Kennydies Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Have you guys noticed the number of SPECS cameras popping up? I noticed there are 2 pais one on northbound M3/M25 and southbound on M3/M25. Also I read over the weekend about the Welsh police ****stable is looking into cats eyes speed cameras... Even if we all drove smart cars is still so easy to speed.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chesterfield Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 They make my blood boil. Motorcyclists account for approximately 2% of traffic on the roads of the UK, but up to 50% of all road deaths. Specs face forward, and Bikes dont have front numberplates. A prize to the first person who can find me an MP or Police Officer that can convince me these devices are being used for saftey rather than revenue generation when they are completely useless against a single group of road users that suffer 50% of the fatalities on our roads... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kev946 Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Good point Cris. I also heard that these cameras cannot detect your speed if you change lanes. Being a BMW driver I already switch lanes at the drop of an hat. Now I have an excuse..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sl114 Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Good point Cris. I also heard that these cameras cannot detect your speed if you change lanes. Being a BMW driver I already switch lanes at the drop of an hat. Now I have an excuse..... Haha, this is true, anyone care to test it? ANother way is to find a big lorry and stay in the lane next to it and hide your car from the cameras, then speed off i dont do this at all btw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beavis Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Good point Cris. I also heard that these cameras cannot detect your speed if you change lanes. Being a BMW driver I already switch lanes at the drop of an hat. Now I have an excuse..... Haha, this is true, anyone care to test it? ANother way is to find a big lorry and stay in the lane next to it and hide your car from the cameras, then speed off i dont do this at all btw No need to test it its true, just change lanes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sl114 Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Good point Cris. I also heard that these cameras cannot detect your speed if you change lanes. Being a BMW driver I already switch lanes at the drop of an hat. Now I have an excuse..... Haha, this is true, anyone care to test it? ANother way is to find a big lorry and stay in the lane next to it and hide your car from the cameras, then speed off i dont do this at all btw No need to test it its true, just change lanes Really? thats good for me then, 70mph through the road works on the M1 it is then BTW my policeman - this statement was made as a joke and i do not intend on travelling 70mph through the M1 roadworks, J6-12 or whatever it is. i can never tell the Junction numbers as i go too fast Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holtehero Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 New SPECS on A14 between Cambridge and Huntingdon go live this week Just in case people sometimes use that road. Stupid thing is during rush hour your lucky to average much above 30mph for that stretch of road Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim S Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Motorcyclists account for approximately 2% of traffic on the roads of the UK, but up to 50% of all road deaths. I'm sorry, but that just isn't true! I feel as a biker I should come up with some sort of defence. The data for 2002 (the last year I could find on the Office for National Statistics website) shows 609 motorcyclists or passengers killed out of a total of 3431 total road deaths for the year, which equates to 17.7%. This is eclipsed by pedestrians (696 or 20%). By far the largest group as far as road deaths go are car drivers and passengers (1747 or 50.9%). The data is here BTW: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/STATBASE/ssdataset.asp?vlnk=4031 I'll concede that there are motorcyclists that ride unsafely, just as there are drivers that drive unsafely, but I think you're being a bit unfair on motorcyclists. I agree with you that festooning the road network with speed cameras isn't the solution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinbad Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Motorcyclists account for approximately 2% of traffic on the roads of the UK, but up to 50% of all road deaths. I'm sorry, but that just isn't true! I feel as a biker I should come up with some sort of defence. The data for 2002 (the last year I could find on the Office for National Statistics website) shows 609 motorcyclists or passengers killed out of a total of 3431 total road deaths for the year, which equates to 17.7%. This is eclipsed by pedestrians (696 or 20%). By far the largest group as far as road deaths go are car drivers and passengers (1747 or 50.9%). The data is here BTW: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/STATBASE/ssdataset.asp?vlnk=4031 I'll concede that there are motorcyclists that ride unsafely, just as there are drivers that drive unsafely, but I think you're being a bit unfair on motorcyclists. I agree with you that festooning the road network with speed cameras isn't the solution. But surely from a safety point of view, if there are some motorcylists who ride unsafely as well as drivers who drive unsafely, shouldn't the camera's be able to catch both the rider and driver if speeding? Ok there are alot more cars on the road than there are bikes but it should be even across the board and the same for everyone. And saying that there are fewer bikes than cars don't you think 17.7% is a high % of the total deaths? