doing 68 in a 60 zone wtf is the fine and points..!!!!!! (1 Viewer)

[DaddyK]

You'd have to be pretty damn stupid to get done by a camera on the side of the road considering that they have 3 warning signs leading up to them.

 

[DaddyK]

Whats the go with the signs leading up to a fixed speed camera!? Like Im not complaining but seriously its obvious its just revenue raising... if they REALLY wanted to stop speeding, dont let anyone know where the cameras are, dont advertise them, and then everyone will stick to the limit cos they dont know where they are and if they will get caught.... unless of course they legally have to tell the public or something! And then some may say 'that would give them more revenue so it cant be for revenue'... but no, cos the long term effect of what I said would be that 90% of people wouldnt speed cos they dont know where cameras are meaning overall the fines would decrease = less revenue.

Your an idiot.

 

[iamsickofyear12]

Speed cameras have not reversed accident trends anywhere they have been implemented. The numbers of speed cameras is increasing and the number of accidents is also increasing.

 

[MiuMiu]

I asked for facts, not your assumptions.

 

[iamsickofyear12]

Show me the facts that they reduce accidents. People assume that because they slow people down and speeding is a major cause of accidents that they therefore reduce accidents.

Speeding isn't limited to going faster than the posted speed limit. Going too fast for the conditions is also speeding. And so all the people that have had accidents from taking corners too fast, or driving too fast in the rain, or driving too fast in traffic are all counted as speeding accidents even if they were going 20km/h under the speed limit. Speed cameras don't prevent these 'speeding' related accidents.

Here is an article from the UK but I'm sure ytou won' consider it proof of anything: http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/06/602.asp

 

[7th Sign]

daddyk your are the idiot I was not looking on the side of he road as I was trying to merge into this lane...also their was only one sign as I just came onto the road before the speed camera the other 2 signs were obviosuly a logn way back...

get your facts straight

 

[MiuMiu]

No, you presented as fact that speed cameras actually increase accidents.

I want to know how you can possibly back that up with concrete facts.

And no I will not accept a UK newspaper article, we are talking about NSW metropolitan roads.

 

[Jiga]

daddyk your are the idiot

Amen to that!

Tell me daddyk how my post means that Im an idiot? Even if it was wrong, I gave explanations which were quite logical..... it is quite childish to just post something knocking someone without stating the reasons behind it (And you double posted to do it as well!)

 

[redruM]

I am just wondering, if they need to have signs before a speed camera, then how come they have cops with 'random' radar-guns?

 

[Serius]

yeah i also think that speedcameras increase the danger to kids, and also frustrate good drivers and might even cause more accidents

on the way to work there is a variable speed camera that is normally 60 but during schooltimes is 40. The thing is that this school doesnt allow kids on that side of the school, they arent allowed to wait on that road[cause its a main road] or be anywhere near it, even for pickups from parents.

It is really frustrating because other cars do about 30km, just to be safe, which is bad enough when it is a school zone, but when it isnt school times they hold up traffic like a fucking idiot. Even onthe days when it is quite clearly not a school time, e.g late at night, or on a sunday.

When i drive past there i watch my speedo like a hawk and stick to the speedlimit, which is why i think there is an increased danger to kids ,seen as people are less aware of their surroundiings when going past a camera. Going in the oposite direction there is a small break in the concrete island allowing a right hand turn into a little used, dead end street where about 10 houses are. When a car turns down here, they have an increased chance of being rear ended because it is not expected, the right hand lane is where everyone else is in[seen as the left ends in about 100m] and they are watching their speedos
I myself have nearly run up the back of someone turning down here, but only cause they didnt indicate and suddenly i realised their bumper was almost touching my car.

quite frustrating really, speed cameras serve a good purpose usually, but i dont know what this one is supposed to be doing

 

[MiuMiu]

I just think certain people who post on this forum should show some more maturity. Some of you are playing games of 'ifs and buts'.....you are saying things that are possible, but in reality, are not happening.

The flash of a speed camera has the potential to trigger a fit in a driver which could lead to them crashing into another car or pedestrian. But in reality it just doesn't happen.

You need to learn to distinguish between possibility and reality. The reality, in this case, is that the effect of a speed camera in slowing down traffic (which indeed has been proven) far outweighs the possibility of accidents due to drivers taking their eyes off the road to monitor their speed.

 

[MiuMiu]

Oh and as far as police radars on the side of the road, I guess its something that as a driver, you have to always be aware of. The possibilty of a police radar popping up around the corner is indeed what keeps my speed down!

But on fixed cameras, there will always, without fail, be 3 signs leading up to it.

 

[iamsickofyear12]

The only thing speed cameras are proven to do is slow down traffic. They have not been proven to reduce accidents.

And everyone knows people only slow down for the speed camera and then speed up again. Police radars are not a very good deterrent either. Anyone who drives in the area frequently knows exactly where they hide, not to mention the fact that if traffic coming the other way can see them then they'll warn you.

Slowing down for speed cameras provide absolutely no benefit to anyone.

 

[MiuMiu]

That may be your opinion

But that still doesn't connect to your earlier assertion that it causes accidents.

And as far as 'speeding up again' goes, that was my earlier point. The people who decide where the cameras go aren't dumb. They put them in places where they need people to slow down that little bit more. Often around sweeping turns etc

 

[iamsickofyear12]

That may be your opinion

But that still doesn't connect to your earlier assertion that it causes accidents.

And as far as 'speeding up again' goes, that was my earlier point. The people who decide where the cameras go aren't dumb. They put them in places where they need people to slow down that little bit more. Often around sweeping turns etc

They may not have caused any accidents yet but they will. It's only a matter of time.

They aren't in places where they are needed, they are just in the most suitable locations to pretend they are for safety reasons while still making as much money as possible.

 

[iambored]

They may not have caused any accidents yet but they will. It's only a matter of time.

:rofl:
you're still making assertions, even after 2 pages of arguments
If they haven't caused any (I read, many, since you don't know if they haven't caused any) accidents yet, why is it only a matter of time? How willl they all of a sudden start causing accidents?

 

[Riviet]

You should get to know where your speed camera locations are so you can slow down prior to one. If driving in unexplored or unknown territory, make sure you drive at least 5km/h below the limit, and be observant of speed cameras as you're driving on those main roads.

 

[iamsickofyear12]

People concentrate less on the road because they are too busy trying not to speed. If people crash when they are paying full attention, then they are going to crash if they aren't, especially if these cameras are in dangerous areas like they are said to be.

 

[iambored]

If people crash when they are paying full attention and speeding, especially in dangerous areas, speed might be the factor that contributes to the crash, not attention.

I agree, speed cameras take people's attention away from the road. I don't agree that this is a bad thing which is going to cause more accidents than not having a camera there.

I also think you have to consider the seriousness of the accidents. Driving slow and with low concentration is most likely going to contribute to ramming someone up the back. Driving faster will contribute to spinning off the road.

 

[iamsickofyear12]

Talking on handheld mobile phones while driving was banned because it takes attention away from the road. I've never actually heard of anyone having an accident because they were talking on their phone but that doesn't make it is any less dangerous.