Newest messages at the top, oldest at the bottom
********** Daniel
We need lots more speed safety cameras. They are saving lives by slowing drivers down. I agree with John Power when he says that the faster you are travelling when you have an accident the more likely someone will be killed or be badly injured. Peter(Cannock)
If Paul Smith was any kind of road safety expert he would be for safety cameras not against them. Jake
John, I think Grace had her tongue very much in her cheek. Markie
Oh dear, what a self righteous lot you are.... Can any of you 100% honestly say you have never knowingly or unknowingly broken a speed limit ? I suspect not, just wait until you get caught doing 34 in a 30 limit by one of the mobile cash generators and see how your opinion alters.... Mobile enforcement cameras do not follow the guidelines in our area and choose positions most likely to catch people. And before you ask i actually have a clean licence and intend it to stay that way. Fixed camera sites have not reduced the accident figures in our area, this is confirmed by the partnerships own data, in fact one camera caused an accident shortly after being installed in an unclear location, the driver of the car braked un-necessarily hard upon seeing the camera at the last moment causing the vehicle behind to hit him !!!! I am glad the government has put a curb on future camera locations. They should stick to using them in built up areas and school locations. I live in Rossendale Ave south which is in Thornton, Cleveleys. and some of these people coming down our road thing its a race track, there are some old people living down here and one day someone till get knocked down there are two little boys across the road and i have seen the mother of the oldest one run after him, what if one day he runs away from mum and goes into the road if someones coming down the road fast as ther do the little boy will not stand a change he will be kill, this road is a through road, so there is a lot of people taking short cut, so this is where i thing there should be Speed cameras. Chan
The Government is committed to ensuring that speed limits are complied with and enforced as a means of reducing deaths and injuries on our roads. Speeding is a traffic offence with potentially serious consequences and driving at excessive speed continues to be a problem that results in accidents, fatalities and serious injuries. That is why there is a speed policy in place as part of an overall strategy to reduce casualties. The Government do not believe that, apart from emergency vehicles,there is ever a time that is right to break the posted speed limit. The ultimate aim of the Safety Cameras Programme is to reduce casualties by ensuring compliance with speed limits and slow drivers down so that eventually no drivers will speed. If this happens there will be a very significant further reduction in the number of people killed and injured on our roads. John Power
Harry is right when he says that safety camera detectors should be outlawed. These devices are purchased for the sole reason of breaking the law. Once some idiot speed freak drivers know that there are not any cameras in their path they will speed. The government and police should go to great lengths to ban the detectors before even more accidents are caused by the nutters who purchase them. Anne
How can Safepeed justify asking people to pay money to their website? Frank
I purchased a so called speed camera detector and it did not work properly. Now I have 6 points on my licence, These detectors are a waste of money. IAN
Don't speed -end of problem! Garry
I wonder how many families will be grieving, this Christmas, for a member of their family ,or a friend, who has been killed just because some speedfreak couldn't drive at a safe speed . Ray Ensor
H,G,V. drivers are the worse offenders when it comes to tailgating other drivers. These morons intimidate and bully drivers of smaller vehicles. They call themselves proffessional drivers. What a joke! The police should look out for drivers who tailgate and charge them with dangerous driving. P.C.
Police Chief Superintendant Derek Barnett has said that the safety cameras have saved lives. He also said that reduction in speeds, fewer collisions and fewer casulties have been the result of dedication and hard work by the Cheshire Safety Camera Partnership. As a result there are people alive today who would otherwise have lost their lives or been seriously injured. John Power
Mr Paul Smith of the mis-named 'Safespeed' web site is no "Road Safety Expert" Grace. This poor misguided individual has nothing better to do than run this site full time and anyone who can actually be bothered to look at it will soon realise what a bunch of loonies Mr Smith and his followers are. Thank goodness the site is in danger of closing down soon through lack of support! Incidentally George you are quite wrong when you say that no one gains anything from speeding unless they are going on a journey of 200 miles or more. No one gains anything from speeding at any time, George, except perhaps an early death. The further you travel the more tired you will become and the less sharp your reactions will be. If you are speeding also this will add up to a lethal cocktail. It doesn't matter how far you are travelling you should always drive properly and safely by keeping your speed down. George G
Nobody gains anything by speeding unless they are going on a journey of 200 miles or more Brian Cowling
More people are killed by speeding drivers than for any other reason. These drivers were going too fast to take appropiate action when faced with a problem in their path. They could not stop in time to avoid a fatal accident. Whenever people are murdered there is usually a big fuss made. Why on earth doesn't the government and police do more to catch speeding drivers who are committing potential manslaughter every time they go out in their cars? Harry
Just had a look at the 'UK.Speedtrap Guide' that Ted has commented on. What a bunch of wallies these people are! They are retailers of speed camera detection devices that they sell at ridiculous high prices. It is obviously in their interest and to their financial advantage to encourage drivers to illegally speed and risk lives because they can sell more camera detectors to these daft drivers who think that they will prevent them from being caught and fined. The camera detection devices should be outlawed because when they are not warning drivers that there are cameras ahead some stupid drivers will take advantage of this fact and speed. These devices are manufactured for one reason only -to assist bad drivers break the law! Frank
Safety cameras are a very effective way of road safety.This has been proved by the vast number of law breaking drivers being caught and fined for speeding.The cameras have exceeded all expectations in their success as a significant road safety method. Many drivers who have been breaking the speed limit and risking lives for years are at last being caught. Lives are being saved by the safety cameras which justifies their use. The only people who object to them are the bad drivers who have been caught. The right wing newspapers who will stoop to just about anything to discredit the present government and try to increase their circulation object to the safety cameras in the mistaken belief that they are unpopular with motorists which of course they are not to the vast majority. John Power
Motorists who drive too close to the vehicle in front of them are soon to face being caught by automatic cameras that are being developed by the police. The anti-tailgating camera will catch drivers who tailgate and who will then be prosecuted for driving without due care and attention or dangerous driving.This long awaited for action by the police will be welcomed by a huge majority of drivers who feel intimidated and unsafe when being tailgated by other foolish drivers who partake in this highly dangerous and unsociable bad driving practice. John Power
We must not allow a few very vocal minority of idiot motorists like the loonies from web sites such as the mis-named 'Safepeed' to undermine the success of life saving safety cameras. The vast majority of drivers support the cameras because they understand two very simple, but important, facts: Firstly the faster you speed, the more likely you are going to be involved in a crash and secondly the faster you speed the more severe the impact of the crash will be. Around one in three crashes are caused by excessive speed where drivers would not have crashed if they had not been travelling so fast which in turn impaired their reactions when hazards occurred. If motorists want to protect their licences and save money by not being fined then all they have to do is stick safely to the speed limit at all times. It is no good whining and bleating about safety cameras if you get caught speeding. It is your own fault for not driving safely and properly in the first place. There are many grieving families who have lost loved ones who have been killed solely because of speeding drivers. Dave
I personally think that the speed cameras are nothing to worry about if you drive properly. PC
Wendy is right when she says that safety cameras should be hidden from view. One of Britains senior traffic policemen, Chief Constable Meredydd Hughes would like to see all safety cameras completely hidden and made mobile. This view is shared by the the majority of other Chief Constables. It seems a bit pointless having warning signs ahead of the cameras if we really want to catch law breaking drivers. Would you warn a burglar that he is going to be caught if he breaks into a house? Joan
Yes Ted. This shows how low the mentality is of people who run these anti speed camera sites. Of course good drivers would use their common sense not speed anyway! Grace
In July this year, Paul Smith of Safe Speed was referred to in an article in The Sun relating to speed cameras as a "Road safety expert", and they quoted him as saying that: "Crashes are avoided by looking where you are going and making a safe plan based on what you see". "Crashes are avoided by looking where you are going...". Now that's what I call very sound advice. Thank heavens there are 'road safety experts' like Paul Smith out there giving such expert advice to motorists. And I suppose that when he says about "making a safe plan based on what you see", he is of course implying that motorists should drive at a slow speed so that they have the time to plan the plan based on what they see - ie the slower they drive the safer the plan. Anyway, I would just like to beseech all motorists following this debate to please remember Mr Smith's wise words and look where you are going when you are driving. Robyn Hope
I completely agree with Wendy. If the speedfreaks never know where or when they are likely to get caught, then they will be much more likely to drive within speed limits all of the time. Having more and more static cameras everywhere may be very profitable for the manufacturers, but a national civilian force of Speed Wardens who could potentially be anywhere, anytime, would reduce the number of fatal and serious injury collisions substantially. But then the higher echelons at the DfT, whilst having to be seen to be doing something, have to consider how the profits of their motor-trade buddies would be affected if the speedfreaks - and more importantly, the next generations of up and coming potential speedfreaks - were disenfranchised from being able to put their foot down and feel the power at their fingertips (as Jeremy Clarkson and his clowns would no doubt describe it!). And whist I agree with PC (as in Pro-Camera I assume!) regarding the maintenance of speedometres, the threshold is in fact set at 10%+2mph above any given limit (as pointed out previously) - eg 35mph, 46mph, 57mph etc. tracy
i think its great police are doing somethink about speed ther is loads of people speeding wher ever you gone people rushing around eating at the wheel and moblie phones why should they be different from every one else if you get caught pay the price ;ha ha; tracy
if you kept to the speed limit you will not get caught will you Ted
Whilst looking for some information about the LTI 20-20 cameras tonight, I came across a website called 'The UK SpeedTrap Guide'. Under the heading 'Evasion Methods Stay Alert!!!!', this is what they had to say: 'Speeding requires concentration if you don't want to get caught. Keep your eyes peeled for police cars, as well as unmarked vehicles. Look for Video units, twin rear view mirrors. Slow down in areas where you can't see what's on the hard shoulders. Don't pass other drivers at high speeds. They could be an off-duty copper. Slow down when approaching other cars, and pass them at a steady pace. Watch in your rear-view mirror, cars you pass should be receding. If they began to pick up pace, slow down. If there are other cars going by at higher speeds, take advantage of it! Get in behind them with plenty of distance between you and follow for a while at a slightly slower speed. Blend back into the traffic after a period and wait for another to come along. Don't keep up a sustained high speed. This is self-explanatory. The longer you go at a very high speed, the more likely you are to be caught.' Ends. I really am at a loss for words. Grace
Mark: I was most interested in what you had to say about your new acquisition. So this "snooper device" - as you describe it - actually makes you subconsciously more aware of the speed you're travelling at and actually slows you down. Fascinating. Do you have a theory as to why that is? Would I be right in thinking you belong to the Freudian school of thought.... No, on second thoughts I can see that you are definitely more Jung than Freud. Are the boy-racers aware of the paranormal influence of these devices? And I agree with you about the bullbars. Good point, and the Government should lower the speed limits on the majority of roads in urban areas from 30mph to 20mph. Don't you agree? Ann
The vast majority of drivers welcomed the speed cameras but never dreamed how successful they would become in weeding out the bad drivers from the good ones. The cameras are doing an excellent job! Sandra
Speeding and tailgating are forms of unsociable behaviour and upsets a lot of good law abiding drivers. Drivers who are incapable of driving properly or simply will not drive in the correct safe and legal manner should be taken off our roads by the courts. PC
In answer to Tom B. The safety cameras allow a 5% margin over the maximum speed limit before they take photographs so your speedometer was obviously showing the wrong speed and you were exceeding the speed limit. All speedometers should be recalibrated annually to maintain their efficiency. Ryan
Only bad drivers have any need to worry about speed cameras. If you do not speed you have nothing whatsoever to worry about. The cameras save many lives each year and should be increased in number. Dave
Matt is quite right when he states that higher or even double insurance premiums are in the pipeline for drivers caught speeding. The insurance companies are inundated with claims from motorists who have had accidents and collisions that need not have occurred if they had not been speeding. The situation is becoming so bad that the companies may have to refuse to insure any driver with endorsements for this offence because they are high risk unsafe drivers. Even now drivers who have not informed their insurance company of their speeding endorsemen can find that they are not insured. Any of these uninsured drivers involved in a bad accident could end up losing all of their assets, including their home, if faced with a legal action by other people involved in the accident. Whilst safety cameras have done a lot to slow drivers down we need an awful lot more to cut down on the number of accidents caused by speeding drivers. Donna
Speed warnung signs are not just signs on sticks as some less intelligent drivers suggest. These signs tell you the maximum safe speed that you can travel at in perfect road conditions. You should only allow yourself to travel at these speeds if the road is clear, dry and without any other hazards. Ideally you should travel several miles per hour less than the maximum speed shown on the signs. Only unintelligent and bad drivers exceed the speed limit. Intelligent and good drivers know that it is dangerous to speed and that speed kills. Jackie
From my own personal experience as a driver I know that speeding drivers cause a lot of accidents that need not happen. I have to travel some 80 miles a day, mainly by motorway, and witness lots of bad driving by speeding drivers. These drivers do not drive properly and follow as close as possible behind you even when you are doing 70 mph. They must be completely out of their minds to drive in this way.I believe that speed is the main reason for accidents and until the police start catching out more drivers the situation will get worse. John Power
The so called U.K. Campaign against unfair use of speed cameras actually has contributors who openly admit that they have set fire to and vandalised safety cameras. (Police please note). These speed freak loonies are so crazy about being able to speed when and where they like, regardless of safety, that they will stoop to any measures to achieve this even if it means committing arson. I was banned from their forum for voicing my opinions about their actions and for my pro safety camera views. If you surf through some of the anti safety camera sites you will also see web sites that gloat over pictures of vandalised cameras. These people are sick. Do they not realise that these cameras save lives and that by vandalising them someone could get killed by a speeding driver. Brian Cowling
I agree with everything that John Power and other anti speed people say. It must be pretty obvious to just about any sensible driver that speed is responsible for a great many road deaths. There are a lot of road accidents that need never have happened if the drivers involved had not been speeding and had been able to stop in time when something went wrong. We all know that speed does not have to be the cause for an accident but we should all also know that speed is the main factor as to whether the accident is more severe than it might have been. Safety cameras at present are the most successful way of clamping down on speeding drivers. It is immaterial where revenue generated by fining bad drivers goes to. The fact is these self financing safety cameras are saving lives! This country spends millions of pounds a year on treating road accident victims. It spends millions of pounds a year on the fire/ambulance and police services. A vast amount of the time of these services is spent at the scenes of road accidents. Why shouldn't the government try to reap back some of the immense cost of accident prevention and accident attendance by the emergency services. Len
The law is far too soft with speeding drivers. Drivers who speed and tailgate are no better than drunken drivers. In fact more people are killed or injured each year by speeding drivers than drunken drivers. KEITH
What people who maintain that it is bad driving not speed that kills seem to forget is that speeding IS bad driving. Martin
Oh what a lot of cry babies the anti safety camera people are. Don't these silly people realise that if you do not break the law by speeding you have nothing to worry about. Instead of thinking up all sorts of excuses for their bad driving why don't they go out on the road and teach themselves how to drive properly. They could even curl up on these long winter nights and read a really good book called The Highway Code. Wendy
What is the point of having safety cameras if there are warning signs in advance of them? These cameras should not have any warning signs and should be moved , without warning, to different locations so as to catch more drivers speeding. It should be made unlawful for web sites and newspapers ect to give out the locations of the cameras. These foolish drivers need to be caught, fined and hopefully lose their right to drive. Incidentally I am not a politically corret person and I do not support a lot of the present government views. I do wish however that the government would take a much firmer stand against these road criminals who speed and risk everyone elses safety. adam
Safespeed the anti road safety camera supporters web site have launched a funding appeal because they are in danger of closing down through lack of support for their idiotic views. They are asking existing members to upgrade to life membership for £199. New members may join as life members for a mere £239 or for £80 per annum as'Gold' members. These are the people who have the audacity to call safety cameras 'cash cows'. The mind boggles! John Power
Oh dear! The looney so called misnamed'Safespeed' idiots have certainly met their match by trying to stir things up on this forum. Sorry loonies but nothing you idiots can say will convince good drivers that speed does not kill. It doesn't matter how road accidents are caused the faster you are travelling the more serious the consequences will be. Safety cameras are needed to stop looney bad drivers like you from endangering every other road user with your excessive lust for speed. The Safespeed people will stoop to just about anything to promote their pathetic views but thank god there are good drivers on this website who just dismiss their views for the rubbish that they are! Tom B (Essex)
