Permanent speed cameras on the M4?

[Dr_Weasel]

Since about October last year there has been roadwork's on the M4 between J18 and J15 both ways. The official reason for these roadwork's is that they are putting in those helpful overhead matrix signs that warn you of queues ahead and they are laying the groundwork for it by putting in the pipes for the required fibre.

However, the thing that disturbs me is that from J17 to J15 there are loads of new permanent signs that have appeared by the roadside, all of which have been covered up with green bags and duct tapped up. During the high winds last week one of the bags came half free and it was obvious that the sign was actually a giant speed camera sign. I only saw it for one day as it was promptly covered up again by the following day but it was definitely one of those black camera on white background signs.

I've not actually heard of any plans for the government to start blanket covering parts of our motorways with cameras, nor am I aware of any other prolonged stretch of motorway that currently has cameras (with the exception of the variable speed limit section on the M25)

Has anyone heard or know anything about this? It seems like a bad idea with the animosity that's already about regarding cameras to camera up 25 miles of the M4.... Where's this going to end???

 

[Scouse]

Wouldn't be surprised. The stated strategy of the government is to make the penalties for speeding so ridiculously harsh that it forces a step change in societies attitudes.

Not very fair - and I doubt it's very effective - but now they can use it as a cash cow it's here to stay. (Whereas if their stated strategy was being followed there would eventually be a reduction in speed cameras)...

Fuckers.

 

[Damini]

See, if motorists weren't such an easy touch, and speeding actually WAS a big problem area, one of the following would happen.

1) Speeding would be de-criminalised, so then Labour could say that crime has dropped while they were in power.

2) Speed limits would be increased everywhere to 200 mph, so Labour could say they had effectively stopped people driving over the speed limit.

3) Labour would tax car owners out of existance, with road tax, congestion charges, petrol charges, and then when the streets slowly empty they would run down the empty roads, occasionally defecating as an added incentive to force people on board over crowded, under maintained trains. Hey, wait...

 

[Chilly]

Damini, why dont you run for local council? I'd vote, but I suspect I dont live near so I doubt Id be allowed to

 

[JBP|]

im not in the slightest bit surprised by the speed cameras,they also have them on the M42 and also the top end of the M6 (somewhere near morcombe)


also they appear every half mile or so on the A5

 

[Tom]

.....and people wonder why there are so many untaxed and uninsured vehicles on the road.....

Are you sure they're not ANPR cameras? Or they could be in bags if there is ongoing roadworks (for instance, the Thelwall Viaduct on the M6 had SPECS cameras for over a year).

 

[Damini]

Did you hear about the 13 year old drink driver... She got banned from driving for two years . Wow. Words... just... aren't... enough.

And Chilly, I'd be a rubbish politician. I don't lie very well, I say terrible things about people when I'm angry, and I tend to misbehave.

 

[Tom]

The reason they ban underage drivers is because driving without a license is not an arrestable offence. Driving while disqualified is, so once banned and caught they can be arrested.

 

[dr_jo]

Plus, having been banned, you have to take a much harsher test, if I remember correctly. Longer, and harder to pass.

 

[Trem]

See, if motorists weren't such an easy touch, and speeding actually WAS a big problem area, one of the following would happen.

1) Speeding would be de-criminalised, so then Labour could say that crime has dropped while they were in power.

2) Speed limits would be increased everywhere to 200 mph, so Labour could say they had effectively stopped people driving over the speed limit.

3) Labour would tax car owners out of existance, with road tax, congestion charges, petrol charges, and then when the streets slowly empty they would run down the empty roads, occasionally defecating as an added incentive to force people on board over crowded, under maintained trains. Hey, wait...

I love you.


*smothers Kenny while he sleeps*

*impresses Lou with beard*

*marries while Clannad plays*

















*edits so Samm doesn't see *

 

[Chilly]

bah Damini but thats just what we need! Misbehave as much as you like, but at least youl admit you did it when some paper asks you and you wont make up some bs storey about spending that money on schools instead of hookers and beer!*


*yes i know, its deliberate.

 

[Dr_Weasel]

Are you sure they're not ANPR cameras? Or they could be in bags if there is ongoing roadworks (for instance, the Thelwall Viaduct on the M6 had SPECS cameras for over a year).

I havent actually seen any cameras as yet. As I said, there is just a load of permenant signs that have appeard but they are covered. I only discovered that they were for speed cameras because the winds ripped the cover off one.

