10/06/2009

In some ways I agree about Safety Cameras, but oh the hypocrisy

Having recently travelled down to London and seen the obsession some parts of the country have with installing speed cameras almost every couple of miles along some roads, I have to agree with the Tory idea that most speed cameras could be culled.

Whilst speeding is a crime, it is not a premeditated crime intended to be at the expense of someone else. I happen to think flashing signs, better road markings and the occasional risk that a police officer might be standing there with a speed gun does provide the necessary inducement to slow down.

The problem though, for the Tories is that whilst they might like to slag speed cameras off, at a local level the Tories are actually very keen to put them up and make money from them.

Take, for example, in Norfolk, where Tory run Norfolk County Council are themselves major partners in Norfolk Safety Camera Partnership. This same partnership is responsible for the recent placing of a camera on my route to work in an area which I have, in four years of travelling that route, never seen an accident or been held up at that point. Of course, with a good flow of traffic I think most people know why the camera was placed at that exact point, and I am sure it will be a money spinner for them.

The problem though that the Tories will face by abolishing camera is that they do provide a source of income for the police, the same police that will apparently have to make its share of cuts. So the prize that motorists will get as a result of having less speed cameras will be less police officers and less crime solved.

The Tories will have to learn that for every policy there is a knock on associated.

5 comments:

Liberal Neil said...

I certainly agree with you that reducing the number of speed cameras being installed and ensuring they are only put in places where they will actually improve road safety is sensible.

But I take issues with: "Whilst speeding is a crime, it is not a premeditated crime intended to be at the expense of someone else."

Speeding is certainly 'premeditated', in that the person doing the speeding presumably knows what they are doing.

Whether they 'intend' it to be at the expense of someone else is questionable, but any driver must be aware of the potential consequences - which are potentially more serious than many other crimes.

Anonymous said...

'But I take issues with: "Whilst speeding is a crime, it is not a premeditated crime intended to be at the expense of someone else."

Speeding is certainly 'premeditated', in that the person doing the speeding presumably knows what they are doing.

Whether they 'intend' it to be at the expense of someone else is questionable, but any driver must be aware of the potential consequences - which are potentially more serious than many other crimes.'

Speeding is a reckless crime. I do doubt whether many drivers are actually paying any attention to the potential consequences.

When some idiot driver loses control of their vehicle - and no other vehicle was involved in the incident - there is a high chance that driving too fast for the prevailing conditions was a factor in the incident - I won't use the term accident because such incidents are perfectly avoidable with a bit more caution.

And in any crash - the faster you are driving the harder you are going to hit someone or something and the more damage - and likelihood that someone will be killed - will be done.

I do doubt whether speed cameras as used in many parts of the UK are the right way to deal with speeding.

To treat speeding offences with the seriousness they deserve we need to be a lot tougher with serious offenders. As it is the police play a stupid game by being visible when they operate a speed trap. They should operate the trap from a hidden position and catch as many of the b------s as they can. And do as the French police can - suspend driving licences immediately for serious speeding offences.

Norfolk Blogger said...

Erm .. same messgage twice from two different people ?

As to your point about the French, they are no example.

The whole drink drive culture in France is abhorrant. I've visited France and I knew French students at univsersity who did not even feel it was wrong to drink drive. The Police take little action over it there and anyone drving on a French Autoroute cannot help but be inimpressed by French driving.

Anonymous said...

You can accidentally speed but you cannot accidentally burgle someone. That is the difference.

Quietzapple said...

People who speed without any premeditation should not be on the road.

You might not premeditate the precise time.

When you do I want you caught and, if the circumstances make your action dangerous, successfully prosecuted.

It became apparent in the London mayoral elections that car crimes are an issue on which drivers will switch, and few others care.

Pages