I didn't get the full story just caught tail end of it on the ITV3 news during the week about having cameras installed in 20mph zones,anyone catch this report ?

I read about it.... its a new 'blanket' type system, similar to SPECS, (and made by the same people) apparently cheap and useable because the communicate by radio.

the powers that be need to loose the obsession with speed cameras, and get some more traffic police on the roads. and I quote the last police show on the BBC "We used to just concentrate on traffic and bad driving, but there are fewer of us now and we're being called to things like this (was a domestic)"

these new cameras wont catch the people who drive illegally (not registering their cars) with no MOT liscence or insureance (or morals)

plus you could drive pas one by a school at 100mph, putting everyones kids at risk, then park and have a sandwich and a read of the paper, then drive out the other side of the zone... job done, no ticket.

just don't bloody work, spend the money on traffic police instead!

note: sorry... rant over! *sigh....

I Agree with Sharkrider, the cameras will more than likely catch honest motorists who have strayed over the limit, the little to$$ers who hurl around in stolen/unregistered cars will gain get off.

Put Police on the streets and catch the real culprits.

I agree about more police on the streets, but I have no issues with SPECS type cameras in urban areas. Call me a sad old git if you wish, but I stick to urban speed limits (40 / 30 / 20) like a limpet. You shoudn't stray over the limit if you're concentrating on driving.

SPECS cameras are the only cameras than genuinely cause people to go at the correct speed. I don't think the pull up wait a bit and go on thing really works because most people are trying to get from A-B as quickly as possible so are unlikely to do that. From my observations in the area I live, SPECS cameras slow just about everyone to the speed limit, with just the odd one who goes faster and will no doubt get the penalty he deserves.

SPECS cameras are the only cameras than genuinely cause people to go at the correct speed. I don't think the pull up wait a bit and go on thing really works because most people are trying to get from A-B as quickly as possible so are unlikely to do that.

I agree completely. The speed-and-pull-up argument might apply on a motorway where you could do 100 and then have a break at the services. But it would be pointless in 20 limits where the units will be just a few hundred yards apart.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't have more traffic police of course

Sal

In addition to this, most SPECS cameras I know are only about 400 yds or so apart between columns.

In addition to this, most SPECS cameras I know are only about 400 yds or so apart between columns.

These ones will be linked to a real time clock, an thus don't need to be close or in straight lines.

All sounds like more revenue generation to me. All that will happen is the observant decent driver will get caught and punished more through a minor slip, rather than the habitual lunatic without MOT, insurance or even a license.

If they are so concerned about people speeding then why not make everyone drive a milk float?

I would rather be able to concentrate on whats around me, in front of me or what may possibly run out into the road than have to watch my speedo without fear of going 2 mph over the limit.

you could drive pas one by a school at 100mph' date=' putting everyones kids at risk, then park and have a sandwich and a read of the paper, then drive out the other side of the zone... job done, no ticket.

[/quote']

seen something similer the other week coming back from ayr,cant remember what road it was but this 911 GT2 came flying past well over the ton and was then parked up at a layby a mile or so up the road just before the second set of cameras.

i really dont see the point of these specs cameras :confused:

Any driving instructors got an opinion on this part of the speed camera equation?

I would rather be able to concentrate on whats around me, in front of me or what may possibly run out into the road than have to watch my speedo without fear of going 2 mph over the limit.

Only learned to drive 3 years ago but have managed to forget almost everything but IIRC, speeding or crawling along as a learner/during your test is a big no-no. Yet as far as i remember I didn't spend all my time looking at the speedo - I seemed to spend most of my time making obvious looks into my mirrors.

So what I'd like to know is, should we all posess the 'skill' of being able to drive at the prevailing speed limit without watching the speedo constantly?

So what I'd like to know is' date=' should we all posess the 'skill' of being able to drive at the prevailing speed limit without watching the speedo constantly?[/quote']

Personally i think i have gained that skill with experience, as a learner i used the speedo more to find out what speed i was doing, but now i believe i could hit 30,40,50,70 without using the speedo and maintain that speed,

As for speeding in 20's and 30's i believe that there should be some better solution, I live in a 20mph cul-de-sac area and the amount of fannies that come racing past in their paxos and corsheds is silly, I have confronted alot of them, simply because of the amount of kids playing in the street, but why should i put myself on the line to enforce a speed limit :confused: :confused: Maybe hidden speed cameras are the future?