I was apparently speeding in North Wales when I passed an unmarked van with a camera in it. As far as I am concerned I was travelling at 30mph, something I tend to do in 30mph speed limits since being fined for speeding in March 2003. On that occasion I was on my bike and deserved the points. This time it is different, I believe I am innocent. The police recorded a speed of 35 mph for my car and I was genuinely doing 30 mph. I know the speedometer is not 100% accurate and occaisonally, because watching the road is more important than watching the dashboard, my speedo will register 28 mph or 31 or even 32mph. At no time was I driving excessively fast in a 30mph zone. The device used to record my speed was an LTI 20/20 speedscope lazer. I have heard that this particular piece of equipment has been disparaged in court when it was shown to register speeds on objects that were not moving. Does anyone know where I might find evidence of this rather than rumour or anecdote? Garry
If I were you Antera309 I would stick to the Silly Safespeed forums because only your cronies on that site can make any sense out of anything you contribute. CP
To my mind the 30mph speed limits on many urban roads are far too high. The DfT I believe define 'excessive speed' as 15mph or more above the stated limit, but to my mind 30mph IS excessive on many of these roads, and the speed limit should be more like 20mph, or less, especially in the quieter residential streets. In fact they - as many people have advocated - should be incorporated into Home Zones with a strictly enforced 10mph limit - ie that anyone caught driving at above 15mph receives an automatic one-year ban. Give the streets back to the people who live there, and especially the kids and the elderly. Matt
Car insurance companies, in an effort to cut down on accident claim payments, are planning to double the insurance premiums of drivers who have received endorsements for speeding. Even now most insurance companies are refusing to insure drivers who have been prosecuted for speeding offences on more than one occasion. Chan
Accident probability increases with increasing speed and decreases with reduced speed.Common sense tells us that the number of road accidents would be significantly reduced if everyone obeyed the speed limit! Ken
I just cannot believe that 'Safespeed' the anti road safety brigade is ripping off its members by asking them to pay a whopping £45 each. For this amount they receive precisely nothing but incorrect information and hype. They are also suggesting to their members on one of their forums that they should 'stir things up a bit' on this site. If any one can be bothered to look at their web site, with all its foul language, they would see what a load of irresponsible nutcases these people are. Pat
Any driver caught speeding and tailgating should be made to take another driving test as they obviously have not got the common sense required to drive a vehicle. The test should include a safety awareness course to show the driver why speed kills and why tailgating is dangerous. Any driver who gets caught speeding or tailgating again should be banned from driving for a minimum of 12 months. A Tate
Ian - as the anti-camera propagandists so often do - repeats the lie about "casualty stats" having risen during the past ten years. In 1995 there were 3,621 fatalities and 307,000 serious and minor injuries*. In 2004 there were 3,204 fatalities and 287,000 serious and minor injuries* (* to the nearest thousand). By my calculations that is a decrease and NOT an increase! They have been repeating this lie over and over again during the past two or three years, and obviously seem to believe that if they repeat it enough times it will have the desired effect of leading Joe Public to regard cameras as ineffective. And can you explain why you "would suggest the vast majority of you here represent the worst and least attentive drivers in the country" Ian? Just because we drive within the speed limits, does it - somehow! - automatically follow that we WE don't focus on what we are doing when we are driving? Are you implying that those who regularly exceed the speed limits are the best and most attentive drivers in the country? How silly and absurd can you get! And what's PC and elitist about supporting the safety camera programme if it saves lives, which it does. Anyway, I could just as easily say that 'I would suggest the Rebellious Souls (that's the term I use for those who are opposed to cameras - R Souls for short) are the worst and most dangerous drivers in the country because they live in the illusion that "sound judgement" is the be all and end all of road safety'. But what the R Souls don't seem to understand is that by the time they learn that their "judgement" wasn't so "sound" after all, someone could be dead or permanently crippled and/or braindamaged. And it could be them and it could be somebody else - ie an innocent victim (or two or more innocent victims). And if the statistics that Gwyndolyn quotes are anything to go by, then it would appear that many men are sadly lacking in this "sound judgement". Or could it be that men (but by no means ALL men) tend to drive faster and more aggressively than women? Davey
Speeding is a crime and is just as serious as housebreaking etc. The big difference is that you are more likely to be killed by a speeding driver than any other criminal. This fact justifies the use of safety cameras and police man power to catch speeding drivers. Norma
Please could we have more speed checks around the Lichfield area particularly on the A51 between Eastern Avenue and Walsall Road. It is a nightmare trying to drive along this stretch of road at the correct speed limit with other drivers tailgating you. Hilary
Some bad drivers will say just about anything to excuse their poor driving standards and lust for speed but what they do not seem to realise is that the vast majority of good drivers who drive safely and within the law think that they are just nut cases who do not know what they are talking about. These bad drivers are the reason that safety cameras have been so successful. They will never learn to drive properly because they are too ignorant to understand that speed is the main reason for deaths on our roads.They say that speed has nothing to do with deaths and injuries on our roads and that it is bad driving that causes accidents. Speeding IS bad driving. There are thousands of dead people who would be alive today if the accidents that they were involved in had been at a lower or lawful speed. Most road accidents would be less severe if the vehicles involved had been travelling slower. It is no good the speed freaks labelling everyone who objects to their bad driving as politically correct.Which in itself is a rather childish comment to make. You do not have to be politically correct to know right from wrong. Speeding is dangerous. Speed kills people and speed is unnecessary. RAY
There should be far more safety cameras and mobile speed checks. There are far too many speeding drivers who need to be caught and prosecuted. The present fine of a mere £60 is far too low. Penalties for drivers caught speeding should be a lot higher than what they are at present. We must rid our roads of these crazy fools. Stan
Judging by some of the stupid comments made by the anti-camera brigade I am even more convinced that the safety cameras are needed to save lives. Dave
To Dick Dastardly. There is no such thing as driving too slow on a motorway as, like on any other road in this country, there is no lower speed limit hence there being a slow lane. There is however such a thing as driving too fast on a motorway. The maximum speed limit being 70 mph. Wendy
Alan states: "I LOOK FORWARD to the day when someone crosses the road in front of you when you travel at 30mph past a line of parked cars." What a sick small minded person this man must be! Peter(Cannock)
A good driver always drives at appropiate speed. Appropiate speed means that you keep within the legal speed limit and allow , by travelling slower, for such hazards as wet roads, schools, busy shopping areas, hours of darkness ect. The speed signs tell us the absolute maximum speed that we can travel if road conditions are perfect. It is for each driver to decide whether it is safe or not to travel at these maximum speeds. It is never appropiate to travel faster than the set speed limit and there are absolutely no excuses for doing so! Don
The pro speeding/dangerous drivers from organised stupid irresponsible web sites such as "Safespeed" are capaple of anything in order to promote their irresponsible view that it is alright for them to speed excessively regardless of cost of human life. Any one who tries to contribute to their pathetic web site with conflicting views to their own is immediately labelled as a troll, politically correct or has their message wiped off. These people know that they are wrong and are too immature to face critisism.I wonder if their beliefs would change if it was one of their own members of family who was killed or badly injured because of an accident, whatever the cause, that need not have been so bad if the vehicle/s involved had not been travelling too fast. Mr S Nail
Dick. How do you know the "idiot" didn't have some problem, and that is the reason why they were travelling at 40-50mph. As for thousands of people witnessing the same kind of thing every day, how do you know. I've travelled on motorways many times over the years, and I can only ever recall seeing someone driving at about 45-50mph once. And my relatives and friends etc say they have rarely if ever witnessed people driving at 40-50mph, except of course for heavily laden lorries on a relatively steep incline. As regards to your response to my asking you what political correctness has to do with anything, thankyou for such a profound, intelligent and convincing answer. And yes, you did say in your letter that you think cameras are a good thing in built up areas - I DO read quite well actually - but you omitted to acknowledge my point that cameras aren't just to protect pedestrians from speeders, but motorcyclists and car drivers etc also. As for your assertion that "since the introduction of cameras the number of traffic police have been drastically reduced", most of the reduction in traffic police numbers took place well before the widespread deployment of cameras. But I of course think - as I'm sure all pro-camera folk do - that police patrol numbers should be reinstated to the level they previously were in the mid 1980s. And NO, you're not wrong about cameras not picking up bad driving and drink-drivers etc. You are in fact correct in your brilliant deduction. You must obviously be a scientist or some such similar. And precisely when was it I was "lecturing" you about "untold pain and suffering"? As for believing "everything the government" says, do you mean like 'WMD' and '45 minutes' and that sort of thing? Were YOU on the anti-war march? I doubt it somehow. And YES, I am one of "these people"! And what is this "black hole" you refer to? Would you care to elaborate? Anyway, I am very pleased to hear that I fulfilled your hopes, and can only hope that I have achieved the same again with the above. If you're happy then that makes me happy. PS I hear what you say about statistics, but please, do feel free to cite/quote them. Robyn Hope
The antis are always trying to portray us as simplistic idiots, as in their bogus claim, for example, that we advocate everyone should stick rigidly to the limits and, as such, it is misplaced of us to do so . That would be all very well guys if we WERE saying THAT, but we're *NOT* saying THAT, it is just YOU saying that we are saying THAT in your usual dishonest and disingenuous fashion. Please will one of you explain how being supportive of speed cameras equates - somehow! - to us advocating that everyone stick rigidly to the stated speed limits at all times. It doesn't of course, and is just the same old fraudulent tactics. Maybe one day soon the boffins will come up with a camera which can detect the light conditions and visibility and, when necessary, reduce the limit accordingly via a screen that alerts drivers to the fact, like the screens on motorways. Mr S Nail
Dick. The example you cite of a mother/parent being distracted by kids in the back of the car doesn't hold much water. In nine out of ten such journeys - more in fact, much more - the parent will be driving in familiar territory and, as such, know the locations where cameras are cited. And a camera could hardly "pick them up" doing 3 or 4mph over the limit, because even in a 30mph zone they would have to be travelling at least 5mph above the limit to get flashed. Can't you come up with a better example than that. All motorists, whether a parent with kids in the back or not, should always give their full attention to their driving, and if the kids are likely to distract them, stop the car and sort it out. But in any event, let's just hope that a camera is ALL they miss, and it isn't a pedestrian or a cyclist or a motorcyclist, or worst of all from their point of view, a twenty-ton articulated lorry. stargeezer
Rob. As regards to 'fools', there are of course many stupid and inconsiderate and dangerous drivers who drive at inappropriate and unsuitable speeds - ie too fast for the road/weather/light conditions - and they are precisely the ones who persistently exceed speed limits when conditions - as they generally are - are suitable to drive at around the given limit. And there are millions of them! But road conditions etc do not generally lead to fatal or serious collisions in themselves if you are driving at around the stated speed limit - assuming of course that you are fully focused on your driving - but what DOES cause such collisions is when the unexpected happens - and the unexpected is always going to happen at some point or other - and if you are exceeding the limit by 5-10 or 20mph or more, then such an outcome is all the more likely. If everyone drove with that always in mind and drove accordingly - ie drove in a manner that always anticipated the unexpected happening at some point - then the number of fatal and serious injury collisions could and would be significantly reduced. Robyn Hope
Well, well, well, I see the anti-camera brigade are out in force - using all the usual bogus platitudes and arguments!
Richard Wilson perpetuates two of their lies. He poses the question: "If these cameras are so good why do we still have 3,500 deaths a year?". We don't! Last year there were 3,221 fatalities; and the main reason the fatality rate stayed at around 3,400-3,500 for six years is mainly because of the ever-growing number of motorcyclist fatalities due to the increase in motorbike ownership during this period.
The other two principle reasons were the advent of the boy racer phenomena in the early mid-nineties and the increasing use of mobile phones whilst driving during the past seven or eight years, and but for the cameras and other speed restriction measures, I have no doubt the figures would have been substantially higher than they were. The other lie Richard Wilson perpetuates is that "Most people with tickets are very good safe drivers". How would YOU know that? Can you prove it? No! It's just a bogus opinion.
Big Dave says that cameras only "detect excessive speed". They DON'T "only" detect excessive speed, they detect anyone driving at more than 10%+2mph above the stated limit which could, for example, be 35/36mph or 55/56mph in a 30mph zone. Then there's the oft-repeated old chestnut about how cameras don't catch drunk drivers etc. So what! Does a lamppost catch drunk drivers? Is it meant to? The objective of the speed camera programme is to deter drivers from exceeding the speed limits. And in the majority of cases they do! As for cameras on rural roads, static cameras are just not practical and would be very vulnerable to being vandalised by morons, but many police forces DO cover rural roads in their areas with mobile speed camera units. But the problems are two-fold: 1) The speed limits on rural roads are generally far too high; 2) Police forces do not have the resources to be as effective as they would like to be.
Then there's the old chestnut about cameras causing accidents because drivers keep having to check their speedos. Tripe! Then there's the one about how it's not speed that kills. Just more tripe! You should all form a club lads and call it The Boy Racers Preservation Society! But I was forgetting, there already is one - The Association of Barmy Drivers! In their world - your world - everyone is a "good driver" who can drive at any speed they deem right because they possess "sound judgement"! What complete garbage! And deadly and dangerous garbage too! Let's just hope that any young people following this debate are not taken in by it. slowcoach
Sorry Antera309, but I couldn't understand a word of what you were rambling on about. It was just drivel from start to finish. Unintelligible drivel! slowcoach
Martin - as in Another Martin - asks us to remember that only "about 3% of accidents (collisions that is) are caused by inappropriate and excessive speed". Even if this were true, which it isn't, Martin still paints a false picture. There are about 300,000 personal injury collisions each year (and hundreds of thousands of others in which no one is injured apart from a few bumps and bruises perhaps), so even if it WERE just 3%, which it isn't, that amounts to approximately 10,000 of the overall number of personal injury collisions. And these 10,000 undoubtedly account for the vast majority of collisions in which people are killed or permanently crippled and/or brain damaged. In other words: Speed kills!, and especially excessive speed. And it cripples and maims! And that in turn devastates and causes untold pain and suffering! No one is taken in by your claptrap boys because they have eyes that see and brains which think and can deduct the obvious. And that includes seeing your rationale for what it is and your arguments for what they are - ie SPURIOUS! Frank Lee
Drivers who ignore speed limits because in their judgement the limit is set too low for the quality of the road all do so because they have "sound judgement" as to what is a safe speed according to Chris! And how do you know this Chris? Do you interview them all and assess their judgement capabilities? I assume you are an expert in the field and qualified to make such assessments? What complete and utter humbug twaddle! But then that's the anti-camera loonies for you!!! Mark
Just bought one of those snooper devices that let you know where the entrapment cameras are located. Superb piece of kit. Not only does it do it's job but it actually makes you Sub consciously more aware of the speed your travelling at and actually slows you down. Speed is not the only contributer to to death on the roads......look at car safety such as tyres and the dreaded bullbars on 4x4's. Get hit by a 4x4 at 30 with bull bars and very few childen will survive. Dick Dastardly
Ah Mr Nail, That’s the sort of reaction I was hoping for,
Well let’s start with your first comment, Yes I witnessed this idiot driving too slow on a motorway as I’m sure thousands of people every day witness the same.
Why do I mention the PC brigade, well it’s obvious from your reaction that your one of those people who are slowly but surely contributing to the ruination of this country with all the beurocratic crap being bought in by this government. But that’s another story.
You obviously don’t read too well either do you, because as I said in my previous letter, I think cameras are good in built up areas where you get the boy racer trying to do 50 in a 30 zone while trying to impersonate Jenson Button at Silverstone. Areas where there are schools and shops etc are where cameras should be, where the risk factor is higher. I don’t support them on major “A” roads in the countryside, this should be left to traffic police to manage. Would you like me to elaborate any more?
You say about supporting measures to reduce untold suffering and pain. We’ll since the introduction of cameras the numbers of traffic police has been drastically reduced, I didn’t realise that speed cameras could pick up bad driving and drink drivers or am I wrong?
Don’t lecture me about untold suffering and pain because my cousin lost his brother-in-law to a drink driver 17 years ago, as a close family it had an immense impact on the them. No speed camera could have stopped that from happening. Do you support the reduction in traffic police, from your response you appear to think it’s an acceptable trade? Just because someone is slightly over the mark, i.e. 45 in a forty does not make him or her a criminal in the same light as a drink driver or a maniac trying to overtake in unsuitable places or someone just driving recklessly.
Concerning figures, we can argue about statistics until we are blue in the face but it’s obvious that you’re one of these people that believe everything that the government throws at them. Whether your site figures you quote or my source figures are right is debatable. Now you say that why should safe drivers be looking for speed cameras if they are driving under the speed limit? Well some drivers, especially women can sometimes have kids in the back of the car and these kids can be arguing causing unrest etc in the back of the car, this can distract the mother/parent while driving and while this is happening, bang a camera picks them up doing 3 or 4 miles per hour over the limit. Now I’m sure that’s happened to thousands of normally good sensible drivers across the country. Surely your not one of these people who claim to have never gone over the speed limit?
I’m also certain that more drivers would support cameras if the revenue they raised was put into making roads safer for drivers and pedestrians instead of going into the government black hole.
If the government and local authorities are so concerned for safety, then why isit that road improvement is not in line with revenue being raised from the cameras? An example is it that the road my father lives in has one of the worst junctions to pull out from in the county, it’s position is just the other side of the brow of a hill, there have been four accidents there including my father being hit side on, yet no amount of campaigning has been successful in changing the junction………no money has always been the answer from local authorities.
