|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Oxons speed cameras back on.
On 01/04/2011 17:32, Simon Mason wrote:
On Apr 1, 5:19 pm, Simon Weaseltemper wrote: On 01/04/2011 16:52, Matt B wrote: I think that the argument against them is to do with the "automaton" effect that they may induce in drivers. They may reinforce the attitude that, regardless of how dangerously someone is driving, the fact that they are within the speed limit means that they "must" be safe. So rather than concentrating on the things that matter outside of their cars, drivers are preoccupied with their speedometers. This is nonsense. There is no implication whatsoever that driving within the speed limit is safe, because driving above the limit is illegal. Drivers should obey the law by default. Forcing drivers to behave as the are expected to, cannot imply anything. That having to "stare constantly at the speedometer" excuse is rubbish. Any experienced driver can just occasionally glance at the speedo without compromising their outward vision and use clues such as engine note and gear selection to keep their speed at the limit or below if conditions dictate. Otherwise, logically nobody would be allowed to drive on the road, as it would be impossible to both pay attention to the road *and* stay within the speed limit. And how on earth would anyone be able to pass their driving test if they could not demonstrate that basic ability? I'm sure. But you must have noticed that the first reaction of many drivers when they see a camera is to slam the brakes on - just in case. We can't all maintain 100% concentration 100% of the time. Also, in some places, speed limits change so often and so irrationally, or are so poorly sign-posted, that it is conceivable that some people may not actually be aware of what the speed limit actually is at the moment they see a camera. -- Matt B |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Oxons speed cameras back on.
On 01/04/2011 17:39, Simon Mason wrote:
I can remember that recent case near Grimsby where a driver was flashing oncoming drivers warning them of a "speed trap". He argued that he was doing a "public duty" in making the roads safer by slowing drivers down. No. What he was in fact doing was making the road less safe, as the speeding motorists would have been given points on their licence and if they kept speeding and getting caught, then eventually they would have been banned and thus have made the road safer by getting rid of them altogether. How can banning drivers make the roads safer - I thought that banned and uninsured drivers were more likely to be involved in crashes than "legal" drivers? -- Matt B |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Oxons speed cameras back on.
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 17:51:13 +0100
Matt B wrote: How can banning drivers make the roads safer - I thought that banned and uninsured drivers were more likely to be involved in crashes than "legal" drivers? Don't you think they're probably the same drivers who were bad risks before they were banned, and that they're maybe less likely to drive once they have been banned? |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Oxons speed cameras back on.
On 01/04/2011 18:38, Rob Morley wrote:
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 17:51:13 +0100 Matt wrote: How can banning drivers make the roads safer - I thought that banned and uninsured drivers were more likely to be involved in crashes than "legal" drivers? Don't you think they're probably the same drivers who were bad risks before they were banned, and that they're maybe less likely to drive once they have been banned? IIRC, Swedish research found that the more severely a driver was punished, the more likely he was to re-offend. -- Matt B |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Oxons speed cameras back on.
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 17:47:01 +0100
Matt B wrote: But you must have noticed that the first reaction of many drivers when they see a camera is to slam the brakes on - just in case. I don't think that it's "just in case" - I think many drivers know they frequently break speed limits enough to worry about cameras. We can't all maintain 100% concentration 100% of the time. Also, in some places, speed limits change so often and so irrationally, or are so poorly sign-posted, that it is conceivable that some people may not actually be aware of what the speed limit actually is at the moment they see a camera. In most cases that's because they're not paying enough attention to ensure reasonably safe driving, so they deserve a ticket. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Oxons speed cameras back on.
On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 09:05:09 -0700 (PDT), Simon Mason wrote:
On Apr 1, 4:40*pm, Simon Weaseltemper wrote: Those who oppose speed cameras might be better to lobby for the raising of, or the removal of, speed limits altogether rather than complaining that they do not like getting caught breaking the law.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Agreed. One must also realise that they are used in many other countries as well as ours. In the UK we are pampered beyond belief, the location of cameras are widely advertised in various news media, they are signposted well and painted bright yellow and still drivers moan about getting caught by "sneaky and unfair" cameras. In Norway they are painted a dull grey colour and in many other countries a cop will be lying in wait with a speed gun behind a wall. Personally, I don't give a toss about them in the same way as I don't care about double yellow lines or no entry signs. Don't break the law - don't get fined. You missed off: Be a cyclist - totally disregard other road users: -- Simon Mason - who cycles at 25mph in 20mph limits just because the limits do not apply to cyclists. A total disreagrd for the well-being of vulnerable road users. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Oxons speed cameras back on.
On 01/04/11 19:55, Simon Mason wrote:
I think that society has decided, via the points system, that persistent law breaking by drivers will result in their licence being revoked, thus making the roads safer by their not being allowed to drive on them. Of course, if they choose to then drive with no licence, then society has also decided that more punitive measures can be meted out including imprisonment. Problem is you have to catch them first. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Oxons speed cameras back on.
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 18:46:51 +0100
Matt B wrote: IIRC, Swedish research found that the more severely a driver was punished, the more likely he was to re-offend. To the point that he gets tagged or jailed, which makes it a bit difficult to re-offend for a while. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Oxons speed cameras back on.
On 01/04/2011 18:47, Rob Morley wrote:
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 17:47:01 +0100 Matt wrote: But you must have noticed that the first reaction of many drivers when they see a camera is to slam the brakes on - just in case. I don't think that it's "just in case" - I think many drivers know they frequently break speed limits enough to worry about cameras. We can't all maintain 100% concentration 100% of the time. Also, in some places, speed limits change so often and so irrationally, or are so poorly sign-posted, that it is conceivable that some people may not actually be aware of what the speed limit actually is at the moment they see a camera. In most cases that's because they're not paying enough attention to ensure reasonably safe driving, so they deserve a ticket. And that could be largely because they have had the requirement or incentive to pay enough attention removed by the proscriptions and prescriptions of the road traffic rules and regulations. If the rules give you priority you tend to assume that you will get it (despite knowing you should never assume any such thing) and thus the imperative need to concentrate is no longer there. -- Matt B |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Oxons speed cameras back on.
On 01/04/2011 19:15, Rob Morley wrote:
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 18:46:51 +0100 Matt wrote: IIRC, Swedish research found that the more severely a driver was punished, the more likely he was to re-offend. To the point that he gets tagged or jailed, which makes it a bit difficult to re-offend for a while. But as soon as he's free to, he'll start all over again. It's a vicious circle and there's no gain, so no point. Incentives are the way whilst we rely on the current flawed road system model. -- Matt B |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
speed cameras | Peter | Australia | 19 | July 5th 10 11:28 PM |
Traffic Cameras: The Sheep are Fighting Back! | ComandanteBanana | General | 12 | April 24th 09 08:33 PM |
We don't need speed cameras | Tony Raven | UK | 16 | February 8th 04 01:21 PM |
Speed Cameras - Here We Go Again | Robert Bruce | UK | 10 | December 5th 03 04:54 PM |
Not speed cameras this time | Tim Woodall | UK | 2 | July 18th 03 12:11 AM |