I cant help but think its going to stuff up the traffic flow. Motorways are the safest roads in our country and I beleive that this is in part due to the fact that people can overtake and spread out the traffic so you arent driving around in big clumps of cars. Its just going to turn the motorway into a permenant Friday night rush hour experience where everyone is travelling at 65-70 mph in the outside line nose to tail. And when are there the most accidents on the motorways?? When its all bloomin nose to tail and everyone is frustrated at not being able to get past the guy in front.

*sigh*

And before I get chastised for being a speeding loon, I know speed limits are there for a good reason. Ive lost 2 of my family members and 1 friend to road traffic accidents in 3 separate incidents over the years, two of which which caused by chavs driving at ludicrous speeds. Theres a time and a place for speed cameras, but I dont think that this is it tbh.

 

[Dr_Weasel]

I knew it...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/4425415.stm

They've fianlly adimitted it months after installing the warning signs (which are still covered up). Im still intrigued as to what this will actually do to traffic flow. I still think it will make cars bunch up and tailgate each other....

 

[Ormorof]

surely if you arent breaking the law (ie speeding) you have nothing to fear?

 

[Embattle]

Where's this going to end???

When drivers stop speeding and it's no longer profitable to use such camera systems.....I realise this is a radical idea

 

[DaGaffer]

When drivers stop speeding and it's no longer profitable to use such camera systems.....I realise this is a radical idea

If a law is ignored by the majority of the population (as the 70mph limit is), should it still be a law? Or is the role of government and lawmakers to protect us from ourselves? Discuss.

 

[nath]

Both. And neither.

 

[Bodhi]

When drivers stop speeding and it's no longer profitable to use such camera systems.....I realise this is a radical idea

I love it when non-drivers make clueless comments like this. Makes it so much easier to laugh in their faces.

 

[Embattle]

I love it when drivers make clueless comments like this. Makes it so much easier to laugh in their faces.

Me2....but I'm use to it now.

 

[Dr_Weasel]

I didn't say that I speed. I remarked that I think it will balls up the traffic flow and cause more accidents. Most accidents seem to be on friday nights when the traffic is heavy and bunched up cos everyone is driving at 60-70mph in the outside lane trying to get past the lorries that are taking up 2 lanes with their driving side by side at 56mph. I personally think its safer for traffic to be going slightly faster but more spread out. I think that these cameras will just force people to drive like automatons 2 inches off the guy infronts bumper cos everyone is doing 70.

If driving slower on the motorway is so safe, why do i see so many accidents in the 50mph contra-flows?

 

[Ormorof]

I love it when non-drivers make clueless comments like this. Makes it so much easier to laugh in their faces.

please explain to me, oh sage fountain of wisdom why it a bad thing that people who break the law are caught and discouraged?

 

[JingleBells]

I don't think I've EVER seen anyone do 70mph MAX on the motorway, if you did you'd be a hazard and would cause more accidents than preventing them. Motorway driving speeds, from what I've seen, is all to do with keeping up with the majority of the traffic. If the police booked and ticketed everyone over 70mph, we'd run out of trees to print the tickets.

 

[Tom]

I reckon everyone knows my opinions on the subject. In case they don't, the safety partnerships are clueless wankers, and schemes like this will make the motorways more dangerous to travel on.

And if they ever fucking try it around here, I'm buying a paintgun with a sight. Fuckers.

 

[Damini]

please explain to me, oh sage fountain of wisdom why it a bad thing that people who break the law are caught and discouraged?

My main problem with these laws in the inequality of effect they have on the law abiding (generally) and the non law abiding (habitually). Pressing the accelerator a little harder until you go over the speed limit is very different from practically every other crime you could cite, and yes, it could have an effect on other people if you were driving recklessly, but most speeders are punished not because of the threat they put other people's lives in, but because that is the status quo when breaking the law. Fair play, perhaps, BUT the grating thing is:

Generally law abiders: Pass their driving test. Pay road tax. Pay car insurance. Pay disgusting petrol tax on top. Pay evil tax if they live in London and wish to defecate £8 daily into the oily hands of Ken. Get too many points on their licence if they speed, lose their licence, and wont drive BECAUSE they are generally law abiding. Probably lose job if they are reliant on self transportation (and lets face it, if you rely on public transport, you get let down. A lot).

Non law abiding: Possibly never passed test, so no licence. No tax. No insurance. No MOT. Maybe not even their car. (Savings from this each year? £600+) Get caught speeding - get non existant licence taken away. OH NOES HOW WILL I DRIVE WITHOUT A LICENCE? Same as ever, is the answer. Gets points added to a licence they dont have. OH NOES, MY BEAUTIFUL NON EXISTANT LICENCE SULLIED! Gets fine that doesn't amount to the sum they would have paid if they had forked out for insurance and tax anyway - bargain. Most likely still dont pay the fine - bigger bargain. Gets blip on criminal record, OH NOES WHO WILL LET ME BABYSIT NOW?

