Speed cameras axe sparks fears of more deaths on roads

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.

I really hate the government doublespeak that led to them being called "safety" cameras rather than speed cameras: If I drive thrugh them drunk, will they take my picture? If I drive through them while on the phone? If I reverse through them on the wrong side of the carriageway blindfolded while juggling live monkeys and receiving oral pleasure from Bella Emburg as she injects me with a heroic dose of methamphetamine? No, no and no.

So, what you're saying is they only take photos of people who are speeding.

And they're triggered by speed.

But, if we call them safety cameras then the public will think we're doing something about road safety, even though excess speed is the main cause of something like 5% of accidents on the road...

[keith_d]

Ah, but government is setting targets in terms of KSI (injury) figures.

Councils could spend lots of money improving junction layouts and sight lines which would result in genuine improvements in road safety. Or they could buy a truck load of 50mph signs and a few speed cameras and get the same statistics for a fraction of the cost by reducing the severity of the accidents that do happen.

It's your council tax bill - how much would you like to pay??

Keith.

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by Bear

But, if we call them safety cameras then the public will think we're doing something about road safety, even though excess speed is the main cause of something like 5% of accidents on the road...

And not to mention the fact that excess speed is a viable cause of a crash even though it may be below the speed limit!