Now read again……………..I DO SUPPORT SPEED CAMERAS IN CERTAIN AREAS BUT NOT ALL AREAS!!!!!!!!! Gwyndolyn
In 2002 men committed 97 per cent of dangerous driving offences, 94 per cent of offences causing death or bodily harm, 89 per cent of drink or drug driving offences, 85 per cent of careless driving offences, 83 per cent of speeding offences, and 84 per cent of offences involving neglect of traffic signs and directions or of pedestrian rights. (Source: Home Office/DfT). Yes, and I suppose inappropriate speed and speeding has nothing to do with it! Give over will yer!!! John Power
So the crackpots who contribute to "Safespeed". (Have you ever looked at their looney web site?) have decided, en mass, to contribute to this web site trying to put forward their pathetic reasons for speeding and risking lives. The excuses these ridiculous little people come up with are amazing!Speed kills! Anyone with half a brain knows that. But these brainless idiots would obviously not! The faster you are travelling when you hit something the more likely you or someone else will die or be seriouly injured.Speed is one of the main contributory reasons for accidents to be more severe however they may be caused. Speed or safety or life saving cameras(call them what you like!) are our biggest defence against dangerous speeding drivers. People like Alan, Ian , MP?, Nick and Rob and a few others (if of course they arent all the same person?)sound like they have an awful lot to learn about driving safely and correctly not to mention within the law. CP
How about if we quadruple the number of Traffic Police and quadruple the number of covert mobile camera units next year and then quadruple them again the year after? How about we incorporate most residential streets into Home Zones with a strictly enforced 10mph limit and have 20mph speed limits in all town and village centres? Strictly enforced of course. And how about we reduce the speed limit from 60mph to 40mph on rural roads (apart from dual carriageways) and country lanes, which is what the vast majority of people want? And how about we deter people from speeding by having deterrents/penalties that really DO deter? And how about we have deterrents/penalties that really DO deter people from drink/drug driving and tailgating etc? All those in favour say 'Aye'. The real point is: Why didn't it happen years and years ago?! Chris
If speed limits were set appropriately, I'd be all in favour of speed cameras. But as it is, there are several speed limits that have been set far too low for the quality of the road, which just leads to drivers ignoring them (and they are not 'killers' by doing so, they are simply using sound judgement about a safe speed for the road). Alan
"Sticking rigidly to the speed limit" Oh what a safe driver you must be. I look forward to the day someone crosses the road in front of you as you drive at 30mph past a line of parked cars. But then safety cameras will stop you, won't they... Some people have absolutely no common sense. I blame the government giving stupid messages and braindead idiots for believing them. Ian
I would suggest the vast majority of you here represent the worst and least attentive drivers in the country! If you think the be all and end all of road safety is speed then you need a wake up call. I do not believe for one second that none of the PC elitists here have ever broken a speed limit. Speed cameras do very little for safety as the last 10 years have shown us with rising casualty stats! Maybe if we returned to sensible policies we would see more of an effect! Michael
JJ (Steve) - A bit over 30 according to the infamous LTI 20/20 may be vastly different to the actual speed the driver was doing. MP
The ironic thing is, I would estimate the majority of the people who are so "pro" safety cameras actually speed themselves. A classic case of hypocrisy!!! Nick
Speed causes accidents?No,its a contributing factor,accidents are caused by people not paying proper attention when they drive.Speed just makes the result of an accident greater/worse just like a small vehicle would cause less damage than a large HGV if they were both travelling at the same speed.The faster you go the more damage you'll do. Rastus
John that isn't even true. The BBC and Daily Mail have been investigating problems with the LTI 20-20 mobile speed camera that has been shown to be inaccurate. In one test, it recorded a brick wall moving at 44mph. But in any case it doesn't stop the idiots driving unlicensed, unregistered, uninsured, or stoled cars, or those with clones number plates. These are immune to speed cameras, and often drive recklessly, knowing that there are few police around to catch them. And even when the police try to do something about it, if the fools crash and somebody gets killed it is the police who get the blame! Rob
It's not speed that kills, It is poor driving. The limit is JUST a number there are many roads which i drive on with a 30mph speed limit, yet you would be an fool to drive more than 20 mph. There are also roads where the limit is 70 mph where one can drive safely at +70mph speeds. I was driving in the fog on the motorway on monday. I was doing 50 mph, other drivers were drivng at 70 mph, they are within the LIMIT however they are not safe. The SAFE SPEED depends on the conditions of the road, and the SAFE SPEED on every road changes from day to day. Speed limit remain the same regaurdless of conditions. They therefore give a FASLE impression of what is safe. nigel_bytes
does a speed camera see A bald tyre?, an uninsured driver?, a drunk driver? an untaxed car?, an unlicensed driver?, a driver on drugs?, they see only one thing CASH CASH and more CASH, i never thought i would see the day when the police would forget moral scruples for money, well done mr blair Dinky Dave
Speed Cameras ALWAYS have the desired effect. You check you speed when in the vacinity of them. It may well be a rein-of-terror for some as mobile and P.C. units operate, well anywhere. So if you or I go too fast we win 3 points & a £60 entry ticket to the Hall of Shame. Job done. Another Martin
The thing that many forget is that good drivers adjust their speed to suit the conditions, and are much better and judging a safe speed than a number on a stick or a yellow box. For example, 70mph on a motorway in thick fog might be legal, but is far too fast for the condtitons. The fact is that large numbers of drivers speed, anmd modtly they do so without causing accidents. That is becuause the safe speed is a speed from which the driver can stop in the distance he knows to be clear. If everbody did that, there would be no collisions. If you don't have sufficient spce to do that, even at 5mph you will crash, and no amount of speed limits or enforcement will make any difference. I repeat, the only way collisions can bew avoid is is all drivers always make sure thay can stop in the distance they know to be clear. That is all it takes. Of course drivers have to learn how to judge the safe distance at a given speed (or the safe speed for a given distance) and this requires training and experience. It incorporates things like hazard awareness and anticipation. So I would not do away with speed limits are they are a valuable guide for the inexperienced. But I think that all limits ouside built up areas should be advisory only. Police have other powers they can use to stop and if necessary prosecute thaose who are driving recklessly or dangerously. And remember, only about 3% of accidents are caused by inappropriate and excessive speed, whilst 12% are caused by inappropriate speed alone. So speed limit enforcement can only at best prevent about a third of speed related accidents. The question is what are we doing about the 90% or so of accidents that have other causes. It seems, as Safespeed says, they are being ignored in the interests of revenue raising and to my mind that is unacceptable, and something I am expremely angry about. We have been sold lies about speeding being the root of all evil in order to raise tax by stealth. All good propaganda needs to be plausible, and if it is it can be used to raise money. So now we have a whole speed enforcement industry that has a vested interest in giving out misleading messages about road safety. I am convinced that by concentrating on sppeding rather than trying to improve the standards of driving by education, we are causing more accidnets than we are preventing. Nick
Everyone exceeds speed limits, if only by a small margin, from time to time. This discussion is just a case of the people who are lucky enough not to have been caught gloating over the people who have. You are all ignoring the point that Paul Smith was trying to make - speed limits and cameras have their place, but using them as "the only tool in the box" when it comes to road safety is just plain irresponsible. Antera309
John power says that "If you drive at the correct speed you will not be flashed by a speed camera". If only this were true. As the GATSOs are getting older, there are more and more reports of inaccuracies and wrongful prosecutions. There is even more concern over the accuracy of the LTI 20/20 speedscope. The potential for wrongful prosecution with the LTI 20/20 has resulted in its being banned in many US States. Why do you people put such blind faith in technology you know nothing about? Antera309
The quote by "slowcoach" is typical of the pro-camera argument and is as flawed as always. [quote="slowcoach"]Martin claims that there are no statistics to prove that speed kills. There are of course...[/quote] Of course there are - I could set up an experiment to prove that speed kills. Two identical cars, one being driven around, the other parked up. The car being driven will have more accidents than the parked one. The only difference between the two cars is speed, hence speed kills. QED. [quote="slowcoach"] ... but even if there weren't, most of us are intelligent enough to figure out that the faster someone is driving the more likely they are to have a collision[/quote] A vastly oversimplified view that totally ignores the human factor. A car travelling at 10mph on the motorway is far more likely to be involved in a collision than a car travelling at 80mph. [quote="slowcoach"] ..and the faster someone is driving the more likely it is that the injuries sustained will be fatal or serious in the event of a collision. [/quote] Ahh, this one is their favourite - common sense says that a faster moving car will do more damage than a slower moving car if it hits something. Again, oversimplified - in real life, cars don't just blindly plough into things at cruising speed. Education in hazard-awareness and adapting vehicle speed to the conditions would achieve more than encouraging people to be "zombie" drivers that think they're safe as long as they drive exactly on the speed limit at all times and spend more time looking at the speedo than the road. [quote="slowcoach"] The anti-camera lobby and their minions... [/quote] Minions? Hey, we're non profit-making, we don't have or need Minions. That's the other side. [quote="slowcoach"] ...always cite examples such as the one Martin cites - ie 71mph on a clear, dry road etc - but conveniently ignore the fact that there are hundreds of thousands of boy racers.... [/quote] This one annoys me. Since when have SafeSpeed, the ABD or anyone else in the anti-camera lobby promoted or condoned motor racing on public highways? [quote="slowcoach"] ...and other speed-freaks driving around our streets at 10-20mph and faster above the given speed limit. [/quote] You cannot measure safe driving in miles per hour. 10mph over the speed limit does not automatically make one a "speed freak". 40mph past a school at 4PM is dangerous. 60mph on a dual carriageway that recently had it's limit cut from 70mph to 50mph for purely political reasons* is not. * discouraging car use in order to get more people onto public transport. Increasing incoming revenue through speeding fines. [quote="slowcoach"] But then that wouldn't fit in with their agenda of course, would it. [/quote] Our agenda is just to see a return to the road safety policies that made our roads the safest in Europe. What's so wrong with that? We're not saying that there is no place for speed limits or their enforcement using cameras. Like the doctor that prescribes asprin for all his patients regardless of their ailment, speed limits and cameras are being used as "the only tool in the box" when it comes to road safety. All of the other measures that could be taken to reduce the death toll on our roads are being ignored, with fatal consequences. In a "common sense" world, this would have been recognised and addressed years ago. But there are too many vested interests in Speed Cameras and this must STOP. When money talks, the truth is silent. Dave
Their's a wonderful speed camera on the A34 heading north just south of Alderley Edge by Astra Zeneca which is quite dangerous on its own! The speed limit is 60 mph, it's a rural area on a long straight section of at least half a mile in length with plenty of visibility. Yet numerous unobservant people (inevitably driving around 45 mph) see the familiar lines on the road late and stamp on their brakes in order to drop their speed to 30 mph. Often following traffic gets caught out by this. One day this'll be really entertaining! Big Dave
These are called, what is it? "Safety Cameras". Which is a complete lie. They are SPEED cameras, pure & simple. They detect ONLY excessive speed and not unsafe driving. ONLY police officers, REAL people with brains & the ability to assess the situation can really improve the safety of freely travelling vehicles. When was the last time a camera caught a drunk driver, an uninsured driver, unsafe vehicles, tailgating, aggressive drivers, mobile phone use, learners out on their own. Need I go on? Exactly. They don't. They are revenue generators. To quote GOVERMENT stats. "60% of fatal crashes occur on rural roads". OK, so on these 'killer' roads, where are the Speed Cameras if these are indeed installed to save lives...oh wait, it wouldn't be ecconomically viable as the revenue generated through fines would never pay for the installation....so much for saving lives. The urban speed limits are generally sensible, and this is where most fatalities occur. I don't see many cameras in residential areas? Do you? The 70mph motorway limit adopted in the middle of the last century was designed with Moris Minors in mind, with none of the advantages of modern motoring. ABS, disc brakes, SRS, seat belts, crumple zones & improved road surfaces & tyres. Yes, the ONLY thing that hasn't advanced is the driver. But now we are no longer 'hurtling' along at near top speed - with 70mph feeling like the space shuttle on re-entry, on the limits of mechanical safety. It's about time we moved with the times and adopted a sensible limit. Remember, nobody FORCES you to drive at upto 70 at the moment - you just accept it as safe. Why? Because you bought the propaganda. "70 safe / 71 not so safe", "you kill 80% at 40, 5% at 20" or some twaddle. Do you know when this 'study' was done. 1979!, and what was it based on? Evidence? No, that would be to convenient. Police testimonies of supposed impact speeds & that of the drivers themselves. Imagine if it were repeated today: "Mr Brown, what speed were you doing when you knock down little Jimmy?" "Exactly 30mph." "How can you be so sure?" "Well, you know that speed camera I just passed, I was so busy watching my speed, I must've checked it 6 times, that I didn't see him." "OK sir. Just so long as we can be sure you weren't speeding." The "Speed Kills" manta is pathetic. If speed alone killed, there would be more fatalities on motorways full stop. In fact, these are (Gov. Stats.) the safest to drive on. Very few KSI's are directly caused through excessive speed. Before any more rants about road deaths - perhaps you should actually do some research. Look at the actual figures - not a websites 'spin' on them. Don't believe the hype. If it were all true, we'd all have died from SARS, been eaten alive by rotweillers, been blown up by terrorists, found WMD's in Iraq and have 8" of snow today. Slightly peeved
6,000 plus cameras, 1 million plus drivers with speeding convictions, greatly reduced numbers of traffic police. What do we end up with? A statistically irrelevent change in the number of fatalities. If the medicine isn't working, change it. Enrico
Oh yes - everything is 'obvious' until you actually discover that it isn't. Like saying that the faster you go the more likely you are to crash - that is as obvious as a flat earth and that colds are caused by cold weather (all the above are or were once the 'majority' opinion and apparently obvious - two have since been proved to be utter rubbish). Speed does not kill, nor does making drivers concentrate on their speed to the detriment of all their other driving skills constiture a means to safer roads. It's a bit like suggesting banning all sharp objects will make the world safer and save lives. It might, unless you are insulin injecting diabetic..... The point of this post is that things are not as simple and clear cut as many posters here make out. Richard Wilson
I pass between 10,000 and 20,000 speed cameras a year. after 30 years with a clean license I missed one sign ( a wide dual carriage way had just had the limit rediced from 40 to 30 ) I was flashed. It made me think a lot ! Most people with tickets are very good safe drivers. If these cameras are so good why do we still have 3,500 deaths a year. Please concentrate on the RESULTS not Speed camera lobby. Mr S Nail
So you saw a driver travelling at 40-50mph on a motorway did you Dick? And he/she FORCED the lorry into the middle lane to overtake did he/she Dick? And it was a busy middle lane was it Dick, and the lorry driver causes the cars behind to suddenly brake which then causes shunts? Did you witness this, or is it just an imaginary scenario? Whatever the case, it was the lorry driver who was at fault! And as per usual, like so many of the anti-camera brigade, you have to resort to the infantile tactic of name-calling. What has political correctness got to do with supporting measures which help reduce the carnage and the untold pain and suffering that goes with it? Would you care to elaborate? But not only do you resort to name-calling, but just like your chums in the ABD and SS, you use Big Lies to support your argument, as with the old chestnut about how "after a decade of cameras the overall road safety results have been terrible" and "The fatal accident rate has had by far its worse decade ever". This is two lies combined. By the year 2000 there were just 500 speed cameras in operation on UK roads, and cameras have only really proliferated since 2001/2002 when the Safety Camera Partnerships were formed (I seem to recall reading on the UnSafe Speed website a few months ago that there were 4,000 cameras in operation by the year 2000!). As for the other lie, well hows about you provide us with the statistics to back up your claim. I think most of us can see exactly where the "crap" is coming from, and as for your 'Attack Dog/Rottweiler' tactics, they may impress any dunderheads who happen to be following this debate, but you don't impress me one jot Dicky Boy. And don't forget the stats! PS Why would any driver have to be looking out for speed cameras if he/she is driving within the limit at....er....a safe speed? Bob
A speed camera is discriminatory in the fact it will catch you speeding i see more dangerous driving on the roads than i do speeding drivers, what is out there in substantial numbers to prosecute these people? Dick Dastardly
Roll on John Power and his PC brigade.
Speed Kills, yes of course it kills. But bad drivers and sometimes pedestrians who don't pay attention cause accidents.
Cameras in built up areas, "YES I agree" but on roads that simply have no threat to pedestrians such as dual carriageways "NO I disagree".
I travel something like 45,000 miles per year on our roads and some of the crap the PC brigade come out with on this site is ridiculous.
I'll tell you what’s ridiculous, a driver travelling 40-50 miles per hour on a motorway and he forces a lorry to pull into the middle lane in order to overtake, the lorry pulling into a busy middle lane then causes cars behind to suddenly brake which then causes shunts. So lets keep a level head on this stuff.
Slow drivers can be just as dangerous as speeding drivers, it just depends on the situation.
As for people who complain about the radar detector units in cars, the following is an extract from the dft.gov.uk "........There is no difficulty with drivers carrying in their vehicles devices that inform them of the location of fixed safety cameras and cameras operating from mobile units. These have the same intention as the signing, visibility and conspicuity rules that form part of the financial scheme under which most cameras are placed. These devices operate currently under Global Positional Systems (GPS). They work by keeping the position of cameras up to date on a computer and identifying where they are in relation to a vehicle by use of a satellite. There is no intention to ban these...."
So you see boys and girls, what some of you are actually trying to endorse by suggesting these items should not be allowed is called entrapment, and we all know that entrapment is against the law.
Just one other point, “Speed Cameras save lives”? yes they do stop the idiot boy racer doing 50 in a 30 zone, but if these gadgets are so good why have the accident figures actually gone up? After a decade of speed cameras on UK roads, the overall road safety results have been terrible. The fatal accident rate has had by far its worse decade ever. Vehicle speeds are virtually unchanged. (see the DfT "VSGB" reports.)
One major problem with speed cameras that Safe Speed has brought to the fore in the debate is the distraction effect. Whenever a driver is looking out for a speed camera he is paying less attention to the road ahead. This happens even where no speed camera is present - there only has to be a risk of a speed camera before driver are distracted in this way. Since driver attention is at the very core of our road safety system, it's hardly surprising that any distraction can produce dangerous effects.
So there we have it, cameras are suitable in the right conditions but not others. Come on PC brigade, even you lot have to admit that the government is just using these gadgets to raise badly needed revenue, not for road safety but for other government policies. JJ
Dan claims he was just "the slightest bit over 30" when he was flashed, but given that cameras are set to trigger at 10%+2mph above the stated speed limit, you would have to be travelling at 35mph or more to trigger a camera in a 30mph limit.
Have you received your penalty notice yet Dan? How fast does it say you were travelling at the time? Either you need to get your speedo fixed or you need to get your eyes tested. On the other hand, what is much more likely is that you are just an anti-camera propagandist and your story - and who you claim to be - is just complete fabrication.
IF there is any truth to your story - which I very much doubt there is - then: 1) You must have been driving in an unfamiliar area if you didn't know the camera was situated there; 2) You somehow managed to miss the sign warning motorists that the camera is there. Adrian
Ninety per cent of people support the introduction of 40mph speed limits on country lanes. 65 per cent of people feel threatened by traffic on these routes. Source: CPRE slowcoach
Martin claims that there are no statistics to prove that speed kills. There are of course, but even if there weren't, most of us are intelligent enough to figure out that the faster someone is driving the more likely they are to have a collision, and the faster someone is driving the more likely it is that the injuries sustained will be fatal or serious in the event of a collision.
