h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Why are speed cameras in the UK always in full view with warning signs before them? Would they not be more effective if they were hidden?

They're unpopular enough as it is - just think of the uproar if they hid them!

Why would there be an uproar?

They did use to be hidden, but public outrage meant that they were signposted.

As if the average driver couldn't just outfox the Treasury by not breaking the fing speed limit!

There's a strong petrolheaded top-gear-watching jeremy-clarkson-book-buying testosterone-fuelled car lobby in the UK who think they're above motoring laws. The Government pander to them.

Do you have a points system, where if you're caught speeding, it counts against you, and enough infringements, you're banned from driving?

Maybe, the idea is that if drivers know there is a camera, or they can see it, they actually slow down.

Yeah, generally you get 3 points for speeding (or 6 if you're *really* speeding), which stay on your licence for 3 years. If you get to 12, then you lose your licence.

The argument that I've seen put forward seems to go something like this:

Petrol is very heavily taxed, and car tax is very high,* therefore it's unfair to make drivers pay when they break the speed limit.

No, I don't understand it either...


*Particularly if you drive the type of large expensive car favoured by those who make this argument...

It's probably good for the environment too, because more of the petrol-guzzling cars will get written off, and their drivers removed from the car-driving population.

I've had a look around the web to find the real reason for the original question but it's very difficult to find your way around the very type of invective that seems to be flavour of the day in this thread.

I found this eventually which is raises interesting points for and against camera visibility and also against cameras in general interesting.
http://www.speedlimit.org.uk/revisited.html

It's an interesting question I'd be interested to find out if they're more effective when hidden or not. Actual evidence I mean.

One interesting point I saw on one page I saw was that hidden cameras weren't necessarily effective as they became quickly known to locals and therefore only caught out the unwary non-local.

I think a mixture of hidden ones, ones with signs, and warning signs with no cameras at all (cheap) would be the best option.

sprout

Visible speed limit reminder signs (that are activated by speeding vehicles) work well to slow people. From my experiences when driving, speed cameras tend to make people slam on their anchors, even when they aren't breaking the speed limit.

Why they cant just take idiots who dont know what they are doing off the road instead of speeding drivers who *do* know what they are doing, I dont know... Surely unaware drivers who have little or no idea of what speed they are doing at a given time and have a tendency to impulsive actions and irrational panic are far more dangerous?



Dont get me wrong, I dont have a problem with speed cameras: If yu break the law and get caught, tough. It's just that I dont think they really address the real problem... Too many people on the roads who shouldn't be. It's a bleedin priveledge, not a right!

Mmh, this subject shouldn't be mentioned without providing the following link, probably: F19585?thread=242934

It depends also on how much speeders are speeding. Because, even if you know what you are doing, someone else might be taken by surprise by the irregularity. A bit like not using the indicator because you know where you're going, or not switching on the lights at dusk because you can still see enough - it's helpful for fellow motorists, really.

And also, it would help if the speed limits were a bit more sensible sometimes. There is a French region where most roads have a 75kph limit instead of the standard 90 for no obvious reason (straight roads, good visibility).

ah, you can argue against that in the UK.
There was a case a bit ago of someone done for 50mph in a 40mph zone and successfully argued that it should not have been a 40 zone in the first place. There are rules as to what speed limit applies and where and it isn't supposed to be done arbitarily.

Oh, that's good I wonder if the same holds in France (or anywhere else, actually).

just a shame it doesn't work for doing 90 in a 70 zone

I do think that motorway speed limits should be increased. It strikes me that people going fast on the motorways is probably much less of a problem than tailgating, weaving too much across lanes, not indicating, and pulling out without checking your mirrors.

Also, there are times when you can be going along in the left lane at 70 and still hold up the people behind you.

As for speed cameras, I don't know at all. I certainly don't like the suddenly slam on your brakes effect where everyone suddenly bunches up as they come to a speed camera.

There are rules as to what speed limit applies and where in Germany, and they're not applied arbitrarily, either: whenever a commune needs money, they put new speed limits, and bingo, they get their money.