In car distractions

Hi Coasting, got one 6 months ago and its great..(classic though). Just keep on thinking changing one digit on my number plate is worth the risk???. I will keep considering for a while longer..

I see your valid point Nigel. And I don't want to appear "stroppy" but its also the serious point of "bad "drivers. These cameras cost money to intall etc..and there is a real issue that all the time there is an increasing number of drivers who drive drunk/drugged, not insured, no tax or MOT. Now I dont know the figures but there seems less police on the road watching drivers than ever before. I do 600 miles a week just to and from work and its a rare sight to see a police car (except parked in the little chef-with no-one in it) from one week to the next.

Over the entire Xmas period I didnt see one car pulled over, and I do drive around at throwing out time, and neither did a single person I know. Now whilst I realise that there are other police duties to be carried out I just feel there is a direct link between cameras and less "police presence" on the road. Peolpe are getting away with serious law breaking as mentioned above. Just to finish off, my own choice would be to see the guy who is drunk or drugged  or uninsured get pulled over--not the guy who goes over the limit at night by a few mph (speeding is bad, yes, but at least if a policeman sees you he can use his judgement to decide if 70 mph in the dead of night in a 60mph limit was actually dangerous or not, a camera has no discresion)

spokey wrote: Nigel wrote: spokey wrote:  Because they de-emphasise every other aspect of safe driving. They do not, they merely enforce the law, and give you a generous margin of 10% + 2 mph, it is illegal to break the posted speed limit. There is almost no visible policing of any other aspect of safe driving. The overwhelming preponderence of scameras tells everyone "as long as you don't speed, we won't bother you".

Agreed Spokey, but how does that merit removing the camera ?

It seems dangerous sometimes to me..there you are driving along at 40 mph in a 40 mph limit and the muppet in front jams his brakes on because he sees a camera..

On the motorway (or better example the dual carrigeway) going along nicely at 70 mph and ..slam on the brakes because there is a car in front who has seen a camera and his initial reaction (before taking his eyes off the road YET AGAIN to check his speedo precisely) is to go for the brake.

The only benefit I can see is the exciting challenge I get every day in that I see if I can get away with it again. 

spokey wrote: Because they police something that, in the grand scheme of things, doesn't merit so much policing. The laws on speeding were made 40 years ago, and the capabilities of cars today are far superior to those of 40 years ago.

That is a matter of opinion, as they dont take up police time, in fact they free up officers to get on with other duties, and whilst the performance of the car has improved, the capabiliteis of the driver havent.

spokey wrote: Because they are used as an excuse to get rid of traffic police.

The amount of traffic police on our roads is a question for the chief constable of that area, he sets his priorities, speed cameras are there merely to enforce a speed limit on a stretch of road where tests have  shown this limit is ignored 

spokey wrote:   Because they de-emphasise every other aspect of safe driving.

They do not, they merely enforce the law, and give you a generous margin of 10% + 2 mph, it is illegal to break the posted speed limit.

Because they form part of a campaign to demonise the motorist and make criminals of us all.

Because they police something that, in the grand scheme of things, doesn't merit so much policing. The laws on speeding were made 40 years ago, and the capabilities of cars today are far superior to those of 40 years ago.

Only where applicable, but many of them are sited for no other reason than to make money.