Phil’s Diary - [Blog @ http://www.philsdiary.net/]
Past month or so I’ve been reading about and thinking about these a lot. Before I go much further though, I’d better explain how I drive.
First off, I’m not a habitual speeder. Most times I stick right to the speed limit (much to the annoyance of others, who know who they are). 30mph as far as I’m concerned means there is real danger ahead, lots of junctions, parked cars, pedestrians and kids. I don’t mess with them. I’ll take it below 30 if need be.
I don’t have a speed trap detector (though I have considered one), on the motorway I usually travel at 70 (don’t wish to incriminate myself). Most other roads I’ll zip along at the limit too. If I find myself in a fit of exuberance travelling faster than the posted 60, I’ll slow down. Even on motorways I’m not the person in the fast lane who overtakes you at surprising speed. I usually don’t need to leave the slow or middle lanes.
I’ve always been taught that it’s not speed that kills, but inappropriate speed. And while I’m sure I’ve been brainwashed, I’d agree with that. There are times when the posted limit is inappropriate, and times when travelling at that speed would be pure lunacy (torrential rain, or snow).
So, as I say, I’m not a habitual speedster. People I know get frustrated by the fact I stick to the posted limits. So let’s quickly see why it is that most of the time I stick to those limits.
I guess there are a few reason.
1) It’s the law. While this is a democracy to a certain extent it’s still true that laws are made, and everyone is expected to stick to them. Just because I disagree doesn’t give me the right to opt-out. If we all did that you may as well call it something other than a democracy (anarchy perhaps).
2) The limits are usually there for a reason. Be it wildlife (lots of deer round here), unusual turns, known black-spots or residential streets. Certainly up until recently speed limits were reserved for areas where special care is due.
3) That’s what people are expecting. If you’re crossing the road in the middle of a small town with a 30mph limit you don’t expect the car on the horizon to be gunning it at 100mph+. Likewise if you’re reversing out of a driveway, or pulling out a junction. You’re basing some of your estimations on the knowledge that people should be going at 30mph. Granted they aren’t all, and to rely on that knowledge alone is suicidal, but it’s a good grounding.
4) It’s what other drivers are expecting. It’s hard to judge speed. If you’re changing lanes on the motorway and you glance behind you and see another car in the lane you’re changing into, you wouldn’t expect it to be doing 200mph. If you changed lanes into it’s path, things could get interesting quite quickly.
5) The faster you go, the longer it takes to stop, and the more it hurts if you stop without the aid of brakes/tyres.
So anyway, that should give you some idea of what I think of speed/speeding. It’s a little long winded I agree, but at least you know where I stand.
Anyway, on to speed cameras.
Not so long ago the government in a fit of generosity said to the police forces, you can keep any money they make, as long as you paint them bright orange. I’m guessing, but at that point I expect the various police people rubbed their hands in glee. It seems that since then, the various cameras have sprung up all over the place.
First question, do they work?
I’d say that for the few hundred feet either side of the camera, sure they work. After that, not really. So best bet is to place them right smack bang in the middle of known accident black spots.
So what about those cameras on the motorways, or the mobile vans? I saw one the other day on a stretch of the A34. This particular stretch of the A34 I’ve not yet seen an RTA on (and I’ve been using it every work day for the past three years, with few exceptions).
What’s even more mad about that is that just a few miles up the road is a bit of the A34 that does see some pretty bad accidents, quite frequently. No van there.
It gets worse of course. The motorways of this country are the safest roads in the country. Least accidents. Certainly almost no pedestrian accidents (unless the pedestrians are really stupid). But yet there are loads of cameras on the motorway. How do they justify that?
While we’re on the justification side. How many accidents happen at junctions? Most I’d say. Sure there’s the odd one elsewhere, overtaking is usually involved there. However most prangs happen at junctions. How many cameras do you see there? Indeed what measures are put in place to improve safety at junctions? And how public are those changes?
Almost nothing. Instead we get numerous “speed kills” messages thrust at us. As I’ve said above, I firmly believe “inappropriate speed kills” would be a better message.
And then we get onto my favourite annoyance. Safety cameras. What’s a safety camera then? Well, just between you and me, it’s just a normal speed camera with a bit of PR added.
I’m not kidding… follow this link to the Northamptonshire Police, and you’ll find “Safety Cameras” on the menu on the left.
So, do they really take pictures of unsafe driving. Well no, not really. They know nothing about inappropriate speed. Nothing about driving under the influence. Nothing about a dangerous car, nor about dangerous habits. Heck, you could be mowing down pedestrian after pedestrian in front of these things and they’d still not take your picture.
