Speed cameras serve no purpose, says report
A new report on speed cameras in Thames Valley which will be published on Tuesday casts doubt on their effectiveness as a road safety tool.
The report investigates the effect that speed cameras have had on the number of collisions that resulted in death or injury.
It includes all 212 fixed camera sites – within which there are 359 Gatso-type cameras – and 105 mobile camera sites that had been operating for two or more years at the start of 2009.
The report concludes that:
> Speed cameras have not made any impact in preventing road traffic collisions.
> There was no reduction in the number of collisions at fixed (Gatso) camera sites after they were installed and there was no reduction in the number of collisions at mobile camera sites after they started operating.
> Even after compensating for other influences such as rising traffic volumes and safer vehicle design, the cameras are still not demonstrated to have resulted in any reduction in collision rates. In fact, collision rates increased at mobile speed camera sites following deployment relative to all roads in the Thames Valley area.
> There was found to be no relationship between vehicle speeds and the number of collisions. Reductions in speeds at camera sites (both average and above the speed limit) did not result in any reduction in the number of collisions.
Find out more by clicking here
Email to a friend
Print this page
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Luton
Wednesday 23 May 2012
Today
Sunny spells
Temperature: 11 C to 23 C
Wind Speed: 9 mph
Wind direction: North east
Tomorrow
Sunny spells
Temperature: 11 C to 25 C
Wind Speed: 13 mph
Wind direction: North east
Comments
There are 2 comments to this article
Page 1 of 1
jcwconsult
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 10:32 PMActually, speed cameras serve three main purposes. 1. They raise a lot of revenue, almost all of it from safe, sane, sober, competent drivers proceeding at safe speeds for the conditons. 2. They punish primarily safe drivers with points on their license so some insurance companies can raise premiums on these safe drivers to increase profits from drivers with very low accident risks. 3. The reduce safety overall by encouraging authorities to post speed limits well below the 85th percentile speed of free flowing traffic under good conditions, the method that almost always produces the greatest safety with the fewest accidents. Cameras also reduce safety by encouraging authorities to reduce road patrols, trained officers who can find and cite drivers for drink-driving, reckless driving, defective equipment, improper passing, etc., etc. - all things the cameras cannot do. Speed cameras are REVENUE devices, NOT safety devices. See the science on our website and the website of the Association of British Drivers www.abd.org.uk James C. Walker, National Motorists Association (USA), www.motorists.org, Ann Arbor, Michigan (frequent visitor to Britain to see family in Yorkshire)
remeboy
Monday, February 6, 2012 at 04:11 PMAt last a report with some common sense input which has been claimed by many over these past years. I have stated many times that speed is not the problem but the driver. Cameras only alienate the public and also drivers become more tense when on the road due to hidden cameras which generate finances for so called safety departments which CCs are so devious to build upon and retain personnel in highly paid employment and pensions. REME BOY Derbyshire
Page 1 of 1
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.