The anti-camera lobby and their minions always cite examples such as the one Martin cites - ie 71mph on a clear, dry road etc - but conveniently ignore the fact that there are hundreds of thousands of boy racers and other speed-freaks driving around our streets at 10-20mph and faster above the given speed limit. But then that wouldn't fit in with their agenda of course, would it. Tom Heavey
It is clear that effects of speed cameras are very much misunderstood. Many refer to them as a blunt tool that cannot differentiate between good and bad drivers. This is far from the truth. Speed cameras affect so much more of a drivers behaviour than most seem to realise. We all make many errors when we drive all of which could lead to a collision. The outcome of this collision is then determined by how fast the vehicle was travelling. Just the mere fact that a vehicle speed has slowed has allowed a degree oc compensation to all of the other errors we make resultin in fewer collisions, and the collisions that do occur, happen at a reduced speed. 2 million get fined for speeding each year, but this figure only represents around 8% of the motorists who freely admit to speeding. So what has caused the difference? The answer then has to lie in an area other than speeding alone. Why were all the signs missed? Why were all the road markings missed? and why was the camera itself not seen? The one common fault here has to be that the drivers attention or concentration was elsewhere and rendered him or her with low awareness and virtually oblivious to their surroundings. So what is worse, two million motorists getting fined each year for speeding or two million motorists driving apparantly unaware of their surroundings. The 2 million fined for speeding only represent areound 8% of those who freely admit to the offence so it is clear to see that speed cameras are therefore 92% successfull in reducing the excessive speed of a motorist. This success rate has got to be a main contributor to the 2004 road traffic collision statistics that represent the lowest casualty rates we have ever experienced. Robyn Hope
Martin. I got about 12% of the way through your post, realised you are an anti-camera propagandist reiterating the same old claptrap that the anti-camera lobby try to dissemble, and gave up. Please give my regards to your chums at the Association of Barmy Drivers and UnSafe Speed etc. slowcoach
Markie G says: "I have never understood why the driver is always blamed when someone is hit". The reality is of course - as I'm sure Markie G knows - that more often than not the fact that they hit and killed someone or seriously injured someone isn't even a factor, and they maybe - MAYBE - get two or three penalty points on their licence and a small fine for 'driving without due care and attention'. It happens all the time. So beware of people like Markie G who surreptitiously spread such disinformation and such myths. Martin
I got about 10% of the way down this posting list, realised its prime use is not as a serious discussion piece but a mouthpiece for those who believe every word the Government tell them about how 'speed kills' (which there are NO statistics to support - its idiots who have no idea how to drive that kill, not speed), and gave up! However, in accordance with this spirit of open, informed and enlightened discussion, I would like to propose a 'final solution' to the problem of the speeding motorist: Reintroduce the 'red flag' law! This is the obvious way to stymie those heinous criminals intent on the grave offence of driving at 71mph on a clear, dry, straight and empty dual carriageway at 2am in the morning! In fact, even better - as the motorist would have to pay to employ the man with the red flag then he wouldn't be able to speed because he wouldn't be able to afford a car - problem solved at a stroke! Joan(Hill Ridware)
May I through this web site implore that something is done about the drivers who speed through the village of Hill Ridware on the B5015. Our childrens lives are being put at risk on a daily basis through these idiots. We have recently had a car plough through the safety railing outside the village hall and knock down a pillar box. It could have very easily been a child who was knocked down.A few months ago we had a laser type speed warning sign put up at one end of the village-what a waste of time and money! Despite having two blind bends near our school drivers are still speeding through at double or even treble the speed limit of 30mph. One day someone is going to get killed by one of these drivers. We need urgent action now by the police and local councillors ect before an accident happens. Most main road villages around here have traffic calming measures. Your Name ALAN,
It is obvious by reading all the comments made that most drivers want something done about stupid drivers who speed so why doesn't the powers that be start doing something? Donna
Lots of rural roads in Staffordshire have no pavements and these roads should have a maximum speed limit of 20 miles per hour. Pedestrians have to walk in the road if there are no pavements and on bends it can be very dangerous when foolish drivers just race without any consideration whatsoever for other road users. Garry
What we need is a strong transport minister who will listen to to the vast majority of sensible drivers who want to see stiff laws bought in to stop bad drivers who break the law and risk lives by speeding and tailgating. Safety cameras should be increased in number not decreased. Fines should be much higher. Drivers should lose their licences for six months on a second offence and made to sit another driving test. If they get caught after that they should lose their licences for good. Eddie
Speeding is potential manslaughter and any driver who causes a death by speeding should receive an automatic prison sentence to fit the crime of manslaughter. Speeding drivers should be far more severely punished by the courts. The present fine of a mere £60 and just 3 endorsements is a joke. Make these stupid drivers learn a proper lesson by taking their licences away. Sue
You are right George. There are a lot of greedy irresponsible people out there who have cashed in on writing books and selling anti camera devices. These people are only interested in making money for themselves. They aren't interested in the facts that cameras are saving lives by cutting down speeding. Everyone with any common sense knows that speed kills but these morons still make money regardless of road safety knowing full well that there are a lot of foolish drivers who would rather pay for their dubious items than drive properly and safely. George
If safety cameras are done away with what will happen to all the people who have been making a nice little earner by writing books against them or selling anti camera devices ect. These people will be put out of work. Shame! Lynn
The vast majority of responsible good drivers WANT speed cameras because they have nothing to fear from them if they drive correctly. It is only bad drivers who are against them because they know that the way that they drive they have been or will be caught and fined. Robyn Hope
Since when did advocating a safe road/street environment in which people can drive and walk and cycle in relative safety equate to "moaning" John? Since when did being supportive of measures which reduce the number of fatalities and serious injuries equate to "moaning" John? The only people who are "moaning" are the speed-freaks and hotheads like yourself who appear to believe that they have some God-given right to drive at any speed they so choose to, and those of course who have been flashed and fined and received penalty points and seen their car insurance rise as a consequence. I dare say THAT 'hurts'! But not quite on the level that it 'hurts' when a much-loved family member is killed or crippled or permanently brain-damaged in a collision/crash, as many thousands are each and every year - around 100,000 in the last ten years alone. But you and your anti-camera buddies obviously couldn't care less about that. Perhaps when you grow up..... Paul
As a road user i would like to put my point forward motorcyclists??? how the riders use motorcars as a sheild they overtake on the outside [ obvious you might say well ] the number plate is hidden by the side of your car so they get away paying a fine i think we should have overhead cameras this would stop some of the pathetic indivdulas vandlizing cameras after they have been caught stick to limet and keep your money its better in your pocket than theres Paul
As a road user i would like to put my point forward motorcyclists??? how the riders use motorcars as a sheild they overtake on the outside [ obvious you might say well ] the number plate is hidden by the side of your car so they get away paying a fine i think we should have overhead cameras this would stop some of the pathetic indivdulas vandlizing cameras after they have been caught stick to limet and keep your money its better in your pocket than theres Barry
Over 15,000 people were killed or seriously injured on rural roads last year. The vast majority of these accidents would have been less severe if the vehicles involved had been travelling slower and not speeding. Do not think that it is safe to break the speed limit on rural roads just because ther is less traffic.There are unforseen hazards such as blind bends, cyclists,horse riders, pedestrians, due to no footpaths, and animals on the road that could lead to accidents. Drive appropiately by keeping your speed down and you will be able to react to these hazards more quickly. Remember always-SPEED KILLS!. Ken
At present there is no other speed deterent as good as the speed camera.They are doing a brilliant job in catching law breaking speeding dangerous drivers and their success rate is phenomenal which is why they are so unpopular with bad drivers.The only thing wrong with the cameras is that there aren't enough of them and hopefully this will be rectified in due course. These cameras are self financing and cost the rate payer nothing, unlike the cost of ambulance , police and fire services which are required at accidents that could happen if the cameras were not making drivers slow down. Bad drivers complain about the cameras because it is bad drivers who get caught by them. Good drivers do not worry or complain about them because good drivers do not break the law by speeding. Charlie
Yet another accident on the Birmingham Road at Shenstone. Due to excessive speed as usual. Why on earth cant we have speed safety cameras along this stretch of road? Chan
To Danny. I would be very careful now mate because you obviously haven't, at your age,had a driving licence for 2 years so if you get prosecuted this time you will lose your licence if you get caught again. Don't listen to the rubbish put out by some of the crap drivers who think they should be allowed to speed and do what they like. Think for yourself and you will soon realise that good drivers do not speed. Drive correctly within the law and you wont have any more problems with speed cameras. Ray
With drivers like Markie, John and Carl on our roads I am glad that we have got safety cameras. Shaun Kirby
What chance have we ever got of having safe roads when drivers speed and tailgate dangerously whatever the road conditions.The law must get tough with these brainless morons. Sue
Vehicles are travelling far too fast on the roads across Cannock Chase. It is about time we had mobile speed checks there. Hilary
I have never seen comments so stupid on here before as the ones that Markie. G. has contributed. What a fool this person must be. Dave
It is people like you who are moaning John. You are moaning because you don't think that you should have to drive properly and safely.It is you who should stop moaning and perhaps instead you could learn some road sense. Martin
Speed cameras are not a joke Carl-they save lives. Peter(Cannock)
If you are doing handbrake turns on a public highway(Markie), whatever speed you are travelling at, then you are a dangerous driver and deserve to lose your licence. Victor
I wonder John if you would have the same attitude if it was one of your family who got mown down and killed by a speeding driver who was "just driving a few miles over the speed limit" because he felt like it. Pat
Cameras only make money if you break the law and speed. Wendy
Markie.G. Whoever told you that roads are for cars only was wrong. Roads are for everyone, all vehicle drivers,cyclists,horse riders and, if there are no pavements,pedestrians. The faster you are going when you are involved in an accident,whatever the cause,the more likely someone will get killed--so speed does kill. John Power
To Carl. I can think of nothing more useful for the police to do than to save lives. We all pay our taxes and I am very glad to spend mine on the police if they are catching drivers who break the law and risk other peoples lives! To John. A few extra miles per hour will hurt. Those few extra miles could mean the difference between life and death if you have an accident! To Markie. Your stupid immature comments are not worth replying to! slowcoach
Carl: Why is it a quick and easy way to make money? Could you elaborate please? So you think it's a waste of time to deter people from speeding and, as such, reduce the number of fatalities and save lives? Markie G: Whoever told you that the road is for cars was indeed correct, and people who speed are killing and maiming the occupants of other cars, and also themselves sometimes. I guess you weren't aware of this? But the road is not only for cars (and lorries and vans etc), it is also for motorcyclists and cyclists and, as you may know, pedestrians - and we are all pedestrians on occasion - have to cross them sometimes. And if speed doesn't kill, then how do you explain the figures I quoted in my previous post? And how do you account for the fact that fatal and serious injury collisions have been reduced by an average of 40% at camera site locations? carl
speed cameras,what a joke-its just a quick and easy way to make money.the police should be doing something useful with their time.to think this is what my taxes go on is a joke. John
Oh stop moaning, as long as the road conditions are right, a few miles over the limit will not hurt. sunday morning moaners are out a few days early. Markie G
I have never understood why the driver is always blamed when someone is hit. I have been told that the road is for cars and if you are there then it is you fault. When a lion kills a person people say well they were in there den so you can expect it. Why is it different for cars it would be better if people were arrested for jay walking. At least i am ok doing some handbrake turns as long as it below 30mph. Speed does not kill people not being able to drive does and how can you run someone over if they do not get in the way. i agree that some people get killed on pavement but that a different story. Jean
I can't see what all the fuss is about speed cameras. If you don't break the law by speeding you have nothing to worry about. Barry
I think that the introduction of safety cameras to reduce speed is one of the best steps in public safety that this country has ever made. Pam
All rural roads, especially ones without footpaths, should have lower speed limits. At present a lot of these roads in Staffordshire are derestricted. It does not make sense. Drivers speed dangerously along country lanes with no thought whatsoever that there could be pedestrians, cyclists or horse riders around the next bend. Alec
Road crashes are preventable,even in poor weather or poor lighting conditions,drivers can stay safe by driving slowly and cautiously. The biggest cause of deaths and injuries on the road are speeding drivers who fail to stop in time when a hazard arises. Jack Davies.
Physics tell us that the faster a vehicle is driven,the less time there is for the driver to react to hazards,and,if a collision takes place with another vehicle,cyclist,pedestrian or inaminate object, the more powerful the impact and the greater the likelihood of deaths or serious injuries. Conversely,the slower a vehicle is driven,the more time the driver has to react to a situation that could result in their vehicle causing a death.Speed does kill! Ann
The only time that the cameras take money from drivers is when drivers break the law by speeding. Victor
Sorry to hear that you have been caught out breaking the law Dan. Unfortunately because of bad drivers who speed and risk everyones safety we have to have speed cameras and a speed limit has to be drawn somewhere. It is infuriating when you are going to be fined and have your licence endorsed for being a little over the legal speed limit and then you see bad drivers who speed excessivly every day getting away with it. Pete(Cannock)
Nice to know Micheal that you are sticking rigidly to the speed limit. Not many drivers do. Hence the successful use of the safety cameras. Dan
i was flashed about half an hour ago, im 17 years of age, im not a bad boy racer i dont have a done up car i looked at my clock and it was the slightest bit over 30 when it flashed ? if you think i deserve the fine for doin 31-33 then please say so? there was a large lorry i was far traveling at the same speed i was not catching up with the lorry i was getting further away ? FRANK
I get really annoyed when I read stupid comments from dopes like Phil when they say that speed does not kill. I would have thought that it is quite obvious, even to idiots and simpletons, that the faster you travel the worse the consequences will be when you are involved in an accident.How on earth can anyone deny this fact? Are these people living in a make believe world? or have they been brainwashed by the idiotic rubbish given out by anti safety camera/anti road safety/ web sites? that have been created by pathetic individuals who think that they have a right to drive any way they like regardless of endangering themselves or, more importantly, other road users? Stop and think before you contribute any more comments Phil then perhaps you will be able to contribute comments that make sense. Michael
Mr Gatso himself said. "If anybody is caught by one of these cameras, they have failed to do their job properly". Evidently they have failed. I don't stick to speed limits because of a yellow box on a stick. I stick to them (rigidly) because I know it is the right thing to do. Julie
I agree with Graham. Something should be done to stop tailgaters who are risking our lives by their actions. Graham is right, £60 fines are far too low. An automatic ban for drivers who speed or tailgate would be much more effective. Brian Cowling
It seems to me Ram that it is YOU who are looking at twisted information simply propagated for the benefit of simple minded law breaking motorists who are seeking,unsuccessfully,justification for their bad driving and lust for speed regardless of road safety. Alec
What a daft challenge to make Phil. Every sensible driver knows that speed kills. Ever thought of reading a few road safety leaflets or the Highway code? I think that there should be a lot more speed cameras in Staffordshire. wendy
Sorry Ram but you and all the other silly naive people who say that cameras do not save lives are totally wrong! I live by one of these cameras which does a grand job in slowing speeding drivers down and preventing accidents and loss of life. Before the camera was in place drivers used to speed along this road with no regard whatsoever for people, including the children and pensioners who live on this stretch of road. I get a great deal of satisfaction every time I see the camera flash because I know that yet another stupid driver will think twice before he speeds and risks lives again. slowcoach
In urban areas, where the vast majority of safety cameras are situated, fatalities have DECREASED by approxamately 15% during the past eight years, whereas in rural areas fatalities have INCREASED by approxamately 5%. Ray
Just because a road appears empty(Ram)does not mean that you can break the law by speeding on it. A road does not have to be busy for you to have an accident. A lot of accidents are one vehicle crashes, usually vehicles that have been travelling too fast and come off the road or hit a tree ect. ANNE
I think that Alex who states that stupidity is the real cause of accidents and John Power who states that the faster you speed the more serious the accident will be are both right. I would just like to add that you must be stupid to speed anyway! Peter(Cannock)
Congratulations Ram on being the only motorcyclist I have ever heard of who does not speed like a maniac every time they go out on their bikes. Garry
Just ask yourself one question Ram. If cameras are not a realistic preventative measure against speeding drivers why are so many drivers being caught and fined because of them? John Power
Phil-Surely you and anyone else with the slightest grain of common sense know that the faster you are travelling when you have an accident the more likely you or someone else will die or be seriously injured hence- SPEED KILLS. Road casulties are gradually rising which is why we urgently need more cameras to catch and fine drivers who speed and cause bad accidents when they crash. Road casulties would be much higher than they are now without the safety cameras that we already have. Claire
You seem a very mixed up guy Alex!I think that you are wrong to criticise John Power who talks a lot more sense than you do. John says what every good driver knows,that speed kills, and,to quote John, "The faster you are going when you crash the more likely you are to kill or badly injure someone." Perhaps Alex it is YOU who should start thinking before you make any more comments about John. John Power
I totally agree with you Julie. Congratulations on realising that they only way to stop these idiots is to have their licenses suspended. If you drive properly, safely and responsibly at the correct speed you will not be flashed by a speed camera. The police should start a purge and catch some of these fools.
Alec
It has been said that Police time is being wasted trapping and prosecuting 'innocent drivers'-time that could be better spent catching 'real criminals'. Statistically 'real' criminals- apart from murderers -rarely kill people but speeding motorists do.
Martin
Speed cameras are a very blunt instrument when it comes to improving road safety. If a driver is driving properly, so that he/she can stop in the distance that is clear, he cannot collide with anything, whatever speed he is doing.
Good drivers adjust there speed so that they can stop in the distance that is clear. If drivers do that, the level of safety of their driving is independent of speed. So speed cameras will often convict safe drivers. This is the injustice of this approach.
The oft quoted statistic that the damage and severity of injuries in an accident will be worse if the inpact speed is higher is clearly true. But the key word is "impact", which should not be taken to be the same as the free travelling speed. Most collisions occur becuse someone had insufficient braking distance, and will have braked before the impact, so the speed limit is largely irrelevant.
What matters is simply whether or not the driver had sufficient space to stop for the speed that he was travelling. If he does not he will collide. The space available, and therefore the maximum safe speed varies from second to second in any real driving situation. Drivers learn how to judge this; if they cannot they don't survive for long. The safe speed by this measure is toally independent of any number on a stick. That being said, speed limits can provide a useful indication to the driver of the expected hazard density.
It does not guarantee that the posted speed is safe in any situation, or that it is always dangerous to exceed it.
Donna
Many people are killed needlessly every year because of drivers who speed. That is why we need speed cameras. Sharon
I was very pleased to read that car insurance companies intend to take a serious view of drivers convicted of speeding offences and may refuse to insure them at all. These drivers should not be allowed to drive. Damion
If you enjoy driving at speed contact your local race track. Many run race days when you can race your own vehicle in a safe enviroment that does not put other road users at risk. Harry
It only takes a fraction of a second to check your speedometer and should be as automatic as checking your mirrors. A good driver should have a good idea of their speed of travel and should be able to feel if their speed is creeping up and counter it automatically. adam
The so called Association of British Drivers have stated on their web site that in 2004 that "tens of thousands" of drivers.(What an exaggeration) were "Mugged" (Dont all laugh at once!) of 2.4 million pounds in Staffordshire. These drivers were not mugged. They broke the law by speeding and were FINED. They then went on to say that 2004 was the third worst year in 10 years for fatalities. I dread to think how many extra fatalities there would have been without safety cameras and other speed restriction methods! graham
i agree with speed cameras because speed does kill. i wish a similar device could be put in place to identify tailgaters.speeders annd tailgaters should recieve an automatic 5 year ban . this i would garantee make our roads a safer place to be .also bad lane discipline is another major problem that any good driver encounters on a daily basis.sixty pound penalty fines are not enough . Victor
There were 78 road deaths in Staffordshire in 2004 and 77 in 2003. You can be sure that speeding at the time of these accidents played a significant part in making these fatalities more likely. I wonder how many extra deaths would have occured if speed cameras had not been in use. An awful lot more I would guess. Speed safety cameras are a neccessity whilst we have stupid drivers who speed on our roads. RAM
In the face of all the stick that Alex has been receiving I have to say that (with a pinch of salt) he talks a lot of sense. Cameras do not save lives per se, and there is plenty of independent research to back this up. As a motorcyclist (and therefore a common object of police scrutiny) I am careful to observe speed limits, particularly in built up areas. Why then , despite a proliferation of speed cameras in North Staffs, do I find cars ‘tailgating’ me (unnerving on a bike) in urban areas? The simple answer is because people slow for the camera only to speed up again when they pass it. That’ll be because they are NOT a realistic preventative measure, without additional presence from the police. If you believe cameras work you are seriously naïve. Similarly Alex correctly highlights the point that stupidity, and not speed alone, is the real cause of accidents. A shame then that JP makes such an issue of travelling over the limit on an empty road. Look at independent research that is based in fact, rather than the twisted misinformation simply propagated for the benefit of the government’s revenue making machine. I’ve got an idea: why don’t we introduce Police onto the roads to manage the situation?! Phil
I challenge anyone who comments above that 'speed kills' to come up with some real facts to justify their claim. Despite being on of the most camera happy counties Staffordshire has a gradual rise in road casualties. Surely if the cameras are doing their job and speeding is the root of all evil, no-one would be killed at all! Len
Now that the A.A. has been daft and irresponsible enough to show the locations of speed cameras in its road atlas's the authorities should move all the cameras to different locations. I think it is totally disgraceful that a motoring organisation such as the A.A. should encourage drivers to speed on other camera free routes. These cameras are for one purpose only-to save lives. Jean --- Stafford