Some of the more cynical sites suggest that these cameras are now just revenue generators for the Police, and certainly the siting of some of them would lend some weight to that argument (Nuneham Courtenay has one hidden nicely behind a tree).
And this is where you come up with an interesting point. Take a car like mine. Some of the best brakes in the world (no kidding, this thing will outbreak a McLaren F1 Supercar, really). Big ventilated discs all round, ABS and driven by an on the ball mid twenties paying attention. Send that car in at 35mph. Enough to trigger the camera.
Now take a battered Rover metro. Drum brakes at the back, some skinny tyres. Driven by an OAP with less than fantastic reaction, who’s not really paying attention. Send him in at 30mph. Not enough to set off the camera.
Which is the safest? Do you really think that the metro would stop quicker?
And this is what we’re getting at. The government has found a lovely metric. Something easy to measure and equally as easily to tie into road casualties.
Back in my days of studying science there was lots of debate about how something may be easy to measure/observe, but was it the right things to measure/observe? Was what you were measuring really relevant, and did it prove the point.
The above example would actually prosecute the driver least likely to do damage. There’s something wrong about that.
Now the cynical anti-camera lobby would go further and suggest that not only are they targeting the wrong people, but that through careful placement of cameras (both static and mobile), they’re just using these as a revenue generating device.
Last weekend the Chief Constable of the Manchester Met went on record to say that if the habits weren’t changed, there could well be a backlash. As he saw it, normally pro-police, law abiding citizens were being turned into criminals by cameras that did little to improve road safety (I’m paraphrasing here, so I apologise if I’ve got things a little wrong).
He’s right too. How far the backlash goes of course depends on the apathy of the country. However there is something deeply flawed in the current use of “Safety Cameras”.
Speeding isn’t good. Innapropriate speeding will kill people, and will hurt people. But the current use of cameras to reduce deaths and injuries isn’t working. It’s producing statistics that don’t mean much by measuring something which is easy to measure, but not the right thing to measure.
Posted by Phil on July 21, 2003 07:31 AM | Categories: Thoughts
To Marc:
If your where in an area where it'd be dangerous to reverse out of a driveway - its gonna be lethal to stop and reverse in backwards (Stop, look about, cars are stopping now, reverse in - meanwhile blocking traffic probably on both sides now; plus not everyone will keep clear of the opposite lane every time). Reversing out of a drive should be a single point turn altogether with better chance of keeping away from opposite lane.
In general:
With all these speed cameras now, personally I think there should be more - in the RIGHT places.
Secondly, cameras should not be nessesity when people are educated on the dangers of the road - what happened to the 'green cross code'
Posted by: Dan at March 17, 2004 6:43 PM
I was nicked twice inside 6 months for speeding. Both were by mobile camera's. The first occasion was on a dual carriageway with a padestrian footbridge only 30 yards away with a service road on the left (with Barriers)a central reservation also with barriers on a 40mph speed.The road just around the corner is a 50 mph limit and a two way road. Why?
The second was with hand held gun.I was on a country road just approaching a village no cars no people and going down a steep hill. I saw this policeman talking to a person in a car on a layby. The next thing I knew was he jumped into the road and waved me into this layby. He said he had checked my speed at 35mph. I did not see a camera as he was leaning over the car in the layby and recorded it from under his body,therefore sheilding it from my veiw. So I am no lover of speed camera's and my view is that they are for revenue only
Posted by: Jim at March 1, 2004 10:27 AM
"Likewise if you’re reversing out of a driveway"
this is illegal
put your car in backwards... much safer
Posted by: Ste_Nova at November 23, 2003 10:34 PM
I agree with everything i have read, speed camera have not emotion or abititly to look at big picture, My first 3 points were gained in Oxford 3 lane road, bus, in,out bound, Weather good, traffic none, midday caught 38 in a 30 in a car that was a month old so good brakes etc.
2nd 3 pionts was also in oxford same car, 5 am dual carriage way set of traffic lights were on red on approach, then green so speed up then they went red and in the wet i had no choice but stamp on the gas (no traffic at junction so i was safe)and jump it or lockup and slide around (car to my left rear also in same state of mind came with me), So these camares need to be analised by humans before letters are sent, ( i.e school time wet no excuse, midday dry middle of nowhere what is the point.
