Wednesday 13th April 2005

Cameras targeting drivers who exceed the UK's motorway speed limit have been introduced along part of the M4.

The Wiltshire Safety Camera Partnership has installed fixed cameras and marked vans along a 40-mile stretch of the motorway between Bath and Hungerford.

Drivers who exceed the 70 mile per hour limit will face £60 fines and three penalty points.

The group says it hopes the cameras will reduce the high number of deaths on the route but there are concerns that the move could be seen as a money making exercise and lead to possible panic-braking.

What do you think of the introduction of speed cameras along the M4? Will they improve motorway safety? Tell us what you think.

From:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/4440349.stm

 

My twopennoth:

Yet again several people give us their very own personalised version of the anti-car lobby's soundbite: "If you don't want the fine, don't do the crime". If these people spent less time looking at their speedo's, and more time looking at the real world, they would have read about the thousands of drivers who had to pay the fine despite not doing the crime. I think the record is for doing zero mph. So which speed limit was that breaking then?

 

And my threepenoth:

If cameras really are about safety, and really aren't about revenue: surely it is the police who should be penalised £60 every time they record a driver they haven't stopped speeding?

 

Don't drive over 70 mph on the M4

 

No sign of either of those.

But loads more brake bullshit.

 

 

Another try:

"The following comments reflect the balance of opinion we have received so far:" - "If you don't want to get caught - don't speed: it's really alarmingly simple." Regurgitated in various versions ad infinitum. Of course the FACTS are that on this very same motorway hundreds of people have been prosecuted for driving at 60mph when the limit was 70mph. So much for "balance".

 

 

Or have they really been taken over by a motoring fifth column?

 

Another try:

I wonder who are the real dummies. Those that get speeding fines, such as the hundreds "caught" doing 60 in a 70 (sic) on this self same motorway? Or the anti-car lobby supporter(s?) who got fourteen variations of "If you don't want to get caught - don't speed: it's really alarmingly simple" posted here. Fair play to the independent, unbiased BBC editors who allowed them the freedom to demonstrate just how dumb they are in the interests of balance.

 

And they actually posted this (once) on the above page:

I note that this is the same partnership that had to refund fines or drop prosecutions as a result of illegal enforcement of speed limits on the A303 recently. Are they just getting their own back on the motorist?
Jerry, Basingstoke, UK

 

 

Though I can't find an article about the dodgy scam left on the M4 after they finished the roadworks anywhere on the Beeb!

 

 

Out of 119 comments we had a "balance" of opinion which included the following fourteen "opinions":

 

People comment that's it's just a money making scheme. Well don't speed, and they won't make any money, it's not rocket science!!
Ruth Bowyer, Yate, South Glos

 

It's very easy to never get caught by a speed camera - don't speed.
Peter Parsons, Reading

 

If you don't break the law you have nothing to fear.
Sue, England

 

If you speed you should expect to get caught. End of story.
Helen, England

 

If drivers are not breaking the law they will not be penalised by the use of cameras.
JC Gill, Derby

 

It's very easy to never get caught by a speed camera - don't speed..... If you break the law, you should be prepared to pay the consequences.
Peter Parsons, Reading

 

If drivers kept within the limits there would be fewer road deaths and no speeding fines. Stop the road mania or pay.
Carol, East Sussex

 

My car is fitted with an anti-speed camera device. Behind the steering wheel is a little disc with some numbers around it. If I make sure that the little arm doesn't go above the number stated on the side of the road, then the cameras are beaten!
Nicole, London, UK

 

Just drive within the speed limit and you won't get caught. All these bleeding heart campaigners should stop trying to find reasons why cameras should be made more visible or removed altogether and just drive within the law.
Gavin, Swindon, UK

 

What's the big deal about speed cameras? The law says the speed limit on the M4 is 70mph. If you go over 70, you are breaking the law. It's not about money making it's about breaking the law.
Steve Brehm, Herts

 

Speed cameras are here to stay whether the British motoring public like it or not. However, fines and points on your driving licence can be avoided very easily, "don't speed" if you make the conscious decision to do so and get caught it is your fault and your fault alone, speed cameras don't go off unless the speed limit is exceeded by at least 10 mph. If you as a driver are incapable of controlling the speed of your car within that limit I would suggest you either hand in your driving licence or invest in some driving lessons, you are clearly incompetent and in need of extra tuition.
Simon, Chelmsford

 

The basic argument that most people seem to conveniently ignore is that if you are driving faster than 70mph you are breaking the law. If you are not breaking the law then the speed cameras will ignore you.
Stephen Mortimer, Reading, UK

 
It's quite simple - speeding is illegal. If you are going to do it, then you must put your hands up when (or if) you are caught. If you don't want to get caught - don't speed: it's really alarmingly simple.
J, London

 

How can you call speeding fines a tax? You only pay the fine if you choose to break the speeding limit. I choose not to and as a result have never been fined. It's not that hard is it?
Paul, Cardiff

 

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm:

In fact: it's fourteen posts.

Many of the have taken two bites of the cherry!

 

Andy Pearson tells us that the opening paragraph of the California Highway Code contains the sentence "Driving is a privilege; not a right." If he'd done a bit more research he would probably have found something like the following which is cited by Washington State (and many states and in other countries):

When setting speed zones, traffic engineers base decisions on several fundamental concepts proven over the years to be true:

-The majority of motorists drive in a safe and reasonable manner

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

-Laws are established for the protection of the public and the regulation of unreasonable behavior of a few individuals

-Laws cannot be effectively enforced without the consent and voluntary compliance of the majority

-Research and experience have shown that effective speed limits are those that the majority of motorists naturally drive, and that raising and lowering speed limits doesn't substantially influence that speed.

Actually, that's not quite right: the spread of speed cameras has seen a reversal in the formerly falling fatality figures!

Is it me?

Or is this more of the same?

 

Revenue raising? Probably. Still, if the government wants to get money, let it get it from those who break the law. How can you complain if you do not intend to break the law? Let's tax these people more!
Andrew, London