Whatever the reason for a road crash speed has a large part to pay. Safety cameras are helping to reduce speed on our roads and reduce the number of casulties. The speed limit is the absolute maximum speed that you should travel at. It does not mean that it is always safe to travel as fast as that speed. Wendy
Breaking the legal speed limit is against the law. Cameras do not generate any cash if speed limits are obeyed. No-one is above the law and those drivers who choose to ignore it by driving too fast can expect to get fined. You are just as likely to have an accident at night as you are in the day. Visibility is poorer and people are more tired or likely to be under the influence of drink so it is pointless saying that as the roads are clearer at night it is okay to drive faster. Brian Cowling
Speeding and tailgating are now becoming as socially unacceptable as drink driving. One third of all road accidents could be avoided by drivers driving at the correct speed. John Power
Yes Les, You are totally correct when you say that if a driver runs into the back of the vehicle in front that driver is the one at fault for being too close. Unfortunately there are a lot of nut cases out there who think it is great fun driving as close to the vehicle in front and intimidating other drivers by doing so. Whatever speed the vehicle in front of you is doing, whether it be fast or slow, you should keep at a safe distance.Tailgating other vehicles is very dangerous. Even on a clear road something may happen to force the driver in front to break in an emergency. Of course you will always get senseless, pea brained , idiots who will tailgate just for the fun of it but then you will always get scumbags in all walks of life. Les
If drivers used the 2 second rule to keep their distance behind the vehicle in front there would be far fewer bumps. remember that you are legally responsible if you collide with the vehicle in front of you even if they have done something totally stupid. KEEP YOUR DISTANCE!!!!! Victor
Speed is the main reason for road deaths. If drivers were not driving so fast when they have accidents there would be far less serious injuries and deaths. The police should do a lot more to catch speeding drivers.There should be far more cameras both static and mobile. The penalties for speeding should be much more severe. Speeding is dangerous. Claire
You seem a very mixed up guy Alex! I think that you are wrong to criticise John Power who talks a lot more sense than you do. John says what every good driver knows,that speed kills, and,to quote John, "The faster you are going when you crash the more likely you are to kill or badly injure someone." Perhaps Alex it is YOU who should start thinking before you make any more comments about John. Ann
To Alex. I have yet to read any of so called "sensible constructive comments" that you have mentioned. The vast majority of drivers KNOW that safety cameras stop speeding drivers and that speeding drivers are the main cause of deaths on our roads. John Power
Whether you like it or not Alex, and a lot of drivers do not want to or are just too thick to realise, the fact is that speed is a main contributory factor to death or serious injury, whatever the reason for the accident. To call someone immature because they do not agree with stupid and idiotic driving tactics such as speeding and suicidal tailgating is in itself a sign of immaturity and childishness. Every road safety organisation will tell you that speed kills so perhaps Alex it is you who should do some research and listening. Regarding your other silly comment, I cannot see any luxury for the police when it is they who are normally first at the scene of an accident and have to face up to the appalling carnage and mangled bodies that need not have been so bad if the driver/s involved had not been speeding. Alex
Here is something to think avout. In the year that the speed limits were devised, the Hillman Minx was car of the year! Time for an update I think. I personally believe 20mph in built-up areas is sufficient and a minimum speed for motorway. Also, ABS does NOT improve stopping distance, in fact stopping distances with ABS are increased by 10% (on average in dry weather) however steering control is improved, especially in bad conditions. In answer to my comments on crashes on motorways, for the number of cars travelling and the distances travelled, motorways are by far the safest way to travel by car. Less than 1% of all accidents are on the motorway compared with nearly 40% at traffic lights. This figure drops considerably when the traffic lights are replaced with a mini roundabout. John Power, you need to do a little more listening and thinking.. to stand there and say SPEED KILLS and then put your fingers in your ears and yell "lalalalalala can't hear you" isn't very mature.. Alot of the comments on this site are pointing out that some things are more important (although less lucrative for the police) than speed alone.. The authorities would do well to take some of these constructive comments into consideration too. Peter(Cannock)
The sattelite vehicle tracking device soon to come into use will be able to monitor all drivers at all times and record speeding drivers so that they can be fined and have their licences endorsed. Barbara
Only complete fools speed and tailgate other motorists. Fine them all I say. H
Martin you are talking a load of claptrap! Slow down and drive properly! ED
Why worry about speed cameras when within a couple of years they will be obsolete anyway? The government will soon be making it compulsory for every car to be fitted with a satelite linked 'Black Box' device which can be checked amongst other things for speeding offences. This high tech much needed 'Spy in the sky' will log details of all journeys and is being welcomed by car insurance companies who are fed up of accident claims that are mainly caused by driver error at excessive speed. If drivers are found to have been speeding when involved in an accident their insurance claim may be rejected in the future. Phil
You have insufficient braking speed because you are travelling too fast. At the point of impact the faster you are going the worse the accident will be.If you drive sensibly and do not travel too fast you will have more braking time. Its all down to common sense an attribute that is lacking in a great many drivers these days! Donna
To Joan. Why don't you get a petition going in your village and try to have some kind of speed restriction such as speed cameras erected. The speed cameras by us do a splendid job flashing speeding motorists. Peter(Cannock)
Speed cameras do not convict safe drivers Martin. Speed cameras convict unsafe drivers who are speeding and risking lives. Drivers who have no regard for road safety, the law, other drivers, pedestrians ect. It is true that posted speed restriction signs are not guranteed to be safe in any situation as sometimes in order to drive safely you must drive appropiately slower than the maximum speed that is shown on these signs. You never, if you are a good safe driver, go faster than the speed shown as you are then driving unsafely, breaking the law and can be prosecuted. There are very few drivers who keep a safe distance behind the vehicle in front and like you say they dont last for long. Unfortunately as well as killing or injuring themselves they kill and injure other people. Doreen
We are very lucky in some suberbs of Lichfield to have speed ramps in some our side roads. This slows down the majority of car drivers and makes the roads safe for residents including oap's and children. What a pity that in view of the dangerous situation in the village of Hill Ridware where motorists speed through without any consideration the council doesnt instal these ramps and hopefully slow traffic down. ANNE
So David thinks simply that it is just all about the government getting money off motorists. Well David if you don't want the government to have your money the answer is quite simple really--don't speed! This goverment has spent millions of pounds trying to save lives by trying to make drivers slow down. (What a waste of time and money when you see the dumb heads speeding on our roads!) So why shouldn't they recoup some of the money back? These cameras cost money and fines from motorists stupid enough to get fined for speeding go towards their cost and upkeep not to mention administration costs. There is only one reason the cameras are needed and that is because drivers break the law by speeding. Dave (Hednesford)
Joan, Hill Ridware may have speeding car problems, but so have 99% of towns and villages across the UK. There are simply not enough Police to cover the problems. Until the governemt make it law that every car on UK roads has to use speed control technology then speeding cars are a fact of life. Why won't the government implement this technology......because current policy brings in masses of revenue. Barry
The law is too soft on speeding drivers.The fines are far too low. WENDY
I think it would be a good idea if a team of speed wardens, similar to traffic wardens ect, were formed. They could drive around in UNMARKED vehicles filming speeding and tailgating drivers and then sending out fines. They would be self financing as their wages could be taken from the fines. They could work on a commission and bonus scheme so that for the higher the amount of criminal drivers caught the more income they would receive. The new unit would replace speed cameras which are too visible and arent really catching enough culprits as everyone knows where they are.They would not personally have to face motorists so would not have any hassle. Their sole function being to film, record and fine by letter. Minister of Transport please note! Joey
Drivers travel far too fast nowadays.There should be a maximum speed of 30mph on all roads except motorways which should be 40mph. Darren
I really think it is about time that speeding drivers were dealt with more seriously by the courts. John Power is right when he states that The faster you are travelling when you have an accident the more serious the consequences will be. Drivers who break the law by speeding have had a good innings. Now is the time to start getting tough with them! David
Its all about revenue generation, no more no less. The accident Stats are vague at best and there seems little stsstical evidence that thay have had any impact whatever on road accidents. The only plus is the revenue generated for the government. The concequences of having folk like Jags in power. Shaun Kirby
Whist driving on the M6 in pouring rain a couple of days ago I witnessed some appalling driving.Drivers were tailgating at 70 plus mph despite the torrential rain. Don't these half wits realise that they would have no chance at all of stopping in time if the vehicle in front had to brake in an emergency. It does not matter what car, tyres or brakes you have, under this type of road condition you should keep a sensible distance from the vehicle in front. John Power
Lorry drivers who hog the middle lane on motorways for mile after mile whist trying to overtake other lorry drivers are in my mind just plain ignorant. These so called professional drivers cause miles of traffic tailback behind them without any consideration for following vehicles.But the most annoying thing about these idiots is when you are driving properly at the correct speed limit and they creep up behind you and drive inches away from the rear of your vehicle. Professionals? Rubbish! Gordon
Justin London is obviously a bad driver who has no regard for other road users, little knowledge of the highway code and no regards for road safety or the law. It is people like him who make it necessary for safety cameras to be used. While there are drivers about with his mentality our lives are being put at risk. This fool openly admits that he tailgates other drivers who are doing 70mph(maximum legal speed limit) on the motorway. I wonder if it has ever occurred to his feeble mind as to what would happen if the vehicle he is following so closely had to stop in an emergency. He would have no chance of avoiding an accident,probably a fatal one. He even has the audacity to criticise other drivers who are driving properly and legally. What a stupid person he is! Joan
The new, costly, laser type , flashing speed limit warning sign that has been erected in the village of Hill Ridware on the, sometimes very busy, B5014 has made no difference whatsoever in slowing down speeding motorists and motorcyclists travelling through the village at sometimes double or even treble the legal speed limit of 30mph. There are three bad bends and a school so it is just a matter of time before an accident occurs. It is about time that the police carried out some speed checks in this area in order to catch and fine some of these culprits. Jean
It is no good moaning about speed safety cameras taking money off motorists. If motorists drove properly they wouldn't have to pay a penny. So who is at fault? Colin
As some drivers resent being fined when they break the law by speeding and resort to calling the cameras silly names like "cash cows" why doesnt the goverment do away with fines and start banning drivers for all speeding offences?These culprits could lose the use of their car for say 3 months for a first offence, 6months for a second offence and so on. If they persistantly refuse to drive properly then their cars and driving licences should be taken off them all together. Phyliss
I think Justin should give up driving. He obviously doesn't want to drive properly and is a danger to the drivers that do. Garry
Tailgating is classed as dangerous driving. So if you get caught you could end up losing your licence. Donna
Drivers who are forever bleating and moaning about speed cameras should take a look at their driving habits. There is nothing wrong with speed cameras. They are doing a really great job in catching out drivers who will not drive carefully and responsibly.It is no good blaming speed cameras if you break the road traffic law by speeding.It is YOUR OWN FAULT. Victoria
Speed cameras are here to stay, until sattelites can check our speed everywhere we go, at all times, then we had better be on our best behaviour all the time. Why does Justin London think there is a fast lane? the speed limit is 70mph on all the lanes of a motorway. I do think that people do not use the lanes properly though, some NEVER moving out of the centre lane. That is really dangerous. Dave (Hednesford)
Justin London, what a total meat head you really are. 1, Speed is relevant if the car you’re driving is not designed to be driven at high speed. (ie a ford Ka compared to a BMW Z4) 2, Tyres, if your tyres are not designed for braking and cornering at high speed then you could be in trouble. 3, Road conditions, roads in this country are not actually the best in the world so in wet or greasy conditions they are even worse. 4, Other road users may not be aware of road runner coming up behind them at the next island and then it's too late when they cut you up. 5, As a courier, if you’re driving a van or lorry there is no way you should be speeding. Courier drivers are the worst culprits for causing excessive braking on the roads because of erratic driving. All courier vehicles should be fitted with the new tracking system that tells people what speed your going. Yes I do speed on open roads such as major A & M roads but only when circumstances allow it. I don’t believe in the overkill speed cameras but I do believe in cameras in towns and villages and around schools etc. I also believe that the Police need powers to stop prize prats like you from killing or maiming people. Dave
I hope that all the bad drivers out there who get caught speeding and deservedly fined and have their licences endorsed remember to inform their car insurance companies, even though their premiums will increase quite significantly. If you do not inform your car insurance company your car insurance may not be invalid. Stan
Why all the fuss about safety cameras? All you have to do is to drve safely and properly by not speeding. No fines .No endorsements.Whats wrong with these people? Danny
Courier drivers like Justin London closely followed by lorry drivers are the worst culprits for dangerously speeding and tailgating on our roads. Just watch them on the motorways. What loonies they are! Pete(Cannock)
If drivers are slamming on their brakes at speed cameras(Justin) then they are driving too fast anyway. What we need is many more spot checks by the police preferably without warning signs. These drivers who will not drive properly need catching and fining! Ann
I am very surprised that Justin London can find the time to contribute to this web site with all his racing about and tailgating other drivers. Breaking the law on a daily basis. Perhaps next time he makes a contribution he may may come up with some sensible comments instead of the self pitying dribble he has come out with so far. John Power
Well Justin London to say that speed is irrelevant is a rather silly statement to make when you consider that speed is the main reason for accidents, however they may be caused, to be more severe than they have to be. Speed can be the difference between life and death. Judging you by your letter I don't think that you are a very good driver. Perhaps you are in the wrong job if you are so frustrated and stressed out. Please, for all our sakes,change your job to one where you do not have to continually risk your and other peoples lives with your poor driving.You may not have had an accident yet but you may have one soon from what you have told us about the way that you drive. Slow down Justin. No job is worth dying for! Stan
I look at the comments on this site on a regular basis but they never seem to be kept up to date by the people in charge of them. Just for the record I personally feel that any methods used to stop dangerous driving such as speeding and tailgating should be increased with stiffer penalties. WEBMASTER REPLY: We recognise that this messageboard is very active and we do endeavour to update it as often as possible... We do make sure that it's updated at least every week.. and sometimes daily... it all depends on our workload from other areas of the site. Dave (Hednesford)
Speed limiters are the only solution to speeding. However, why should the government make limiters law on our roads when they can make such a ridiculous amount of money from speeding motorists. If our glorious politicans cared about life that much, no car would be mechanically allowed to go over the speed limit. It's all about money from there point of view. Only this week, figures released show an increase in deaths on the road because of the most foul crime on the road, drink driving. Apparently not enough officers to carry out the old checks that police used to do. Need I say more............ FIn
Speed cameras in residentials and commercial areas are a create idea. Camera's in an area which is prone to accidents due to a bad design in the road stupid idea. Am I the only one who thinks that if a section of road is prone to accidents then it SHOULD be changed. Also we have signs plastered all over motorways for tempoary speed restricitions, so why not set the motorway speed limit to 120 and turn those restrictions on at times where there are a lot of traffic, and then use speed camaeras to enforce them. Last time i checked when i was doing 87 on the motorway at 2am with no cars to be seen there was VERY little chance of an accident justin london
it really is down to awarness,consideration of other road users and not taking silly chances speeed is irrelevant,many comments from ppl saying there sick of being tailgated as a courier its imensly frustrating trying to earn a living and getting held up buy mr/mrs righteous sticking to the speed limit in the fast lane MOVE!! your the PROBLEM its that simple .just ignoring me behind you cause your doing 70 is pig bloody ignorant and a sure way to cause an accident in this stressed out life of chasing money i dont have the time to fart about,im 31 never had an accident it just comes down to sticking within ur limits dont take risks and be considerate i always move over if someones coming up behind and i see them along way off as im always looking whats going on around me .its shocking to see how many ppl out there drive around in there own little world without a thought of whats going on around them ...think ahead .very important spped cameras are NOT doing anything to help the sudden braking that goes leads to bangs all the time its plain and simply a revenue earner stop concentrating on the cameras concentrate on yourself and other ppl and just be bloody aware!!!! Alan
As an ex ambulance driver I have had to attend many many road accidents where drivers and their passengers have been killed needlessly just for the sake of speed. A lot of these accidents could have been avoided or would have not been fatal if the vehicles involved had not been travelling so fast. Ask any emergency crew member who has to cut these people, dead or alive, out of their vehicles what they think. They will all tell you that speed is the main reason for people getting killed. The ill informed people who say that accidents have nothing to do with speed should be made to go out with the emergency teams and see for themselves. I am pretty sure they would soon change their minds and perhaps even start to drive properly by not speeding for the sake of it. Dennis Feeney
Speed cameras are just one more hazzard to be observed by the driver who already has enough to watch without 'big brother' I can recollect one occasion when I was alerted by the flash of a speed camera indicating the driver in front of me was speeding; but it took just one second that I had my eyes off the road I almost knocked down a child who had been with her mother and ran into the road. By the way I wasn't speeding, the other motorist had just passed me. Just like seat belts they have some good points but had I been wearing a seat belt one day in 1980's? I might have been killed, as it was, the fact that I had not been wearing one I was still alive, so said the surgeon. It was not compulsery then to wear a seat belt. Do away with the cameras but for drivers who persist in speeding make the penalty £250 for the first offence and loss of licence for subsequent offences; say six months. Dave
I think that the police should get off their backsides and start saving a few lives by clamping down on drivers who speed and tailgate other drivers. John Power
It is a well known fact that the faster you are travelling when you have a collision, however it is caused, the more likely you , your passengers or someone else will be killed or badly injured but still we get idiots who speed. We have these foolish people coming on to this and other web sites telling us all kinds of rubbish about how speeding has nothing to do with accidents or road safety. Are these nut cases completely ignorant? Dont they know anything about how to drive properly? Have they never read the highway code?Why do they constantly blame the police, authorities, speed cameras and everything else when it is they who are at fault?Would these pathetic individuals have the same attitude if one of their family or a friend was killed needlessly just because some selfish self centred maniac drove too fast. An accident that need not have caused a death if he/she had been travelling slower?What has happened to good driving? Why does everyone have to drive at ridiculously fast speeds or follow ,suicidally, a few inches from the car in front?Where are our traffic police? Why has this situation been allowed to happen?Why arent drivers who deliberately speed and tailgate caught more often and dealt with more severely by the courts? Garry
Drivers who speed should be treated the same as drivers who drink. They should lose their licences and be made to sit another driving test. Donna
We urgently need more speed cameras in Staffordshire. It is a nightmare driving with all the drivers who speed and tailgate. Why is it allowed? Jerry
Ann, most of what Stuart has said is very sensible and contains the sort of points found in Roadcraft, the police drivers handbook. You might find it an interesting read. Peter, if *you* had read the Highway Code you'd have noticed "keep left unless overtaking". Nowhere does it add "unless you are travelling at the posted speed limit". Tell me Alan, would you drive at 40mph on an empty motorway in good conditions if that was the posted speed limit? I assume so, despite the fact you'd spent years driving on it previously at 70mph. Even various senior police figures have called for 80mph limits on motorways. I suppose they don't what they're talking about? Actually Alan/Damion, roads are safer than they were previously. Death rates have been dropping for decades. John P, my point is that *the law* (that we must all blindly follow remember) says cameras can only be placed at accident blackspots. So is road I comment on a blackspot (in which case why the 33% rise in speed limit) or are the cameras placed illegally? Hilary, you'd be better looking out your windows for hazards than staring at your speedo. This is just the problem with the current safety campaign, half the country driving around thinking they are safe drivers because they don't exceed speed limts. Same people who drive at 70mph in fog on motorways - "but I wasn't speeding....". Tim, simple reason being that Durham's Chief Constable believes in stopping unsafe drivers rather than people who simply exceed speed limits. He uses a special device called a "traffic cop". John, yes the "travel everywhere at 40mph" drivers. They might be travelling below many speed limits but are they safe? Ian
I agree with most of Stuart's comments. David Hill is obviously a prat, though. Nuff said! Just read the prat's comment! Shaven-headed would-be racer. My car would burn his off anytime, but I drive sensibly though not always inside artificial limits. Anne
Judging by all the sensible people in favour of speed cameras who are leaving comments on this web site I think it is fairly obvious that the vast majority of drivers want them and that the only people objecting to them are just pea brained low standard drivers who havent got the common sense to know any better. Dave
Now that police forces are being merged with more than likely even more man power cuts I hope that far more speed cameras will soon be introduced to do the at one time job of the traffic police.The present standard of driving on our roads has reached an appalling all time low with drivers totally disregarding road safety by dangerously speeding and tailgating. Instead of cutting down on police man power and speed restriction methods the powers that be should be increasing them. Philip Castle
I have a rear view camera fitted...a prosecution every time :) Adrian Z
Speed Cameras are a money making gimmick nothing more. Police use many underhand tactics to entrap drivers such as clocking you as you are building up speed into a faster road area. The police park just above a slip road or on the boundary of a speed change to catch you out. As for speed cameras save lives, keep dreaming, they just cost the living no amount of fines save lives the law should get real. Marion
Common sense tells us that if you have speed detterents such as speed cameras then accidents will drop. The only people who could possibly object to these speed cameras are the cry babies who have broken the speed limit and want to blame everyone else and anything else for their bad driving. Harry