...why should i put myself on the line to enforce a speed limit :confused: :confused: Maybe hidden speed cameras are the future?

I agree with that, I was asking because of all the times I see letters or comments in the media about how someone was only doing 36 in a 30 zone etc. Is this a basic driving skill?

Personally I've got no objections to the use of cameras. I only object to their use as a replacement for traffic policing by policemen. I'd hate to stray off topic but I don't see speeding fines as generating much revenue rather that automatic speeding tickets from cameras are an easy thing to measure and this government loves to set targets and measures and league tables.

Besides this will all be redundant when GPS/RFID road pricing is is use. Every time you stray over that limit you'll get a ticket. Cameras or no cameras.

This might sound a bit contraversial, but....

Most Drivers in the UK Hate speed cameras fact,

IMHO we should do what the French did, and sabbotage the lot of them until the rozzers give up. That's just my view. There are far more important things to be looking at than enforcing 20MPH speed limits.

Most Drivers in the UK Hate speed cameras fact' date='

[/quote']

Do they? Do you have a link to support this fact? Every survey I've read has suggested otherwise.

Rob.

The fact is that if you hate speed cameras, the chances are that you speed / have been caught speeding. No excuses.

I'm not pretending to be an angel, when I go past a derestricted sign, I often exceed 60 or 70mph, but where there's a speed limit, i.e., 50, 40, 30 or 20, it's there for a very good reason. And please, no more rubbish about revenue. Councils set speed limits and police put out speed cameras. The limits were there before the cameras and should be obeyed regardless of if there is enforcement there or not.

when I go past a derestricted sign, I often exceed 60 or 70mph, but where there's a speed limit, i.e., 50, 40, 30 or 20, it's there for a very good reason.. The limits were there before the cameras and should be obeyed regardless of if there is enforcement there or not.

So a derestricted sign isn't a speed limit:confused:

I disagree with the official line on cameras as being a safety device - look at www.abd.org.uk and you'll see that the government does not follow it's own guidelines on where and how cameras should be placed.

OTOH If you speed in a built up area with a 20/30 limit (sometimes 40 but not always applicable) where there is housing and a likelyhood you could hit a child or whoever then you should be banned instantly. If the government was honest and said 'speeding is a crime we want to catch you and you will be punished' then I would not have a problem with that. Dressing it up as safety when the motivation is financial is wrong.

I also believe the motorway limit should be raised to at least 80 in good conditions (maybe more) and that HGV's should have their limiters removed to prevent the 5-mile overtakes that go on - again put in place stricter penalties to ensure they don't exceed limits but give them the power to overtake etc.

While I'm ranting... I believe that tailgating should be cracked down on by our increased police numbers (in my utopia ) and should be a 6 point offense, as should lane-hogging.

I also think IAM/RoSPA/Whatever should be compulsory within 3 years of passing the L test.

And ban French cars and BMWs.

And charge foreign motorists and ease the financial raping of the motorists that goes on.

So a derestricted sign isn't a speed limit:confused:

Historically there was no limit, now 'derestricted' means NSL.

Historically there was no limit, now 'derestricted' means NSL.

Yeah, that's what I was referring to. Although there is a NSL blanket in place, it's not been put there 'for a reason' in the way that 50/40/30/20 limits have been.

Traffic calming measures such as pinch points and other physical restrictioons are a better method than cameras.

Speed cameras do generate a vast revenue, and are placed at revenue generating places. Why is the M25 speed restricted at times when its clear?...because then the speed cameras become active.

I,m not advocating speeding, but that does not mean I agree with the over-deployment of speed cameras, nor the free-for-all scenario either.

Until those in power actually get realistic with speed limits across the whole board, they are never going to get the general public to follow the line given.

Yeah, that's what I was referring to. Although there is a NSL blanket in place, it's not been put there 'for a reason' in the way that 50/40/30/20 limits have been.

So why as it been put there? Just to pi