Marc
Posted by: Marc from Exeter at November 16, 2003 12:28 PM
Hi,
I was caught, (no that indicates I was in the wrong), filmed by a speed camera last year that was place on a bend coming off a roundabout. It stated that I was doing 45mph in a 30mph zone. Firstly, if I had been coming off a bend at 45mph I would have heard wheel screetching. Secondly, I had just purchased a new computer monitor, so would have been crazy to be traveling round a bend at that speed as the monitor would have moved due to the gravitational pull. Thirdly, the law states a camera warning sign must be plaed o.6km before the camera. How do you put a warning sign 0.6 km before a roundabout? Fourthly, if you pay the fine within 14 days you pay half the penalty charge. Being disabled and on benefit, I could not afford the full charge so had to pay up rather than appeal at which point the fine could be raised to hundres of pounds. What happened the basic right of being innocent until proven guilty? What happened to my right to a fair and impartial hearing before an independent court or tribunal as granted under the Human Rights Act?
Now I have been hit with a fine for being in a bus lane. I travelled down a road with a bus lane that was not in opperation between 10am and 4pm. I went across a set of lights at which point another road merged from the right. The bus lane on the opposite side of the traffic lights is in opperation 24 hours. Am I supposed to watch the signs on the left at a junction where two roads merge, or watch the traffic coming from my right? Incidently, the picture of me in the bus lane shows an 18 HGV1 lorry on my right. This is nothing more than entrapment at a point where you would be a fool to be looking at road signs. Furthermore, I looked up the regulations on bus lane cameras, and the home secretary stated thay should be roadside cameras. The one that got me was an overhead CCTV camera mounted on a lamp-post over hanging the hill where the bus lane was not in opperation. I will fight this one, I am not paying a penny even if it means prison.
I am fed up with owning a car but I need it due to spinal problems. We pay tax when we buy a car, We have to pay road tax but that did not decrease when the took space we pay for and made bus lanes we are not allowed to use. We have to pay to park our cars in contolled parking zones. And of course we pay tax on petrol.
In fact car owners in cities like London now pay tax in one form or another 24 hours a day whetther or not they are using the car. This is a country gone mad.
Posted by: Mick at October 11, 2003 3:16 PM
I've seen it from both sides of the fence this year, wandered slightly over 30mph straight into the laser of a 'safety camera van', "But I never break the speed limit!", now wondering if I'll get a fine or what, still not sure how it happened, the van was parked behind a tree, obviously generating a few quid. Why was I driving? Well, I'm nearly cycling again - 4 months now and am better, finally, from a big painful puncture wound in the leg, caused by a Mondeo at no more than 10mph, not breaking any speed limit, but _running_a_red_light. Policeman the next day whined "Oh please don't say you were injured, then I've got a load more forms to fill in".
Posted by: Neil Browne at October 10, 2003 3:18 PM
PS As a follow up to my comment above. Surely it would make sense for the speed camera to be positioned just BEFORE the blind bend, this would slow speeding drivers down in time to take the bend at a safer speed!
Posted by: James Page at September 8, 2003 1:31 PM
Hi Phil
An excellent read, thanks for that, I'd say pretty much that my views and opinions are in line with yours. Well, here's my story, I'll keep it brief.
In the first week of August this year my wife and I headed up from Surrey to Northumberland to visit friends and family for a Christening. At roughly 10 a.m. on a bright Saturday morning we were travelling along the A692, the A692 is a good few miles long and has a speed limit of 30mph.
Now, I was sticking to this speed limit all the way, plenty of signs reminding me of the speed limit too, when eventually as is always the case when I stick to speed limits I was tail-gated by another car. Usually when I'm tailgated I slow right down in order to annoy the twit behind me, but on this occasion I was in a hurry to make the Christening on time so I allowed him to intimidate me a little. I still kept to 30...until I came to a sharp bend that also dipped into a substantial gradient. I eased off the gas but because of the gradient the car increased in speed, I'm a young guy and my reactions are razor sharp, but I still sailed through the speed camera hidden by the curve of the bend and placed at the bottom of the sudden dip at 37 mph. I was reluctant to suddenly slow down because of the car only a few metres behind me.
I now have three points on my licence which is totally unjust as I broke the speed limit for no more than 4 seconds on a journey that had been over 350 miles. The camera on the A692 is there to purely generate revenue. Speed Cameras are way too indiscriminate.
I have never been in trouble with the police in my life, I am law abiding (to the point of being boring sometimes) but I just hope the police realise they have lost a fan, at the moment I despise them.