So Tim reckons Government figures show that accidents are fewer in areas without cameras. Piffle! Accidents are not fewer anywhere! Read your newspaper, watch your local news. No doubt the government are coming up with these figures because they realise that if they show a positive view to safety cameras they could lose the votes of many of the motorists who have,so rightly, been fined because of the cameras.In the run up to the last election the Tories said that they did not approve of safety cameras ( how low can you get when trying to get votes?) and now the present government are trying to copy them with silly made up figures. Speed cameras are doing a magnificent job in catching selfish drivers who speed and risk accidents! Nigel
Yes John good driving does stop accidents full stop. Good driving means that you do not speed or follow too close behind other drivers. That is bad driving! Peter(Cannock)
A driver who tailgates other drivers is a dangerous driver, risking not only his own life but also lives of other people. Drivers who drive too close to vehicles in front, no matter what speed the other vehicle is doing, are deliberately committing an offence and should be dealt with very harshly by the courts. John Power
It is all very well, John, for you to say pull over for idiots who tail gate you but what happens when it is not possible for you to pull over? The best way to treat these dopes, especially lorry drivers, is to slow right down then at least when they run into the back of you if you have to brake in an emergency the accident may not be quite so bad. Don't pull over for these maniacs-they are breaking the law! Andy
This is a money making scheme, take it from the horses mouth. The Police authority and local council get a percentage of all revenue from these cameras/vans. Aam
Can anybody tell me how much money staffs making from these so called safty camras, I think over 6 million a year. So people this is a another tax on working class. This is time we realise the new ways of making money and you all know a cop can do 120 on these road without emergency. I just gonna say stop sucking blood from poor class pete
If speed cameras are for safty not for quick cash why is it we have two cameras one each way on a stretch of road with only aprox 15 houses on it within 1/2 a mile the rest bieng industrial estates yet on a road around the corner there is a supper market 2 schools and seval hundred houses the only diference bieng the first is a 30 and the later a 40 and we all no witch is easier to creep over.I also agree that cameras contribute to accidents because how can you see the car in front brake suddenly or the dog run out in the road or even worse a child if you a stairing at the speedo making sure you only pass the camera at 30 then hit them John
I'm glad the slagging match has now finished, Good driving stops accidents full stop. I live on the edge of a 30 limit the national signs is 5oo yards away, people constantly exceed the 30 down my road the heavy breaking in front of the gatso proves this however, what I find the most annoying are the drivers that exceed the 30 limit and then hit the nationals and then only drive at 40. Sorry I just dont get it, are these the same people that constantly go on about tail gaters? theres a very simply solution to tail gaters pull over and let them pass. Safe and happy driving. Cheers John Tim
According to figures published by the government in the last few months counties with no sped cameras have had a much higher percentage drop in accidents fatal, serious and none serious than ones with speed cameras. Indeed there is a strong coloration between the number of cameras and the size of the drop in fatalities with counties where there are large numbers of speed cameras doing by far the worst. Damion
I agree entirely with you Karen. Car manufacturers should not be allowed to produce cars that can be driven faster than the legal speed limit. All cars should be fitted with tachometer type devices that can be checked for speeding offences. The law should become really tough with drivers who dangerously tailgate the vehicle in front. Any driver involved in an accident where speed or tailgating are contributory factors should be heavily penalised perhaps even having their car confiscated and being banned from driving. Our roads are becoming more and more unsafe with multi pileups on motorways etc and a lot of fatalities could be avoided if drivers drove properly at the correct speed limit. Of course you will always get daft people trying to convince us that its okay to speed and risk lives.The excuses they come up with would be laughable if it wasn't for the fact that people are getting killed every day! JohnPower
Obviously, Simon,you have to be involved in an accident to kill someone but that death could probably have been avoided if the vehicles involved had been travelling slower at the point of impact.It is not fantasy Simon it is fact. Danny
Stuart you have offended the older generation of drivers with your stupid and childish comments. What a pathetic small minded individual you are. Grow up and learn to drive properly! Hilary
If being a self righteous speedo watcher means keeping my speed down to avoid a collision being more serious than it need be then I am glad to be labelled as such. John Power
It is stupid waiting for a place to become an accident blackspot before putting a speed camera there. These cameras should be placed everywhere to stop idiots from speeding and causing accidents. Ann
No wonder we need safety cameras with low standard drivers like Stuart on our roads. Peter(Cannock)
Just thought I had better mention to Stuart that the absolute maximum speed limit is 70mph so anyone doing that speed is not hogging the road. Instead of contributing a load of rubbish to this web site chum try reading up on the Highway code you obviously know very little about it. ALAN
To say that drivers can drive above the legal speed limit if they feel it is 'appropiate' is a totally irresponsible statement to make.(Jerry). It is never appropiate to speed and risk lives. Good drivers do not take unneccesary risks by speeding when they feel like it. Good drivers do not tailgate other cars. Roads have never been more unsafer than they are now mainly due to the ever growing number of motorists who think that they can drive just anyway they like once they have a driving licence. Try looking in the newspapers Jerry. Accidents are increasing all the time. What we need is for the government to introduce mobile speed wardens doing spot checks(no warning signs) to catch and fine speedsters and tailgaters on the spot. Much stiffer penalties are needed. Karen
The best way to stop the idiotic speeders is to reduce the ability of cars to go so fast. Why oh why do we need cars that go from 0-60 in 3 seconds or whatever when there are very few roads where you can legally drive at that speed, and why we need cars that can go over 70 when that is the top limit on roads in Britain anyway is totally beyond me. The car manufacturers are as much to blame as the idiot drivers if you ask me. Danny
I agree Phil.The police are far too soft with tailgaters Jerry
If cameras are only put up in accident blackspots then can someone explain to me why the speed limit approaching Festival Park from the A500 was raised from 30 to 40 at the same time 4 cameras were installed? Doesn't sound like a good way to treat an aciident blackspot to me. Useful for revenue generation though... I've not read these pages for a while, it seems to have been overrun by self-rightous speedo watchers. Wake up, blindly following speed limits doesn't make you good drivers. The difference between good and bad drivers is largely down to their level of awareness and their consideration of other road users, not how fast they drive. Good drivers travel at speeds appropriate to the conditions, which may be above or below speed limit depending on circumstances. In my view if the government wants to lower road deaths (on our already comparatively safe roads) then they should tackle the causes of accidents (lack of awareness, inability, tailgating, drink, drugs, tireness etc.) rather than attempt to reduce the severity of accidents by reducing speed. If people didn't collide in the first place, their speed would be irrelevant. Cameras are next to useless at *preventing* accidents, unlike the properly trained traffic police that they have all but replaced. John
In every day driving now on our roads there are only three things on a drivers mind. Keep one eye open for the cash cows, the other on the speedo and how to nagotiate the traffic calming measures without ripping your suspension off. Any other potential hazards on or in the road dont get a look in. I bet the new driving test dose not cover any of these everyday hazards. If you are unlucky enough to have an accident at least you can say i did not see it and i was only doing 30 Nikki
I believe that speed cameras are a good thing outside schools, shops and other busy places where there is increased risk of injuring someone, but please tell me why the police seem to spend the majority of their time trying to trap motorists on roads where it is not necessary for them to be. There is a mobile police "trap" on a road near to me and as far as I'm aware there has never been a minor accident there never mind a serious one. In my mind the police need to concentrate there efforts on the other idiots on the road like the boy racers who have no thought for others. Stuart
Speeding is not the worst thing, bad driving is. Roundabouts. Indicate, and properly. Stay in your lane on dual carriageway roundabouts. Motorways. Don't hog the lanes. If you don't want to go over 70, move over. Indicate, again properly. Don't leave overtaking till the last minute, match the speed of the lane you want to enter. Change gear when overtaking, don't drop into the 3rd lane going 2mph faster than the middle lane. Trucks, don't try and overtake out of the slipstream of another truck only to find you're going 1mph faster. Junctions. Position yourself correctly in the lane for the direction you are going. Don't brake if you aren't slowing down. Get off the pedal. Don't overbrake and turn into a juction after slowing to 0mph. Cameras. Not all cameras are 40mph, so don't go through every one at 35mph. Overtaking. If you can't drive well enough to overtake the truck/tracktor/OAP then at least leave a gap between the vehicles so we can overtake you. Change down a gear and accelerate. Don't drive right up behind the slower vehicle and then can't see to over take, stay back and accelerate. Dual Carriageways. Sliproads, accelerate, accelerate, match the speed of the traffic. Do not slow down and STOP on a sliproad on. Sliproads, decellerate on a sliproad off, don't drop down to 30mph while you are still on the DC. Do not sit in the outer lane doing 60mph/70mph while, if drivers want to go faster behind you, move over, you are not there to uphold the speed limit. Don't stop to use the phone, urban clearway, no stopping. Parking. Don't dump your MPV/People carrier just anywhere when you drop the kids off. If you live to far away for them to walk, drop them half mile away, they needs some fresh air and excercise. Park in the lines, in between the lines! You shouldn't park on or oppsite junctions, remember? Others. If you go everywhere at 30mph, quit driving use the bus, support public transport. If you can't see over the wheel, get a cushion or a push bike. If you are old and don't realise you have the reactions of a sloth, use the bus. Get your shop mobility buggies off the road, do they have a car tax?! If you aren't in a hurry to get somewhere, walk or take a bus, some of us have to get to places. I'm out driving today, no doubt there will be 100 more annoying things, not speeding. David Hill
I paid out a lot of cash for my car so why shouldn't I speed if I want to? If anyone gets in my way I will tail gate them. Simon
Nice to see that John has resorted to name calling again! Sorry John, but I must draw your attention to the fact that you have to be involved in an accident to kill someone! Speed is not the root cause of road accidents, lack of concentration, road awareness, or consideration that other people use the roads usually is. Yes it makes the effects worse, but it is a fantasy that because people religiously stick to the speed limits that accidents will not happen and people will not be killed. I would be more happy to drive on roads where people concentrated on the road and its users, and not their speedos. Then again perhaps this is just me being Simple again eh John and Hilary. Karen
I am sick to death of being tailgated every time I go out in my car. Matt
Speed cameras are a waste of time!What is the point of having them if drivers are warned about them in advance by signs before they get to them. If a driver gets caught the fines are laughable.What good does it do fining them just £60 and giving them 3 endorsements? They should be banned to teach them a real lesson. There are no excuses whatsoever for speeding. Anne
I agree with Sue. The Police must do something to save all the lives of people who get killed each year by speeding drivers.We desperately need more safety cameras in Staffordshire which has more than its fair share of bad drivers. Steve Morton.
What a silly comment to make frazer. HILARY
Ian-stop worrying about other peoples cars and slow down! Simon-you are just talking rubbish! Phil
Drivers who tailgate are just out and out nutcases! fraser
Hope all you people who rant on about 'speed kills' don't go on holiday by air. Jet planes do 500 mph. Better to stay at home and have a nice cup of cocoa Bill
Don't speed! End of problem! John Power
Simon you must be a bit simple when you come out with comments like speed does not kill. Don't take any notice of the hype put out by some of the anti-speed camera web sites they are talking through their backsides.Speeding and tailgating(when will the police please start booking tailgaters?) drivers are just nut cases who should not be driving. These crimes should be dealt with more severely by the law. Whatever roundabout excuses and flimsy reasons you come up with Simon be rest assured SPEED KILLS. The faster you hit someone the more likely they OR YOU will die. Sue
To Hayley. I think that the police are doing a very worthwhile job if they are saving lives by catching motorists who risk killing and maiming people by having high speed accidents. If you got caught twice then you could not be a very good driver. Good drivers do not break the law by speeding. Joan
Driving standards have dropped to an all time low. A lot of drivers out there who are driving dangerously by speeding and tailgating deserve to get caught and fined. They have a total disregard for the law and road safety. It is no good trying to tell these people that they should drive properly because they havent got the intelligence to understand. So I am all in favour of speed safety cameras and mobile police checks as its the only way to teach them a lesson. Paul
Have been driving for thirty years, never had an accident. Any passengers I carry describe my driving as'careful and considerate,- even boring!'. Driving to work this morning along a straight, very wide, urban road; very few cars on the road, thinking about my day ahead. I suddenly spotted a mobile unit. Glanced at my speedo- probably doing 35 (in a 30 zone). Guess I will get a ticket. It's not the fine, or even the points that anger me. It's the fact that I will be punished for not checking my speedomoeter every ten seconds.Is this the kind of crime we need to punish? I feel things have gone too far! Simon
Has anyone read the latest report regarding road fatality figures for the past 12 months. Unfortunately for the Speed Camera supporters road fatalities in those regions employing speed cameras have actually reported an increase in road accidents and fatalities. This would clearly suggest as many have been saying that Speed Cameras do not necessarily reduce road fatalities. Chris is right that Speeding doesn't kill; anyone wishing to argue this should consider the situation of a loan driver, on a private stretch of road exceeding any speed you care to imagine. Will this driver instantly become another statistic - no, speed is not a cause of an accident merely an effect upon it! However it is blantantly obvious that it has a great impact on the effects of an accident, which is why Speed Cameras should be used at strict locations. Remember the boy who cried wolf? Overused mobile and static cameras simply add overwhelming urge to watch your speedometer and not the road. I know what I think will cause more accidents. hayley
I think cameras are rubbish!!! just money making devices . Ive been driving nearley 10 yrs with no accidents or points until i went to a particular part of the country that is littered with them and gained two tickets in 6 months one from a camera van have the police nothing better to do with there time ? mind you traffic officers arent the real police anyway are they ? !! Joanne
I was flashed by a speed camera two weeks ago. How quickly is it before I will know if I've been done for it? Mark T
It would be nice if the Staffs County Council website showing the locations of mobile safety camera units actually worked. Ian
Innapropriate speed is the danger. Relative speed is what kills, not absolute speed. If you hit a pedestrian at 40mph in a 40 zone, they are still as liable to be dead. If you hit one at 30 in a 30, it doesn't matter to the pedestrian that you where not speeding. As for the Highway Codes breaking distances, when where they last updated? A modern car with ABS will stop a lot quicker than an old car. Even a modern car without ABS will proberly out break the HC's limits. Tailgaters are seriously nuts! Also bad, realy bad, is when you are cruising down a fast road, within the limit and there is a car in the left hand lane that decides to pull out without looking from behind a wagon and they are doing a lot less than you but have been sitting behind that wagon for ages. They pull out when you are just about within full breaking effort from their back end! How many drivers either pull out with out looking or who think that once they indicate they can pull out? But as these guys useally drive less than the legal limit, they very rarely get any kind of a ticket or even a pull. Then there are cars which are driven on our roads in a state that is totaly unsafe. They have been MOTed at a "Friendly" MOT station, but any one worth their salt would have condemed them years ago! I know of one car that was driven from Shefield to Nottingham with a broken fron suspension spring. The car was rotten beyond beleif and had been in a bad state for quite some time, but it had not long since passed an MOT. But driven below the speed limit meens no action. I know of another car that can best be described as a shed. I do not know where the car lives normaly or I would inform the local constabulary of its state. (The first one I mention has since been scrapped) What about people without licences or insurance or driunk or under the influence and know it and drive below the limit? These guys will not get flashed by the cameras. We need more traffic cops on the roads, not speed cameras. Why have two cameras (one each side) on a nearly straight 70mph DC with limited access? Why change a limited access express way to 60mph and put up cameras? One of which is in an area where every one has to slow down as you approach the M56 at Jcn12? Safety? Na! Money raising? Yes! On Top Gear last night, it was revealed that in some areas where camera numbers had gone up, so too had fatalities. But in Durham with no cameras, deaths had gone down! Work that one out! Near Schools etc, 20mph durring School hours, yes! But on the M4 near Swansea? If its about safety, why on the A69 was there a camera hidden behind a large route sign? Lights cameras, yes. Too many idiots jump red lights and think its ok for them. While I am on about lights, how come some lights have zero over lap? (Time both roads are on Red) M57/M62/A5080/A5300 the roundabout has zero over lap on the lights. So any one just making it through in one direction is in probable risk of getting side swiped by an over eager starter or even some one who is approaching the lights when they change. Local road designers can go a long way to reduce the number of accidents in this country. More trafic cops and better veihical safety inspections will do a lot more. Ann
If you speed and get caught by a safety camera it is entirely your own fault. There are far too many drivers speeding now. Phil
We need more cameras to stop speedsters. Joan
The new,costly,laser type, flashing speed limit warning sign that has recently been erected in Hill Ridware on the, sometimes very busy B5014,has made no difference whatsoever in slowing down speeding car drivers and motorcylists travelling through the village at sometimes double or even treble the legal speed limit of 30mph. It is about time that the police carried out some speed checks in this area in order to catch and fine some of these drivers. John Power
I agree with you Di that speeding may not cause a lot of accidents but the fact is when these accidents do happen, however they are caused, the consequences are far more serious than they may have been if the vehicles involved had not been speeding. Unfortunately lots of drivers think that it is safe to speed------until they hit something! John Power
To Alan.H.Dale. Never heard of your so called initiative mate! But no doubt if it does exist it is yet another one of those crack pot things that some dim wit ,cry baby, who has been caught out by a speed safety camera has come up with. When will these dopes learn that they cant drive just how fast they like risking every one elses safety with their stupid irresponsible behaviour! Please don't come back on this forum with your feeble tin pot views as to why drivers should be able to speed if they want to. Most accidents are far more serious, however they may be caused, if they happen at speed. Alan H Dale (Norfolk, ex Stoke area)
As I run The Sensible Speeds Initiativein opposition to the Slower Speeds Initiative, will JOHN POWER kindly reveal his ADVANCED,defensive-driving qualifications? Di Donnelly
I don't believe that it's speeding that causes accidents, but a culmination of events - tiredness is a big factor, sometimes people think they can handle a big powerful car when they are inexperienced, it is very possible to drive fast safely - look at F1 John Power
Well Chris you started calling me names first so I just retaliated tit for tat. Kids stuff really I suppose. Anyway, you are quite right about me saying that motorway accidents are caused entirely by speed. This is obviously wrong and I really don't know why I put that. I was responding to a comment from Pete who said that most motorway accidents are caused by driver error at high speed. Of course there are other factors such as the ones you mentioned. I'm glad your a responsible person Chris and not any of the things I accused you of being just as I feel that I am not all of the things that you have called me. Chris Hope
To John Power - Unfortunately it would seem you have assumed far too much about me. I made a valid point against one of your comments (speeding is entirely responsible for accidents on motorways) but you simply fail to address this completely. Are you admitting it was a silly thing to say? And to label me a dope, an idiot, I drive pathetically, I'm non-law abiding, that I race about and tailgate. I would like to make you aware that I have no endorsements on my licence, I do not speed, I drive sensibly and I have never been pulled over by the police. I am 30 years old and work for the 3rd largest company in the world. I believe that me undertaking the above mentioned actions would not only risk my life but the lives of others, as well as my job. If you would like to carry on this arguement in an adult manner then please do... don't just call me names, try to belittle me and ignore my points. Are you scared of my veiws? Please feel free to reply here... I'll wait for your reply. Chris. John Power
I hope That now the government, in its infinate wisdom, has decided not to introduce any more speed cameras for the time being, it will employ more traffic police to catch the dangerous drivers who speed excessively and suicidally tailgate other motorists. Sue
I too agree with John. The law is far too soft with drivers who speed and risk accidents. I am all in favour of safety cameras. It is pretty obvious that they are needed. Mark
I have no problem with cameras placed as prevention at accident black spots. Unfortunatley the wording on the legislation permiting the use of speed cameras states it must be placed within 400m of the black spot.This i feel being used cynically ie 398m away and some times even in a diferent street. Yet still strickly speeking complying with legislation, but not serving to protect peoples lives as was originally proposed. Furthermore it was the preservation of human life that got the bill through and circumvented human rights laws. The nearest speed camera to my office is about a mile down the road. In the 10 years I have been here, there have been two fatalities on a cross roads by the school and yet the camera is a good 400m away. So people brake for the camera and by the time they go through the cross roads by the school they are doing 40+ again. I believe the only reason the camera is where it is because it's partly obscured by the traffic lights and that way it catches most new commers to the area as the road is open country side on one side and looks like it should be 40. Reacently I have been acussed of speeding in a section of road works on the A483. I was aware of the mobile arrive alive van being used every day and took great care not to exeed the speed limit. I have been accused of driving at 58mph in a temporary 40mph zone. I know I was not yet my solicitor has told me that I stand little to no chance of convincing the court I was not speeding. The fact is we can no longer question technology. Which I find frightening because even if the technology has no glitches (which I doubt)it is still operated by people who do. I have a clean licence and have had for more than 20yrs I feel very agrieved that I've been accused never mind the thought of a fine and points when I know I'm innocent. Cameras have a real and rightful place in road safety, but unfortunatly so far that is not what there being used for. I believe better safety devices in cars ie brakes airbags and better monocoqe design is the real reason for the reduction in road deaths over the last few years and not cameras. John Power
Only fools would disagree that speed kills. The faster you are travelling the more serious your accident will be. It doesnt matter how the accident is caused, whether you fall asleep at the wheel, have a puncture or some other mechanical fault etc etc. the faster you are speeding the more likely you, your passenger or some one else will die. Peter(Cannock)
I completely disagree with you Chris. What John says makes a lot of sense. Everyone knows that speed cameras are essential in order to cut down the ever rising deaths and injuries caused by drivers who speed. John is not any of the things that you have so rudely called him. He sounds like a man who has a goal in life to promote road safety and get rid of people such as yourself who havent much of an idea how to drive properly. John Power
To Chris Hope. I wont call you an idiot because with your attitude I feel that enough people already think that you are one and you have probably been called one many times in your life already. If you had any common sense at all Chris you would know that my views are shared by the vast majority of good law abiding motorists who are sick and tired of of dopes like you who risk our lives with your pathetic driving, racing around and tailgating. You sound like a person of very low intelligence so I am not going to waste any more of my valuable time answering your comments as you are obviously too thick to have an intelligent debate with. John Power
