Average Speed Cameras on Handcross Hill

[The Fifth Column]

In which case I sincerely hope you never get the knock on the door to say your son or daughter has been run over and killed by someone doing a few miles an hour over the limit. Or would it suddenly bother you then?

Bit of a one dimensional outlook as you are simplifying the causation factors of the accident as being purely about being a few miles over the speed limit. It's very rarely solely about one such factor being the cause and if you hit and killed someone and were a few miles an hour under the limit or not speeding then the result is the same and the knock on the door would be no less painful. I know you have a party line to tout but don't tell me you never speed ever, I simply won't believe you.

 

[larus]

I think the issue is that everyone KNOWS that speed cameras are used for REVENUE GENERATION and not SAFETY. Put the in accident hotspots, not in locations where it's 'easy' to speed.

For example, about 4 years ago, I was caught on Hove seafront, about 22:00 doing about 40 in the dual carriageway travelling from Portslade. I was near the traffic lights at King Alfred. There was 1 other car on the road, and a pig jumped out with a speed gun. It was clear, dry and the road quiet. Was it a danger. No. (All you pious twats, please f*** off now). What possible motive for this other then meeting revenue targets.

As for the average speed cameras; I would have more acceptance if they were used during peak hours and/or when there is work being carried out. If there's not, then turn them off or increase the accepted speed. There's no LOGICAL reason to limit the speed at midnight, when the roads are quite and no-one is working.

 

[otk]

I think the issue is that everyone KNOWS that speed cameras are used for REVENUE GENERATION and not SAFETY. Put the in accident hotspots, not in locations where it's 'easy' to speed.

For example, about 4 years ago, I was caught on Hove seafront, about 22:00 doing about 40 in the dual carriageway travelling from Portslade. I was near the traffic lights at King Alfred. There was 1 other car on the road, and a pig jumped out with a speed gun. It was clear, dry and the road quiet. Was it a danger. No. (All you pious twats, please f*** off now). What possible motive for this other then meeting revenue targets.

As for the average speed cameras; I would have more acceptance if they were used during peak hours and/or when there is work being carried out. If there's not, then turn them off or increase the accepted speed. There's no LOGICAL reason to limit the speed at midnight, when the roads are quite and no-one is working.

I think the LOGIC behind having the speed limit at all times is that if say they weren't enforced between 10pm. and 7am., you'd get loads of these whiney threads about people being nicked at 10.03pm., and how 'unfair' it is

 

[otk]

Bit of a one dimensional outlook as you are simplifying the causation factors of the accident as being purely about being a few miles over the speed limit. It's very rarely solely about one such factor being the cause and if you hit and killed someone and were a few miles an hour under the limit or not speeding then the result is the same and the knock on the door would be no less painful. I know you have a party line to tout but don't tell me you never speed ever, I simply won't believe you.

A simple yes/no question for you

If everyone in the country drove at or under the speed limit at all times, would there be a reduction in road deaths?

I reckon the answer would be yes

Whether it is one, or more probably hundreds, if not thousands, they are lives that would be saved

 

[chimneys]

I got rid of my car recently, and the attitudes shown on this thread are some of the reasons why. I really don't want to be on the road when other drivers are doing the mental working out of how, and by how much, they can break the traffic laws, instead of how they can stay within them, and show consideration for fellow road users

Btw CCDL since passing my test 33 years ago + CC HGV1 for 25 years

Inconsiderate HGV drivers, falling asleep at the wheel of tens of tonnes of metal, not letting others onto motorways when the middle lane is clear, and driving within a gnat's chaff of the car /lorry in front. Also good reasons for you to have given up your car/lorry!

 

[Vegas Seagull]

Turning off where? The only exit now is for the garden centre or the 4x4 sales place.

The work quite regularly goes on at night, up and down the whole stretch, hence the limit is still in place then.

Services at 'Jeremy's Lane' those going in & then out and back up the road or turning off to Warninglid can do what they like

 

[goldstone]

Services at 'Jeremy's Lane' those going in & then out and back up the road or turning off to Warninglid can do what they like

The services at Jeremys Corner are on the northbound A23. There is a camera as you get back onto the A23. And the exit to Warninglid is closed until March. Apart from that you're 100% correct!!

 

[Tom Bombadil]

For example, about 4 years ago, I was caught on Hove seafront, about 22:00 doing about 40 in the dual carriageway travelling from Portslade. I was near the traffic lights at King Alfred. There was 1 other car on the road, and a pig jumped out with a speed gun. It was clear, dry and the road quiet. Was it a danger. No. (All you pious twats, please f*** off now). What possible motive for this other then meeting revenue targets.

.

Serves you right. Man up and take it on the chin. All this it's not fair whining makes you sound like a three year old.

 

[jemwillett]

That loophole was closed a few years back.

Got caught in Middlesboro last year. Claimed I didn't know who was driving and got a lovely photo back of me at the wheel. It's a fair cop.

 

[Vegas Seagull]

I think the issue is that everyone KNOWS that speed cameras are used for REVENUE GENERATION and not SAFETY. Put the in accident hotspots, not in locations where it's 'easy' to speed.

For example, about 4 years ago, I was caught on Hove seafront, about 22:00 doing about 40 in the dual carriageway travelling from Portslade. I was near the traffic lights at King Alfred. There was 1 other car on the road, and a pig jumped out with a speed gun. It was clear, dry and the road quiet. Was it a danger. No. (All you pious twats, please f*** off now). What possible motive for this other then meeting revenue targets.