Posted by: James Page at September 8, 2003 12:57 PM
I am a victim of head injury. But I'm not the one who had the head injury. My family has been fighting for the right for my brother to live at all for 7 years. With out my mum's hard work I don't where I'd be today. At last I can relex a little now. But my life is still far from normal. for the past seven years from when I was very little my life changer all together. I did not know that I would never have a 'normal' child hood, or any child hood at all for that matter. I've had to grow up meantly very quickly from the early days to cope with the strain.
Through the strees I keept getting sick, and it affected my school work non stop. Although that did not stop me from getting abouve average marks in my work and test results. I guess I've always had to work twice as hard as any one I know to just keep getting up every day. When I tried to explain this to my friends or teachers they could not understand, visualise or even cope with listening to what I was saying. This happens every day. More and more people, keep turning up at head way if they're lucky, looking for help, looking for answers. But there are no answers for this kind of tragedy. the only thing that these people can hear is that they will have to find the will and the corage to keep going every day. And many more still go with out hearing this or being recignised by our country that they have a genuin disablity. And will for ever need the kindness and the help of others.
For people like me there is no help, no word that can comfort me. Or give back what I have lost my brother.
So I ask you can you afford to put your self through what I've been through?
And could you live with your self if you knew you had done this much damage to so many people?
Posted by: Dragon at September 7, 2003 1:48 PM
Hi, I'm Mike and I am 25 years old, I would like to put across a few of my views.
Seven years ago I was walking home after being at collage, when I was hit by a car. This was on a contry road with a speed limit of 60 MPH.
It was a mile walk between the bus stop and home which I had done many times before, so I was awear of the risks and was as careful as I could be on that road.
But as a result I have been left with brain damage, I can't drive, my abilitly to find my way around is seriouly fliped up and I am at serious risk if I try to cross a road by myself. More than once I have gone to start crossing a road and my Mum (who has given up going for a carer in teaching in order to be my "Primary Carer") has grabbed me to stop me from walking in front of a car that I haven't even seen.
This is how I am after 7 years of recovery. I now attend a branch of Headway (the brain injury organisation) and have met plenty of head injured people. My injurys turn out to be not uncommon and I actually got off rather lightly compared with some of the people I have met.
I haven't even mentioned memory loss, or the crippeling headaches that I get at the drop of a hat. A short car journey, negociating a croud or concentrating on a task to hard for to long (,for me,) can bring on pain in my head. Apparently I have also been at risk of developing epilepse, but thankfully that risk diminishes over time.
When I was at secondry school and then collage, I would looked forward to learning to drive and I probably would have driven a bit to fast at times as well. I quite liked the idea of owning something like a Golf GTi. But now I can really see the point of speed limits and speed cameras.
People talk about speeding as if it is their god given right (the group MAD being at the extreme end of the scale. Kind of like a far right group of drivers), but if they or a member of thier family was hit by a car (4x4, bus, lorry or here in Dorset... A tank) going to fast, they might see things differently.
If you do get injured by a car, don't worry, you will just be a statistic. R.T.A's happen every day and an awful lot don't end up on the news.
If you don't like speed cameras, then the next time you reach a blind bend in the road and meet an articulated lorry on the wrong side of the road, going far to fast. Just remind your self that you don't like speed cameras.
An R.T.A. dosen't just kill or cause injury, it also affects the familys and loved ones of the people invoved in an R.T.A. look at the figures and think of the number of familys affected.
I do agree that traffic calming mesures do have to be put in the right places on the road. Apparently a poorly thought out set of traffic calming messures can also cause problems.
One final thing, if anyone reading this has recived a head injury, and has been left with problems. You might want to try putting 'Headway' and 'Head injury' into an internet search engine and see what you come up with.
Well that's a few of my thoughts on the matter. Thanks for providing me with a soap box from which to shout.
Posted by: Mike in Dorset at September 7, 2003 12:07 PM
hi phil,
i do agree with you on most of the points that you raise, i had to travel to fairford last weekend, from bridgend in south wales, via the m4, over the severn bridge then up the m5, i drive a saab 900se turbo which is a very safe car, also a very fast car, i did not exceed the speed limit (apart from overtaking)at any time, i have fitted to my car a "road angel", and was gobsmacked to find that the number of accident blackspots on my journey numbered around 24(approx). the one thing all these blackspots had in common was that they were ALL on bends (not junctions)with a bridge just around the corner where the police park their camera vans (revenue generators)i for one have lost any respect i had for the police for using this tactic, but what can we do, only i suggest use our vote at the next election to vote in a party that looks on motorists in a favourable light, not like the labour party who are very anti motorist, and there are over 20.000.000 of us in the country.enjoyed reading your comments,
roger.
Posted by: roger woolls at July 28, 2003 2:13 PM