To Margaret and Rosie. If you think that speed cameras that save lives are silly then you must both be silly too. To Nick. Why dont you just start driving more safely instead? John Power
To N40 Only a dimwit like you could say that Alfie is trying to invade your privacy when he is filming tailgaters.That means that you are probably one of those suicidal dangerous idiots that are likely to get filmed by him when you tailgate him. Keep it up Alfie! Ignore dopes like N40 who are too stupid to give their proper names! Chris Hope
To John Power again - Forgot to mention, feel free to call me an IDIOT if you wish. It seems like the only word you know when someone annoys you!! hahaha! See you when I overtake you in your Micra doing 25mph and I wave and point at your pathetic driving skills!! You... erm... idiot! :o) Chris Hope
To John Power - you seem to be the main man on this comments board. Can I just say that after carefully reading most of your comments that I conclude you are nothing but an ill-informed, self-righteous moral bully. To select one example from your pearls of wisdom... "Accidents on the motorway are caused entirely by speeding...". Sorry but this made me laugh out loud. Are you saying that people sticking to the speed limits dont cause accidents by not paying attention to the road, falling asleep, tyres blowing out, mechanical failure or some other reason for losing control of their vehicle? I think you should seriously think before you write another comment as you are making yourself sound like a pompous prat and look very silly. In fact, keep leaving comments, its an entertaining read!! andy900
Oh dear Anne, before you tell others that they should improve their grammar please learn to spell it correctly first.....lol...!!!! Nick
Speed cameras on pointless roads are only for the revenue! I'm glad this new aa map showing all camera and mobile locations is coming out, so i can plan my journey with less cameras Margret and Rosie
I think that all speed cameras are really really really silly too Ray N.40
Now listen here John Power what alf's doin is invasion of privacy which if im right is illegal it like me walking behind you filming you! Which to be honest none of us would want so if i were you i keep you mouth shut! John Power
Why do drivers speed anyway? If you speed and get caught by a speed camera you will normally be fined and get three endorsements on your licence. If you are daft enough to keep on speeding and keep getting caught by cameras then you will lose your licence. As most drivers now depend on their car for work they could quite easily end up losing their jobs too. No job means no money so the next thing to go is the house (not to mention their marriage when they start having constant arguments about money with their spouses). And---just to top it all-when they do finally get their driving licences back they will find that their car insurance premiums have increased considerably. Is it worth it? Oh and before I forget if you are caught tailgating you could be prosecuted for dangerous driving and lose you licence on a first offence-think about it! Anne
Rob... You really must learn to spell properly and improve your English Grammer if you want to submit messages. If your driving is as bad as your writing you have a problem. John Power
To Unknown. Why on earth dont you use a proper name? Do you feel guilty about the comments that you are making.Very sad. Alfie is not a sad person but you certainly are if you do not realise that Alfie is trying to do the job of our "never to be seen" traffic police by filming idiot suicidal, potential manslaughtering drivers who drive dangerously by tailgating vehicles in front of them. Keep it up Alfie dont let dopes like unknown put you off with their stupid comments. Jean
Did anyone see the programme on BBC 2 about road safety where the police caught a driver tailgating? He was took to court and prosecuted for dangerous driving, and banned for 6 months. Its great to know that the police are at long last catching these suicidal nut cases. John Power
Many, many people are killed needlessly each year because of speeding drivers. If these driverd had been travelling more slowly at the point of impact a lot of lives could possibly have been saved. John Power
So what you are saying Richard is that its okay for some 60 people to be killed on our roads in 2003? How about if it was one of your family and friends who were one of the mere 60 people? I am sure you would adopt a more mature and intelligent attitude towards drivers who risk other peoples lives by speeding and tailgating dangerously. To call these drivers idiots is for the want of a stronger description. Incidentally the subject being dicussed in this web site is road safety not smoking. Richard
The road is specifically designed to accomodate cars. People (children inparticular) should be educated about the dangers of the roads. I don't believe a large amount of people are killed walking the pavements compared to those who run out dangerously into the roads. Regardless of speeds. Also, cameras do avert drivers' attentions from the road. Unknown
alfie i think your rather sad recording people why dont you get a new hobbie like trainspotting! Richard Versluis
In 2003 about 60 people a week were killed on the road. But smoking killed about 1600 people. Would it not be better to ban smoking right now, rather than pompously prattling on about who's an idiot driver. (...Hi John Power) ANN
I WOOULD LIKE CAMEREAS EVERYWHERE THEY WOULD SAVE HUNDREDS OF LIVES, I THINK NO ONE CAR COULD BE ABLE TO GO FASTER THAN 60MPH DANNY
YOU ARE JUST STUPIED IF YOU SPEED SPEEDING KILLS JUST STOP OR YOU WILL BE PHUNISHED John Power,
I totally agree with you Don. I'm glad that you agree that speed cameras are necessary and are doing a fine job by slowing idiot drivers down. Most SENSIBLE motorists are in agreement with speed cameras. Drivers who flout the law will be punished. John Power
Alex, to say that speeding doesn't kill is unfortunately a reflection on your own mentality. Only an idiot would think that exceeding the legal limit was a good idea. We can only hope that stupid drivers like you are soon going to be receiving their just reward. John Power
Peter. Congratulations on becoming a responsible driver and realising that accidents on motorways are caused entirely by speeding. Think before you put your foot down on your accelerator and then one day you may become a GOOD DRIVER instead of a BAD ONE. John Power
I totally agree with you Julie. Congratulations on realising that they only way to stop these idiots is to have their licenses suspended. If you drive properly, safely and responsibly at the correct speed you will not be flashed by a speed camera. The police should start a purge and catch some of these fools. John Power
Rob, you are obviously an idiot for exceeding the speed limit no matter what time of day it is. GOOD DRIVERS do not speed, and believe it or not 90mph is SPEEDING, speeding KILLS. I certainly do not see why you should be allowed to travel faster than all the sensible law abiding motorists. Try using your brains for once instead of driving like a fool; I hope you lose your license for the sake of all of us John Power
John, you would have to be an IDIOT to think that cameras caused those two accidents. Whether you like it or not speed cameras are doing a fine job by slowing drivers down and increasing road safety. All speed limits should be reduced Les
Alex, which motorways are you driving on? I mostly use the M6 and can say that some weeks I really think I should not. In recent weeks there have been an average of 2-3 incidents and judging by the length of the skid marks all were caused by travelling too fast John
Two people have been knocked down since they put up camera's on a main road near me. Seems werid that dont you think... Safty camera's lol come on. Those that think they are for safty are very naieve! I think the concept was probably good natured but too many councils have abused them... Rob
If speed camera's are just for safty then why fine? 12 Points and your out! Theres no need to fine, the only thing this does is prove to me that its for revenue! They are commenly put in places that are just silly. They dont pick-up stupid driving (e.g. tail-gating). I always stick to limits except in the great exception of driving from the north to the south of the UK where sometimes in the small hours I do around 90mph on the M1. No one around, My car (tires) are upto to it and I dont see a problem but then I guess thats comman sense Im using and the goverment want me to be some kind of drone. I do understand why speeding limits are imposed (for people who cant judge what speeds to travel at in built up area's). Oh and can the 1! person whos using capitals all the time please understand that this is the same as shouting! (even though this person has put different names down reading the comments its ovious!) WAYNE
If the police want to catch drivers breaking the law by speeding and tailgating they should do a few checks on the A51 between Eastern Avenue and the A461 island junction,near the Bowling Green Hotel, in Lichfield. Julie
Tailgaters are just stupid idiots who should have their licences taken off them. Peter
When accidents occur on motorways they are usually caused by driver error at high speed. Because of high speed driving these accidents usually result in multi vehicle pile ups. The vehicles are travelling too fast to stop in time. Speed limits should be reduced on all types of roads in view of the higher number of vehicles using them. The more vehicles there are the more accidents there will be so we must cut down on speeding to save more lives. John Power
Good for you Sarah.Drivers who tailgate are driving dangerously and the police should start a purge and catch some of these idiots. Phil
Alex you must be driving around with your eyes shut if you think motorway accidents are few. As a daily long distance motorway driver I can assure you that motorway accidents occur every day-usually caused by drivers making mistakes whist speeding and travelling too close to the vehicle in front. sarah
to all the tailgaters out there... do it to me, and i will go EVEN slower John Power
What you forgot to mention Alex is that in any accident or collision speed is a main factor regarding as to how severe the result of the impact will be. Speed cameras have been very successful since their introduction both in slowing traffic down and reducing the risk of high speed accidents and also saving consirable police manpower. If you drive properly, safely and responsibly at the correct speed you will not be flashed by a speed camera. Trevor
Anyone have a contact number for Tele-Traffic (featured Monday on BBC Midlands Today. Alex
Speeding doesn't kill, stupidity does. In fact very few lives have been saved by the cameras, although the police won't tell you this. Problems occur through the DIFFERENCE in speed, this is why so few accidents happen on motorways, and why the majority of accidents (fatal and otherwise) occur at junctions. Britains accident rate is one of the lowest in the world, yes almost 50% lower than the USA where everyone drives sedately, because of 2 reasons: we have roundabouts instead of deadly junctions, and because most distance travel is on the motorway. Speed cameras are there for 1 reason only, funding. On average, each camera makes the police, council and road authorities £22,000 per annum. Perhaps if this cash was used to pay for 5-yearly driving tests for all drivers (yearly tests for the over 70s) and junction replacement by the councils, we can improve Britains already impressive fatal accident numbers. Joan
The laser type speed limit warning sign that has been recently placed in Hill Ridware on the busy B5014 will make no difference at all to some of the drivers who often drive at double the legal speed limit of 30mph through the village. I feel that the police should carry out some speed checks in this area in order to catch and fine some of these idiots. Don
You only have to worry about speed cameras if you are breaking the law by speeding. Slow down, drive safely and properly and you wont have anything to worry about. Ann
Whats the matter Dave? Scared Alfie might catch you out tailgating him with his camera? Good luck Alfie. Phil
To Nancy. If you think that all speed cameras do is wear out your brake pads you must be travelling too fast any way! Speed cameras are not silly they are used, very successfully, for saving lives and save a lot of police man power. John Power
I totally agree with you Dave. If these drivers aren't prepared to drive within the law they should have their licences suspended pending another test. Peter
Now that the police are using unmarked cars in order to watch for and prosecute drivers tailgating vehicles in front of them I hope that this dangerous practice will soon cease nationally. Dave
I think that any driver caught speeding more than once should have their driving licence suspended until they have taken another driving test. Anne
How nice,Jacquie, it must be to live in an ideal dream world where all drivers drove with curtesy and consideration towards one another, driving with due consideration and allowing for road conditions and at safe speeds. What a pity that your dream will never be realised whist there are so many mindless ignorant drivers in our society who as soon as they sit behind a steering wheel think that they can do just as they please and speed as fast as they like regardless of safety. Wake up Jacquie! Harry
Just a point Paul, excellent and safe drivers do not speed. Only poor and irresponsible drivers speed. Excellent and safe drivers conform to speed restrictions and drive as instructed in the Highway Code. John Power
Congratulations Les on becoming a responsible driver and realising that speed kills. It is a shame that you have had to learn the hard way but obviously in your case it is a lesson well taught.There are thousands of drivers just like you Les who have been driving for years breaking the law by speeding and getting away with it. Now thank goodness with the increase in speed cameras etc these dangerous drivers are going to be receiving their just reward! It is a pity, now that speed cameras have become so successful in saving lives, that the police cant start a purge on drivers who deliberately tailgate the vehicles in front of them! John
I have been making further enquiries with regards to the A449/M54 northbound a service provider for the staffordshire county has looked at the road signs on this stretch of road and has stated they are in a "faded condition", I have also looked at the web site of the Caualty Reduction Partnership that advertise the local of the mobile sites the north bound carriage is not mentioned at all on there web sites, they clearly state they they are not a money making institution,so in that case why are they then "nicking" people just in front of the national signs, surely if they are after casualty reduction the camera would be better suited going to an accident black spot or a position on the road where it is a 70 to 40 and not 40 to 70, must of had a bad day in there publicised spots. If this is an accident black spot then why is the nationals there, if it is a black spot I will be the first to sign the petition to bring down the speed on that stretch of road. John Nancy A Bellmore
In reply to Jacquie. I partly agree. I've driven in the USA for quite a while now - and what a nice place to drive it is. No one cuts you up, no one tailgates you, and no one speeds. I put this down to not knowing if the other driver has a gun :-) The Police there, although as pig ignorant as they come, don't give you points, they just fine you instead. I believe this is a much better system - people in the UK have an emotional attachment to a clean license, and feel very resentful when they get 3 points. What's more, it doesn't modify their behavior in the slightest - A resentful person isn't open to change. Improving driver ability and attitude is the key, not these silly cameras, they only wear out your brake pads :-) Dave
To alfie and his tailgating camera That's got to be the saddest thing I've read here, get a life - please Likewise to those pompous people on here with the stuck Caps key. And before John kicks off again, I don't speed either but don't start thinking we have the same views Jeff
If the coppers reckon all those hidden mobile camera vans at Weston are not just for the money, stick a blooming fixed camera there and have done with it ! I do the legal 40 down that section of dual C, but I still jump out of my skin and brake when I go around the corner and see the blooming thing sitting there ! George Warburton
Regarding the multiple(!) mobile camera sites in the Weston area. I witnessed a car crash in that area a few years ago, and the evidence of a few more. The problem at the time WASN'T SPEEDING, but a poor junction layout. Since the Roads dept. improved the layout - no more crashes. They still made a pigs ear of it, like many other "improvements" but it was better than nothing. Eliminating the many other "bad junctions" in the area would do more to improve road safety than a 1000 mobile cameras. And yes, the mobile sites at Weston are money scams pure and simple, there have been zero incidents on that OPEN 100 yard section past the lights in the 8 years I've driven down there. Mike Dunston
To John re: speed camera scam at Weston Where did I mention the fixed camera(s) ? I'm talking about the MOBILE camera scam they are running in the 40 to 60 zone. Explain THAT in terms of safety... Likewise, I resent your implication, where did I say I ever speeded ? Get off your high horse John. Ryan
John I totally understand where you are coming from and Paul you are completely correct with your last statement. I have just been caught on the A449/M54 roundabout approach the same as you were, where just before the roundabout, the fast dual carriageway changes from 70mph to 40mph, with no advance warning of the limit change. The Staffordshire Police, notorious for revenue grabbing off motorists, were actually filming people coming through into the 40mph zone, positioned across on the OPPOSITE carriageway at a reverse angle, and to top it all off, were hidden behind trees. The Police administration dept themselves gave me this information, as they are obliged to. How anyone can see this as genuine speeding is beyond me. John Murphy
I agree with Paul, I have since made enquiries with the company that maintains the signs on that stretch of road and they have said that the 2 40mph repeaters are faded, I cannot establish where the new/refurbished signs have come from. It begs the question as to what they are policing on that section of road and exactly how far the camera is set for i.e it's focal point from the van, they can only be there for revenue, why police the last few yards in front of the nationals sign. If there is a saftey issue there then change the limit. 3 points plus 60 quid and the insurance knock on for the next 4 years. Thanks. Still P***ED OFF. John. Paul
I don't think anyone can dispute the fact that these things have improved road safety. However it seems that the mobile units are often placed to maximise revenue(e.g.just before the nationals on a straight, clear dual-carriageway ).The police need to be aware that this will result in many excellent and safe drivers being fined and this should not be the case. I think that much more should be done to prevent the truly appalling driving seen on many of our motorways. John
A449/M54, just came under the motorway island onto the 449 passed a car on my inside looked up the road to see a nationals accelerated to 50 saw the enforcement van infront of and I mean infront of the nationals kept my car at 50 not sure of the speed there. Myself wife and two kids could not see a repeater other than the nationals, tempted to slam the brakes on drove steady instead 3 points 60 quid, policing the last few yards infront of the nationals on straight and safe piece of road? the nationals are before a set of houses? bank holiday weekend, 25 years with a clean licence P***ED OFF. Jacquie
I am a firm believer that there shouldn't be speed limits at all. Now don't all jump up shouting "what an idiot", hear me out. If all drivers were taught to drive defensively and with curtesy to all other road users then they would drive at the most suitable speed for the road conditions and according to the weather. They should also take into account their own capabilities and also the capabilities of their vehicle. Driver error is the cause of all accidents. Drivers should be checked at least every 5 years and further training given if they fail to meet the standards set. I pride myself on my driving skills especially my anticipation of other road users. Fining people for speeding does nothing to educate them. Les
As a driver with a 30 year clean driving licence I was much aggrieved to get flashed 12 months ago. I paid up because I broke the rules and also attended the speed awareness course for an extra £90. My whole approach to speed was changed. I like to drive fast but on todays roads it wholly inapproppriate to exceed speed limits. I use the M6 every day and witness the apalling driving standards of the majority of road users. andy
they are safe but when they get you the flash is to bright John Power
Well Allen. You may be daft enough to own a fuel gobbling car but that is a luxury and was your choice.I certainly do not see why you should be allowed to travel faster than a sensible law abiding motorist! Whether you like it or not speed cameras are doing a fine job by slowing drivers down and increasing road safety. Whatever people say, and lets face it a lot of it is just sour grapes by drivers who have broken the law,speed cameras are an important neccessity and are here to stay. There are many highly technical devices in the pipe line to combat the ever increasing stupidity of some drivers who flout the law and eventually through their own fault these drivers will be punished and in some cases taken off the road. All speed limits should be reduced. Dave
Is that what it is to you Alfie? One big game about catching motorists? Allen
Its definitely time to revise the law regarding speed. Check the stopping distances in the Highway Code against the stopping distance of a modern car. I'm for a variable speed limit, passing a Primary School at 4pm at 30mph is more dangerous than passing the same Primary School at 50mph at 3 in the morning. (How many times have I been flashed up for dropping below the legal limit when passing the local Nursery in the morning) Driving at 60mph on the motorway in foggy or wet conditions is more dangerous than 90mph in good conditions. The speed camera is a blunt instrument and while there are many restrictions that are clearly way too conservative many motorists assume that all speed restrictions are wrong, they also see it as an obligation to drive at the maximum speed allowed. Reserve the fast lane for cars in the 2 litre plus tax band and raise the motorway speed limit in dry conditions! We pay more, we should be allowed to get there quicker. ANN
Good for you Alfie and as for you Bob there arent too many do gooders on here at all just good drivers who would like to see the law get a lot more harsher with bad drivers who risk killing or injuring people by their disregard for the law by speeding. John
Well Bob I dont know if you have ever read the Highway Code or have any road sense at all but every driver should know that the speed limits shown on road signs are MAXIMUM SPEED LIMITS. A good driver would keep his speed slightly lower than this. But of course you always get senseless idiots who just have to speed which is why we have speed cameras in the first place. Yes Bob there are stll thousands of stupid drivers who speed like you and I suppose when they eventually get caught, fined or even banned they will blame everyone and everything else but their own bad driving. alfie
Oh and by the way! If i catch anyone tailgating me and they dont backoff when warned. I have a Hires camera and laptop mounted in my car to record your Monkeyboy behavior and will submit the evidence to the Police: the score so far 16 convictions for dangerous driving and one Ban :) Alfie
you only get fined if you speed. break the law you pay the price. quit whinging get a grip on yourself or get off the road Sam
Dont Speed! JOHN
To Big Al. The government guidelines are stupid Al. There should be cameras near EVERY school. Why on earth do they wait until after accidents and deaths occur before they put cameras up? We need far more cameras NOW! John
The reason that the speed camera has been installed at Weston, Mike, is to stop idiot drivers from speeding, losing control and maiming or killing other road users. It has nothing to do with collecting money from drivers. If you dont get caught speeding it wont cost you anything. It should be pretty obvious to any one with even a small amount of common sense that SPEED KILLS. Glad you havent been fined yet Mike but if you speed you eventually will be. Bob
Allan Bean said it all, just because you lot drive to the speed limits or no dout 10mph under them does not mean you are a better or safer driver you could still knock over a cyclist on a A road at 60. , i speed like the rest of the thousand million other people do, but not in 30's etc, but open a roads or motorways, to many do gooders on here it's not an equal argument, Mike Dunston
Regarding John's reply to Allan: It's silly to imply Allan is a "bad driver". If you've ever been in a car with a rally driver or a trained Police driver, you'd know that their skill level is light years ahead of you and me. If you're so clever, explain the "safety" reason for the mobile site at Weston then ? And before you start calling ME a bad driver - I've not been fined for anything in my life. Big Al
The governments guidelines for cameras is 3 serious accidents or a fatallity in a 3 year period.In a 5 mile radius of my home are 7 cameras on roads that do not meet this criteria. There are 6 schools in this area without a camera within 2 miles......safety or cash? Marion
Good for you Mark. If you can do it so can every one else. Think of all the lives that will be saved. Mark
I am going to drive 20 mph everywhere from now on - after all, if 30 is safer than 40 then 20 must be safer than 30! Remember - SPEED KILLS Mark Richardson
I agree with John about those greedy Stafford councillors Some mobile sites are sensible, but some are $$$ scams John
To Allan. People kill each other by speeding. If you speed you are not driving responsibly or carefully. You are being very stupid,risking your life and other peoples lives. Advanced drivers are just as liable to get killed in an accident as any one else. Its not always your fault. SPEED CAMERAS SAVE LIVES BY SLOWING DRIVERS DOWN. To suggest that they are just there to get money out of you is a ridiculous argument put up by bad drivers who have been so rightly punished for breaking the law. If you dont speed you will not get caught and fined! John
You are completely wrong George. It doesnt matter how far you travel you are still breaking the law and risking lives if you speed. Your common sense should tell you that if you are travelling a long distance you become tired, your responses are slower and that you are more likely to have an accident if you speed under these circumstances. Slow down George its not worth it! Barry.