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chesterfield Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Thats "up to" 50%. On some roads motorcyclists account for far more than 17% of deaths. In Lincolnshire for example on some roads they apparently account for a HIGHER percentage of deaths than car drivers/passengers. Even using the figures above, 17% of deaths from motorcyclists is MASSIVE! if they account for around 2%% of road users but 17% of deaths, yet car drivers account for say 80% of road users but 50% of deaths. For a single group of road users to account for a death rate almost 9 times higher than their frequency on the road would infer, and safetey camera partnerships to continue to invest in camera technology that does not even target that group is absolute madness. I firmly believe that these "safety" cameras, are no no longer about safety at all, if they were, any new cameras would not be totally useless against the group most at risk of death on the road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim S Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 But surely from a safety point of view, if there are some motorcylists who ride unsafely as well as drivers who drive unsafely, shouldn't the camera's be able to catch both the rider and driver if speeding? Ok there are alot more cars on the road than there are bikes but it should be even across the board and the same for everyone. And saying that there are fewer bikes than cars don't you think 17.7% is a high % of the total deaths? I would argue that safety and speed aren't linked in the way the government seems to presume - i.e. you can drive/ride safely above the speed limit as well as drive/ride unsafely below the limit. Traffic police would be much better at catching the unsafe road users than automated cameras. There's no doubt that motorcyclists are more likely to be killed on the road than car drivers per capita - regardless of blame, if you're on a bike and involved in an accident there's less to protect you. I was just taking issue with the 50% statistic. I think the cameras face the front of the vehicle because they need the high contrast black & white plate to read it properly. The government could even the stakes by forcing motorbikes to have the reg displayed on the front if it wanted to. Perhaps it's not bothering because there aren't enough motorcyclists in total to make it worthwhile from a revenue point of view? The same is true of the fixed camera vans - rightly or wrongly motorcycles are impervious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim S Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Thats "up to" 50%. On some roads motorcyclists account for far more than 17% of deaths. In Lincolnshire for example on some roads they apparently account for a HIGHER percentage of deaths than car drivers/passengers. Even using the figures above, 17% of deaths from motorcyclists is MASSIVE! if they account for around 2%% of road users but 17% of deaths, yet car drivers account for say 80% of road users but 50% of deaths. For a single group of road users to account for a death rate almost 9 times higher than their frequency on the road would infer, and safetey camera partnerships to continue to invest in camera technology that does not even target that group is absolute madness. I firmly believe that these "safety" cameras, are no no longer about safety at all, if they were, any new cameras would not be totally useless against the group most at risk of death on the road. Ah, sorry, I thought you meant overall. You may well be right about some roads. Like a lot of the current government's policies I think this one is based on a flawed assumption (that excessive speed is always unsafe) and speed cameras are a cheap way of addressing that assumption. There's loads of stuff about why cameras aren't making the roads safer at http://www.safespeed.org.uk/ (not bike specific). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kev946 Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 They are called "Donorcycles" apparently... http://www.wordspy.com/words/donorcycle.asp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chesterfield Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 The reasons for the death rate is obvious in that motorcycles offer far less impact protection. But the levels of fatalities remain the same regardless of the reasons. It is the government or saftey groups that have made the link between speed and death, then proceed to use devices that cannot detect motorcycles. It appears the link between speed and death is fine until it comes to the devices that catch the speeders, then its not so much down to the death rates and probabilities, but more the probability of "catching" a speeder with a forward facing unit. With rear facing units, you get chance to slow down before you are "caught". Whereas by the time you see a front facing unit, it may be too late. That is the only reason vans and specs are front facing - because they catch more people out - absolutely sod all to do with reducing death rates - if it were, they would target all road users evenly - and not use devices clearly designed for maximum revenue generation. To clarify, its not bikers "fault" that they are impervious to the newer camera technologies, but this anomoly is somewhat clear evidence that cameras have less to do with saftety than the authorities would have us beleive in my opinoin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim S Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 Well given that the numbers of road deaths haven't improved in a statistically significant manner since the introduction of speed cameras, I'd be inclined to agree with you. And that includes the fact that cars are becoming safer and safer to have accidents in. I don't even think it's about revenue generation as there is some evidence that the scheme runs at a loss. I think it's the refusal of the DfT and certain police chiefs to back down and lose face. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alscar Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 I couldnt possibly encourage it.. But take your front number plate off and its a £30- fine IF you are unlucky enough to ever see a real police officer (who might have some discression) OR £60 and 3 points (or worse) if you get speeding! Speeding isnt dangerous! Its only inappropriate speed that is! Something v different! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 I think speed cameras are totally futile devices and I love them ! My reasoning is this : Most motorists drive the same routes over and over again, I know I do. It doesn't take many trips to learn and remember where the fixed cameras are and where the Police operate the mobile speed traps on that route. The camera can only see 50 yards of road, leaving you free to drive as fast as you like the rest of the way. The cameras have no intelligence and no judgement, like a Traffic Officer would have. I can't remember the last time I saw a Traffic Policeman except on the motorway and I wouldn't have half the fun I have in cars and on bikes if the roads were more heavily policed. P.S. This is meant ( slightly ) tongue in cheek. I drive high performance cars and bikes on a daily basis. I speed every single day of my life but I have not had an accident in 20 years and I have a clean license. I don't speed through built up areas, I stick to 30 and 40 limits and "blend in" on the motorways. I save my fun for the rural roads when nobody else is around. Time and a place, and all that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.