As for the average speed cameras; I would have more acceptance if they were used during peak hours and/or when there is work being carried out. If there's not, then turn them off or increase the accepted speed. There's no LOGICAL reason to limit the speed at midnight, when the roads are quite and no-one is working.

a few years before you were caught two 70 year olds were mown down & killed in the late evening by a speeding car whilst crossing at the same point by the Sackville Hotel...

 

[larus]

Serves you right. Man up and take it on the chin. All this it's not fair whining makes you sound like a three year old.

God, what a pathetic response. "Man up"; maybe you need more than one brain cell to be functioning at a time.

 

[larus]

a few years before you were caught two 70 year olds were mown down & killed in the late evening by a speeding car whilst crossing at the same point by the Sackville Hotel...

A policeman I knew told me they had targets to meet and would often go to roads which they knew were easy spots to pick up drivers speeding. This was not done for road safety. They are called raod safety cameras, not money raising cameras.

Also, you are using emotive language to to make your point. Mown down; I was doing 40 on a dual carriageway, not 50-60. What speed was this driver doing. You need to know that before you try to imply linkage in the 2 events.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

God, what a pathetic response. "Man up"; maybe you need more than one brain cell to be functioning at a time.

Typical self pitying trash from a Clarkson clone, just because you cant stick to a speed limit diesn't mean you are some sort of matyr. You seriously need to look at yourself and grow a pair.

 

[brighton rock]

ok fair enough, but i would make 1 of them responsible, and they would get the points regardless of who was driving

If you don't provide a name and decide to go to court it then becomes 2 offences with a penalty of 3 points for both or a fine of upto a £1000 and they can even make you retest so best just put your name down and pay the money

 

[otk]

Inconsiderate HGV drivers, falling asleep at the wheel of tens of tonnes of metal, not letting others onto motorways when the middle lane is clear, and driving within a gnat's chaff of the car /lorry in front. Also good reasons for you to have given up your car/lorry!

I see you are one of those drivers who believe everyone on the road should fit in with your intentions, rather than vice versa

Here's a snippet from the Highway Code. It's the leaflet you looked at to pass your test, then forgot all about...

'Part 3: Joining the motorway (259)
259

Joining the motorway. When you join the motorway you will normally approach it from a road on the left (a slip road) or from an adjoining motorway. You should

give priority to traffic already on the motorway
check the traffic on the motorway and match your speed to fit safely into the traffic flow in the left-hand lane...'

And you obviously have never driven a large vehicle, as changing lanes is a bit of an operation tbh, and not something that is done to accomodate selfish drivers

 

[The Fifth Column]

If you don't provide a name and decide to go to court it then becomes 2 offences with a penalty of 3 points for both or a fine of upto a £1000 and they can even make you retest so best just put your name down and pay the money

I got pinged in Essex several years ago by a temporary camera, I told them my friend Joos Van Der Kinkerhofen who was visiting from South Africa was driving and provided his address in Cape Town. I never heard from Essex police again and funnily enough I never heard from my old mate Joos either. This year my mate Benny Von Abbaband from a small village in northernmost Sweden will be over, I hope he doesn't get caught speeding.

 

[The Fifth Column]

A simple yes/no question for you

If everyone in the country drove at or under the speed limit at all times, would there be a reduction in road deaths?

I reckon the answer would be yes

Whether it is one, or more probably hundreds, if not thousands, they are lives that would be saved

Bit of pointless comment as this will clearly never happen. If every pedestrian wore a crash helmet would the number of head trauma deaths reduce? I think the answer is yes.

As previous posters have pointed out, speed cameras are rarely about safety they are a cynical cash cow for local authorities/ the government. Average speed cameras make sense when applied correctly but are pointless in the middle of the night when no one is working and the roads are empty. Static cameras are completely pointless, people slow down for the camera but are speeding before and afterwards.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

A policeman I knew told me they had targets to meet and would often go to roads which they knew were easy spots to pick up drivers speeding

That may well have been the case at one stage in history, or in another force, but I can tell you for a fact that we don't have targets to meet, either in terms of speeders or any other sort of traffic offence.

 

[GingerBeerMan]

Are average speed cameras taken from the front or rear of the car? And as an extension of the previous question do they work for motorbikes?

FWIW I never follow speed limits, I go at a speed I think is safe for the conditions (excluding any cameras). This could be 50 along the seafront at 1am, but I go 25 just 200m further up the seafront where the drunk people unexpectedly pop out. On a motorway I go at the speed of other cars in my lane whether that be 60 or 90.
IMO speed limits are too rigid, the fact the government think we should be allowed to go the same speed in heavy rain at 7pm as we can in fine conditions are 1am is silly in this day and age.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

Bit of a one dimensional outlook as you are simplifying the causation factors of the accident as being purely about being a few miles over the speed limit. It's very rarely solely about one such factor being the cause and if you hit and killed someone and were a few miles an hour under the limit or not speeding then the result is the same and the knock on the door would be no less painful. I know you have a party line to tout but don't tell me you never speed ever, I simply won't believe you.

I haven't said that anywhere. My standpoint would be that if I did get caught, I'd have nobody to blame but myself, as I know what the limits are, and I'd be pissed off at myself for getting into that position. It's not a "tax on drivers" because a tax is something you can't avoid (unless you're Jimmy Carr), whereas it's entirely your choice whether to get caught speeding or not.

Trust me, if a child gets hurt or killed, I can pretty much guarantee the parents will be demanding action against the driver if it's proved he was doing even a small amount over the limit. It might not be the prime cause of an accident- the kid might have run out from behind a parked car for example- but grieving people will always look for someone to point the finger at, and question whether the driver might have been able to stop quicker if doing 30 rather than 35.

Like I said, drive how you like, it's entirely up to you: just take it on the chin & don't cry like a three year old girl if you get caught out