Several police forces are now using video footage in order to catch and prosecute drivers who tailgate other drivers. Distracting other drivers by tailgating or by flashing head lights etc is illegal. Any driver intimidated in this way should obtain the registration number of the vehicle involved and report the incident to the police. Allan Bean
To say "Speed Kills" is like saying "Guns Kill". Neither speed nor guns kill, only people kill. If you drive responsibly and carefully, you can drive at higher speeds under the appropriate conditions. What we actually need is an advanced driving license with very stringent requirements to pass, and those holding an advanced license are authorised to exceed the normal speed limits - where appropriate. I am not opposed to speed trapping in principle, but I am vigorously opposed to inapropriate speed trapping, purely aimed at revenue collection. Matt
Tailgating is one of the most appalling things other drivers can do, and I have seen it cause countless problems in rushhour traffic down the M1; one woman wasso close and paying such little attention that when I braked as the traffic slowed down she had to swerve blindly into the next lane to avoid hitting me. And to whoever PETE is, the national speed limit on dual carriageways has been 70mph for some time now, making 67mph a perfectly legal speed in what was assumed to be a 70mph zone. Perhaps your telepathy skills are better than mine?! John.
Sorry about your ordeal Andy. Unfortunately there are many stupid drivers out there who havent got the road sense to know that besides being illegal, tailgating is very dangerous. It is about time that the police used unmarked cars in order to catch these idiots. Phil
Of course its all about safety Mathew. Speed cameras are there to save lives. If you had been driving more observantly you would have noticed the speed camera signs before you reached the camera! Barry.
The only thing wrong about speed cameras is that there arent enough of them Carol
Why arent speeding drivers dealt with more severely? A driver who has been drinking is normally banned on a first offence so why arent drivers who speed? A drunken driver doesnt realise how bad he is driving but a sober driver who deliberately speeds does. PETE,.
Its not all about money at all Sid. If you dont speed it doesnt cost you anything because you wont get flashed by a speed camera and fined. Its all about fining and banning bad drivers who risk killing or maiming other people by causing accidents by speeding. These dangerous drivers have to be taught a lesson! GeorgeG
Intelligent people know that driving over speed limits is pointless unless the journey is more than 300 miles long. Andy
Despite keeping to the legal speed limi during my journey, yesterday, I was tailgated all the way from Lichfield to Sutton Coldfield by some idiot car driver. What a dope this guy must be! 1200 sid
wake up its all about the money Jimmy
If a kid,relative or friend of yours got killed by a speeding driver you drivers who moan would soon change your mind about speed cameras Matthew
On Tuesday you fail your driving test for driving to slowly (60 mph) down a dual-carriageway with a national speed limit sign. On Wednesday you are snapped by a Gatso for speeding (doing the same 60mph) down the SAME ROAD because the limit was reduced to 50mph and cameras were put up! Are you sure this is about safety? John Power
After seeing all the pro camera messages here I think that most SENSIBLE motorists are in agreement with speed cameras. Sue
Well said Danny. You have hit the nail right on the head! DANNY
I AGREE WITH YOU ANN.THESE DRIVERS ARE JUST TOO STUPID TO REALISE THAT SPEED CAMERAS ARE PUT THERE TO SAVE LIVES.THEY HAVE TO SPEED BECAUSE THEY DONT KNOW ANY BETTER.THEY ARE TOTALLY IGNORANT OF ROAD SAFETY, THE HIGHWAY CODE OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT MAY INTERFERE WITH THEIR LUST FOR SPEED. THEY ARE A DANGER TO OTHER ROAD USERS AND PEDESTRIANS. IF THESE SO CALLED DRIVERS DROVE PROPERLY THERE WOULD BE NO NEED WHATSOEVER FOR SPEED CAMERAS.THEY ARE JUST A LOAD OF CRY BABIES WHEN THEY EVENTUALLY GET CAUGHT AND FINED BLAMING EVERYONE AND EVERYTHING BUT THEMSELVES. Colin
Why do people speed? Because they are idiots! Danny
Excuses! Excuses! Whenever will these whinging drivers see sense and realise that SPEED KILLS and that they are BREAKING THE LAW. Drive properly at the correct speed and you wont have a problem. Neville Stockley
We live in a democracy. If the speed limits are unreasonably low, we have the democratic power to change them. If they are not too low, then we should abide by the law. Until the law is changed. then no-one should complain about being unfairly caught. The law is not a-la-carte. can anyone complain if they are caught thieving in Tesco that the security guards were not wearing fluorescent coats? John
Re: The mobile camera site at Weston. Who are they protecting by being there? They know darn well that few will notice the limit is actually still 40 until well past the little used right turn. They are just hoping to catch people who think "Ah, dual carriageway = 60mph" It's a scam foisted on us by greedy Stafford councillors, and it breeds unjustified resentment against the police. anon
Trentham camera - A34. This camera has been faulty for well over six years now. It even flashes people on the other carriage way doing <40mph. How are we supposed to believe they are all correctly calibrated ? I wouldn't fancy anyones chances fighting it in court though :-( Anne
Speed cameras are more of a danger than a help. Motorists just slam on the brakes when they see them and speed up as soon as they pass the white lines. Ken
I fail to understand why some idiot, brain dead, motorists have to speed. Speeding is totally unneccessary.So why do it? I can only assume that in their puny wisdom these drivers believe that by driving at excessive speeds they somehow make other road users think that they are superior drivers. Completely untrue! The majority of good, responsible, careful drivers think that drivers who speed are just nut cases! Rick
I appreciate your concerns about avoiding the speed camera sensors but as said, we are talking about cameras on what were NSL trunk roads, not built up areas. These roads were 60/70 mph and are now often 40/50 mph where it is not justified. Going through towns, the speed limit is paramount. However, for many rural roads such as A34/A51 we are subject to speed limits set by the senile baby boom/post menopausal council members and 'nimby socialist do gooder' brigade who have nothing better to do than waste our council tax on such schemes. In my opinion, these revenue speed cameras should be 'moved' to areas of schools/elderly/close playing fields etc and more 20mph produced for areas such as these. Stephen Bagwell
The most dangerous road is the A5 between the M6 and the A449 where drivers risk their lives because of drivers only driving at 40mph when the speed limit is 50 because there are 2 GATSO speed cameras. Stephen Bagwell
If I were Fran I would appeal against her speeding tickets from the A449/M54 junction. The speed limit changes from 70mph to 40 for only a short distance. If you come off the motorway the speed limit change is at the roundabout. How can they prove you were past the sign, what kind of angle was the camera pointing at, are not camera vans supposed to be highly visible, if the road is so dangerous why are there no rumble strips or anti-skid road surface, why have they put up new "National Speed Limit" signs when it is clearly not safe to drive a car a 70mph around 2 the roundabouts there. The Police eveidence against me sayx that the location of the camera van was "just north" of the junction - the speed limit is 70mph just north of the A449/M54 junction. MARK
I hope you dont meet another vehicle coming the other way Rick because by your stupid actions of speeding on the wrong side of the road to avoid speed cameras could end up with very nasty consequenses. Danny
You are a dangerous driver Rick. If any one sees this idiot driving on the wrong side of the road on the A51, to avoid a speed camera get his registration number and report him to the police! Peter
RICK. WHAT A STUPID AND IRRESPONSIBLE PERSON YOU ARE. DELIBERATELY DRIVING ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROAD JUST TO AVOID BEING CAUGHT FOR SPEEDING BY A SPEED CAMERA. I HOPE THAT YOU GET CAUGHT AND FINED HEAVILY FOR COMMITTING THIIS OFFENCE. PEOPLE WITH YOUR LOW MENTALITY SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO DRIVE, YOU ARE RISKING OTHER PEOPLES LIVES BY YOUR BAD DRIVING. GROW UP AND GET SOME ROAD SENSE BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE! Rick
Cameras are good for school/elderly zones only, not the countryside. On country roads with newly reduced limits, such as the A51, I just use the other side of the road at fixed camera locations where there is no sensor. Look first though.... ANNE
Geoff. One reason why speed cameras were introduced was to cut down on police time so that they could deal with other crimes so your comments are invalid. SPEEDING IS A CRIME. People get killed daily because of speed. What can be more important than the police trying to save lives? John Power
Mark, Well there you go again Mark calling me a liar before giving me a chance to answer your questions. Yes Mark I have exceeded the speed limit in the past and in fact I did get fined many years ago for this offence. I dont speed now as I like to think that I am a more better, responsible and mature driver. If the tories get in they have said they will get rid of a lot of speed cameras. This would be very foolish indeed as then there would be virtually no deterent to stop some stupid drivers breaking the law by speeding and being a danger to other road users. Obviously, Mark, I will not be voting for them. I'm glad that you agree that speed cameras are neccessary in some places. My cousin was mown down on a zebra crossing by a speeding driver. He would not be dead now if that driver had not been going so fast. A road accident stands less chance of being fatal if vehicles are travelling slower. Obviously all accidents arent caused by speed but a good many of them are. Mark
Well John, considering we were talking about a gentlemen who has had a clean accident free licence for 44 years, really does prove that you can't put a response to what I was saying. Your one of these political correct people that are ruining this country. I've not said this before, but I endorse cameras in the right locations, such as towns and around schools and areas like that, but not in some of the stupid areas that the Police are now putting them. Even the Chief Constable who introduced the cameras into this country has stated that it's overkill now. After listening to the budget last week, it look like thay are going to need even more cameras to get a lot more tax in. Any way John, you didn't say whether you had ever speeded or not did you? Then again, after reading your last response what's the point, it's obvious you wouldn’t tell the truth. Just one more point John, About 20 years ago my cousins brother-in-law was run down and killed outside a Bar near Walsall, he was 25, a cracking lad with a bright future. The Police put the accident down to drink driving, so don’t judge every accident down to speed. Speed can kill, but it’s not the sole or main contributer to accidents. Alex
The A500 is difficult enough at the moment without having to worry about being slightly over the 40 mph limit especially when the person behing is tailgating you and there is nowhere to go to get out of this idiots way Sandra
Judging by all the comments received in favour of speed cameras I think that the vast majority of people are in favour of them. I believe that people are now beginning to realise that something has to be done to stop the dangerous speeds that a lot of drivers travel at regardless of speed restriction signs, road conditions or any thing else. Unfortunately while we have these bad drivers who think that they are a law unto themselves speed cameras and such like are a neccessity. Phil
I think that speed cameras in their present form are a bit pointless. Most people know where they are and there are far too many signs telling you that there are speed cameras ahead of you. What I would like to see is far more speed cameras without warning signs so that more speed nutters get fined. I would also like to see far more mobile speed cameras catching these dangerour law breaking drivers. Fines should be far higher than at present. Money collected from these offences should be ploughed back into more camera sites and police speed checks. Ray
Well done Wayne! I am sick and tired of being tailgated by feeble minded lorry drivers. These morons even have the audacity to call themselves proffesional drivers. What a laugh! Tailgating other drivers is illegal and very dangerous. If a driver being tailgated has to stop in an emergency there could be a bad accident caused. Can you imagine one of these lorries crashing into the back of you and probably pushing you across the road into the path of oncoming vehicles causing several vehicles to crash probably with fatalities. These lorry drivers and any other driver who tailgates the vehicle in front should lose their licences. They obviously havent the road sense or sense of responsibility to have one. WAYNE
Thanks for the advice Adam. I was driving at the correct speed limit the other day when an articulated lorry driver started tailgating me. This happened for a couple of miles so I waited until we were was half way up a hill, slowed right down, put on my hazard lights and stopped. Then I drove off again. It worked like a charm and I had a good laugh to myself as I spotted him struggling to get up the hill miles behind me. These bully boys need teaching a lesson! PETE
SORRY MATT BUT YOU BROKE THE LAW. THE MAXIMUM SPEED LIMIT ON A NORMAL UNRESTRCTED ROAD IS 60 MILES PER HOUR NOT 60. DONT SPEED AND YOU WONT GET FINED. John Power
Mark. Please do not judge other people by your own poor driving standards. To say that there are no drivers in the country who have not ever exceeded the speed limit is being rather rash and immature. To call them liars is unfortunately a reflection on your own mentality. There are many GOOD DRIVERS who drive responsibly within the law. GOOD DRIVERS do not speed.GOOD DRIVERS have the common sense, obviously lacking in your case, to know that if they speed and have a collision people are more likely to be seriously hurt. GOOD DRIVERS do not whinge or moan about speed cameras as they do not present a problem to them.It is BAD DRIVERS like you Mark who are too stupid or blind to realise that speed cameras are there to save lives.One day It could be you or a relative or one of your friends who gets killed by one of these speeding drivers. So start to use your brain a little more Mark. Think before you put your foot down on yor accelerator and then one day you may become a GOOD DRIVER instead of a BAD ONE. Matt
I have been driving for 3 years now, and had kept a clean licence until I got caught doing 65mph on the A1 in a 50mph section. Why complain about that you may ask? Well I had only just joined the A1, and the sign marking it as being 50mph had been vandalised so that it was impossible to be seen by oncoming traffic. As 50 sections on the A1 are normally hugely well marked you can imagine how annoyed i was to see a single tiny repeater sign informing me of the limit, and opposite this sign was a mobile camera that clocked me before I had the chance to slow down. After appealing against the ticket, I was told that I did not have a valid reason, and still had to pay the fine. This all happened about 6 months ago, so the other day I thought I'd revisit the site where I got caught, and to my dismay the sign still hadn't been fixed, yet the mobile van was still there. I therefore find it very very tough believing the arguments that cameras are to improve safety if after 6 months they havent bothered to mark the limit correctly, but are still prepared to set up cameras to catch unsuspecting motorists, then ignore their pleas. ANN
I THINK PEOPLE WHO MOAN ABOUT SPEED CAMERAS ARE PATHETIC. EVEN SOME CAR INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE SAYING THAT THERE ARE LESS ACCIDENTS DUE TO DRIVERS HAVING TO DRIVE SLOWER BECAUSE OF THE CAMERAS. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A MUCH MORE WIDE SPREAD USE OF THEM.THEY ARE WORTHWHILE AND HAVE PROBABLY SAVED HUNDREDS OF LIVES BY INCREASING SAFETY ON OUR ROADS. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE EVERY VEHICLE FITTED WITH A TACHO TYPE DEVICE AND BEING STOPPED AT ROAD CHECKS FOR THEM TO BE CHECKED FOR SPEEDING OFFENCES. IF YOU GET CAUGHT SPEEDING IN FRANCE ITS A £1000 FINE. THIS IS WHAT WE NEED HERE. adam
Heres a tip! Next time you get tail gated by some nut case driving a wagon slow down and stop! Then move off again. By the time this idiot builds up his engine speed again you will be miles away! ALAN
in answer to Jase K (obviously an idiot) who says that as an ambulance driver I should stick to what I know best all I can say is that when you have dealt with as many road accident casulties ( many of them dead)as I have, caused entirely by speeding perhaps you will think before you drive in the stupid manner that you do at present. It must be obvious to all except complete idiots that if a camera cuts down the speed of a car any one hit by that car stands a better chance of survival.SPEED CAMERAS CAN SAVE LIVES and we need many more of them. WENDY
WE DEFINATELY NEED SPEED LIMIT RESTRICTIONS, BACKED BY CAMERAS, ON ALL ROADS LEADING ACROSS CANNOCK CHASE. THIS AREA IS USED BY WALKERS AND CYCLISTS BESIDES BEING FULL OF DEER AND OTHER WILD LIFE. lETS HAVE A 30MPH. THE IDIOTS WHO WANT TO SPEED SHOULD STICK TO THE MOTORWAYS! LES
SPEEDING DRIVERS ARE POTENTIAL KILLERS AND SHOULD BE TREATED AS SUCH.MORE CAMERAS ARE NEEDED WITH HEFTIER FINES. Careful Motorist
"Scared Parent Only IDIOTS speed !!" How about not letting your kids play on roads, fear alleviated. Andy
Cameras only catch cars over the speed limit. They don't catch the bad driver, the drunk driver, the uninsured driver and the driver with an unroadworthy car. For that you need police on the road, so why, with all the revenue from the cameras are police patrol numbers falling? I was on the A5 recently heading towards Cannock, when I was overtaken by someone way over the limit. The cloud of smoke from his tyres when he braked for the next camera was very impressive. Unfortuneatley he didn't trigger it. After he was out of the marked zone he just put his foot down again. Lee
The A51 from Dosthill to Two Gates must have the most speed camera per mile of road in the UK - 7 in around 2 miles! Elliot
Speed cameras are dangerous because they take your eyes off the road. They are a dangerous distraction, it's as simple as that. Ray
I was flashed by a camera on the A34 in Trentham on Sunday evening even though I was travelling at 38-40 mph in a 40 mph speed limit. If I get a ticket what chance is there of disputing it without it costing a fortune ! I was particularly careful to check my speed as I had seen the camera catching other motorists earlier that day ! | 
Listen to the 
Watch the