you've just proved Dunes point. If speed cameras have this effect on very inexperienced or poorly skilled drivers then these very cameras don't actually help at all and as you agreed with Dune they are more of a danger to the type of people who "spend more time watching the speedo ... than the road" Yes?

If you have to "spend more time watching the speedo ... than the road" to maintain a generally consistent speed then you're either a very inexperienced or poorly skilled driver.

That's exactly the problem with camera's....there's no 'generally' involved

It's also the difference between the will of a free society and the Stasi run state that NuLabour tried so hard to build

I drive between 30,000 and 40,000 miles a year with work, and my view is that most cameras are put in places to raise cash although cameras such as the one on the A36 in Wellow should be kept as its a notorious black spot for accidents. But say the cameras going in on the Bournemouth spur road are totally there to make money, maybe keep one there but three.....c'mon.

 

Does this also mean that speed camera vans are being stopped as well? As these are the ones that get up my nose!