Speed cameras axe sparks fears of more deaths on roads

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-sto...5875-22440564/

ppl in oxford will be happy.

"Oxfordshire was yesterday considering shutting down all of its 79 cameras this week as a result of the decision"
"

[keith_d]

Hmm... if they had been used as 'safety' cameras in the first place maybe things would have turned out differently. But as it is I don't think I'll miss 'em.

D'oh!

Ignore me.

[maviczap]

Originally Posted by keith_d

Hmm... if they had been used as 'safety' cameras in the first place maybe things would have turned out differently. But as it is I don't think I'll miss 'em.

Agreed.

Spend money on real Policemen to catch people speeding in the wrong places and people using mobiles at the wheel

[gruntygiggles]

Had this discussion the other day with someone. I always have been annoyed by the fact that they are not often used as a safety tool, but a money making tool.

This is evident when you consider that where there are real accident black spots, you'll see a massive number of warning signs and chevrons with bright yellow surround, even signs telling how many fatal accidents on that stretch of road in the last 5 years etc. These are the places that need cameras...to slow people down where it can actually make a difference.

Not on the stretches of road that, for instance on dual carriageways make much difference in safety terms, but have a high yield for fines.

They're already off in Swindon...all cameras are covered, so would be interesting to know if the accident rate has dropped. In fact, this has reminded me about a thread I wanted to start!

My view is that on the whole, they dont bring in enough revenue for me to consider them beiing used as a money making scheme.

However, some do appear to be in some odd places. They dont really work, we all slow down and speed up afterwards. They should be using average speed camera along stretchs of road to combat speeding, i can only assume it costs more so they dont implement many of these.

This leaves me with conclusion that they are only doing this for public perception purposes, they need to be seen to be doing something, and maybe they use the oddly placed ones that make a little money to fund the ones outside school etc.

I think this is all a setup to start using those security traffic cameras for the average time fines.

You can see this cameras coming out of many towns and cities in the south east.

all this means is there will be a huge increase in unmarked plod cars like GG said in her thread.

id rather have cameras than unmarked cars. all i will do now is spend more time looking in every car i go past at a sprightly pace just in case its a plod car instead of looking where im going.

[L3nny]

So they cut £38m in finding but they generate £100m in income.

The governmet havent told the council to remove them, just that they wont fund them. But they generate more than 100 percent profit.

Am I missing something?

[Biker Biggles]

The councils pay for them with the help of government grants but all the income generated goes to government.Remove the grant and the councils get no money.I do think road enforcement will move towards more high tech surveillance from now on,with monitoring done by roadside sensors or satelites,and every vehicle being required to have a transponder.This will double for speed enforcement and road pricing as and when the government sees fit.