Speed Camera’s don’t work: from the horses mouth

! This post hasn't been updated in over a year. A lot can change in a year including my opinion and the amount of naughty words I use. There's a good chance that there's something in what's written below that someone will find objectionable. That's fine, if I tried to please everybody all of the time then I'd be a Lib Dem (remember them?) and I'm certainly not one of those. The point is, I'm not the kind of person to try and alter history in case I said something in the past that someone can use against me in the future but just remember that the person I was then isn't the person I am now nor the person I'll be in a year's time.

Straight from the horses mouth, proof that speed cameras don’t work and they are there simply to make money.

The West Mercia Speed Camera Partnership was telling us how wonderful their speed cameras are and how they’ve cut accidents at camera sites by so 60-odd %.  Fabulous.  The article then went on to say that accidents as a whole were down by something like 25% so the 60% figure is rubbish.  Still, if they stop accidents then they’re worth the money aren’t they?

Today, the Speed Camera Partnership launched a camera bike.  The motorbike has a speed camera attached and can be used whilst on the move.  The bike will be used around camera sites because (remember, this is the speed camera people saying this) motorists slow down for the camera and simply speed back up again when they’ve gone past it.

Hale-bloody-lujah.  Finally they get it.  Yes, 99% of people slow down for the camera and then speed up again.  This is why they don’t work – they only catch the people who aren’t paying enough attention to slow down.  People who are paying more attention to pedestrians and other motorists than their speedo for instance.

They can call them “safety” cameras and they can make more adverts showing mock-ups of children being run over by someone driving at 5mph over the speed limit but they won’t convince the majority of the public that their cameras do the job they say they do.  If their sole interest was in saving lives and reducing accidents they would have a traffic officer in place of the speed cameras stopping people driving too fast, people driving too slow, people driving erratically, people talking on mobile phones whilst driving, people smoking whilst driving, cyclists riding without lights in the dark, people in unsafe and/or untaxed cars.  The list of dangerous driving habits is endless but, of course, the only one that can be detected without anyone but the man who collects the film having to get off their arses is speeding.

Speeding isn’t dangerous, driving too fast is.

One comment

  1. Jeff (4 comments) says:

    And even if they did work, they’re not capable of making any serious inroads into road casualty figures.

    Today’s (28/9/06) report from the DfT “Contributory factors to road accidents” states (once you get through the bullshit and find the actual figures in the tables) that “Exceeding the speed limit” is only a factor in 5% of all accidents. Whereas “Not looking where you’re bloody well going” (my paraphrase) is a contributor in 32% of accidents.

    So it’s official… Cameras are a con.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload CAPTCHA.