If everyone should be affected equally by laws, then the repercussions should be weighted to have equal effect on people. As it is, driving a car feels like haemoraghing money, whilst you watch other people get away with murder (sometimes literally "9 year old boy killed by hit and run driver with no licence and no insurance - killer given 4 months") because the system knows that if you squeeze an honest man, money and fear comes out. If fines were actually even reinforced so everyone ended up paying them that would be something. Until these things are reinforced, speeding is a source of revenue from the honest, and just a way of handing out pieces of paper to the habitually criminal, because their is no disincentive for the dishonest to continue.

End rant.

 

[Dr_Weasel]

/me applauds

 

[Embattle]

On some things I agree with you Damini, however I don't see your reply as a good enough rebuttal to Ormorof's reply personally.

I generally agree that there are too many camera's in questionable places, however my personal view is that it's become more of a question of people feeling that the risk factor is becoming very unfavourable. Nearly everyone breaks the law in one way or another, the generally law abiders class will most probably break the law in terms of things they consider minor such as speeding, downloading music, parking on yellow lines, etc however the problem doesn't come because they believe that the law is wrong. The problem arises from the fact that it is no longer the safe risk it used to be, people like taking risks especially ones where they feel it is safe to do so but now they stand more chance of getting caught whiling breaking one of these so called minor laws/risks.

We should also remember that it's not just non license holders that knock people over although they are the most reported. I would have to question the position of someone in the generally law abiding class that had got enough points on their license to lose it.

Camera's in populated areas I have no problem with at all and I would actually like to see more cameras located on traffic light based junctions & pedestrian crossings since I find the jumping of red lights on these crossing extremely hard to swallow.....although this may be bias as I've nearly been flattened taking the supposedly safer route on a pedestrian crossing instead of the road junction only to have a mixture of vehicles accelerate on the amber and run the red on a weekly basis.

Drivers are an easy target and will continue to be, no change of government will make a bit of difference either especially while drivers continue to be a cash cow, sometimes willingly too.

 

[Damini]

If you commute daily on the motorways, isn't it easily concievable that generally law abiding people could accumalate enough points in one day alone (if multiple traps were set) to lose their licence?

And I'm not saying that it is always non licence holders that knock people over. I'm not saying that because that would make me an idiot. However, I don't have a licence to own a gun. I am not licenced to perform surgery. I am not trained to administer or prescribe drugs to people. All these activities undertaken by untrained people are potentially lethal - and how many people get killed by cars each year in britain? If you aren't qualified to drive one of the most lethal machines on the face of the earth, and you do it anyway, and THEN you kill someone, then you should be heavily punished.

Edit:// Also, most hit and runs happen in people without insurance and licences BECAUSE they dont have insurance and licences, and dont wish to get caught. If the incentive against driving without insurance and licences dropped, if you were more likely to get caught, and more likely to (ACTUALLY) get punished, then less people would violate the law in the first place, and less people would have reason to flee the scene should an accident happen.

 

[Embattle]

Yes you could but you've just broken the law multiple times, I guess it depends on your view of what constitutes a generally law abiding person. I personally find that someone who speeds past multiple cameras in one day is probably going to carry on speeding even in more dangerous conditions/areas thus for me this generally law abiding person must surely move closer to the non law abiding group....however I don't intend it as a blanket statement.

They can be potentially lethal even by trained/licensed people.....although admittedly not as dangerous as the non trained/licensed.

I thought it was a good mixture of different drivers that were involved in hit and runs although I don't deny unlicensed drivers are the ones most likely to run.

I'm not particularly for or against cameras, although I do accept they have there place and I don't see them vanishing suddenly. I do however see an increase in the moaning about speed cameras, some of it valid and some of it not but most of it because a person took a risk of going a bit faster and lost.

 

[Tom]

1) Increase in speed cameras (tax)
2) Decrease in traffic patrols (cost)
3) Road deaths on the rise (spin)


Coincidence?

 

[Bodhi]

please explain to me, oh sage fountain of wisdom why it a bad thing that people who break the law are caught and discouraged?

I'd see your point if speeding actually killed but it doesn't - driving dangerously does. Speed != Danger. I sat on the motorway today at about 95mph without endangering a soul. But then I guess cos someone said speeding was norty me and the queue of traffic I was in (all keeping a respectful two second gap to the car in front) should all have been arrested by the police car we drove past. Oh wait, the police could tell that we weren't harming anyone so let us go. A camera can't tell this. Ergo speed cameras are shit.