Average Speed Cameras to Police UK Rural Speed Reduction

[RobBrady]

There's a lot of talk this week about the reduction of the speed limit from 60mph to 50mph on thousands of the UK's rural roads - about half the network.

Although the Department for Transport (DfT) reports that the average speed is already only 48mph on the existing rural 60mph roads during free-flowing conditions, they say that the reduction would save as many as 250 lives a year, would reduce fuel consumption and lower carbon emissions.

A spokesperson for the Environmental Transport Association (ETA) said: "A lower speed limit may seem a logical way of improving safety and reducing emissions, but the average speed on rural roads is already less than 50mph and a head-on crash at this speed is devastating."

Nigel Humphries from The Association of British Drivers says, "Anyone can see that hazards vary along rural roads, and so speeds must vary with them. A blanket 50 mph speed limit does not recognize that roads vary enormously in character and that a limit as low as 50 is totally unnecessary on many rural roads".

The speed reductions are planned for next year and will be policed by average speed cameras. Do you agree that the change is a good idea?
_________________
Robert Brady

[Jellyroll]

I personally think that Average Speed Cameras should be reserved for stretches of road where an average speed can be maintained.

While there are some rural roads that are long, straight and safe, far more are twisty-windy and have poor visibility. The average speed is already under 50mph, because most people have more sense than to push 60mph on a stretch that isn't safe, and those who haven't, who contribute to the 250 deaths that the change is trying to prevent, are not going to be put off for long by something as trivial as a pair of yellow cameras.

Such cameras can only be used on stretches of road where it would be safe to average 50mph, else they could be used in a driver's defence following any accident as having indicated that 50mph was appropriate for the stretch concerned. And if those stretches where they are used are genuinely safe enough for 50mph they're very often gong to be safe enough for 60mph, I should expect.

So, overall, that's a big

[PhilGarmin]

Personally I drive at a speed that reflects the conditions.
Some roads are too twisty, narrow etc to progress near to the 60mph, limit.
This limit is an upper limit and not a target to be achieved or exceeded.

Some of the soon to be effected roads, currently allow safe overtaking opportunities, with a sensible overtaking speed (and less time taken to complete an overtake with less time exposed to oncoming traffic).

People will still overtake, however will now have 10mph less to overtake with.

The countryside is an excellent place to relax, slow down a bit and take in the scenery, however this will change if all vehicles are being closely monitored by average speed cameras.
The drivers will be watching their speedos more intently and not the tractor that just pulled out in front.

Come on now give us a bit of credit, start trusting us to be sensible rather that enforcing all of the time.

There are the silly drivers who insist on travelling too fast for the conditions, however whatever limit is imposed, these drivers will still come a cropper at some point as they choose to ignore even the current limits.

If a sensible approach to speed is to be demonstratied by the government, how about reviewing the current motorway limits and setting them to a higher value (80-90pmph) which is lowered depending on weatherand volume of traffic.

How about raising the age of drivers to 18, curfews to stop the boyracers wizzing around causing havoc all night.
_________________
Garmin DriveSmart 76 with Alexa

[MikeB]

Some years ago I argued with a friend about the explosion of CCTV in our city centres and around the roads. I was informed that this was a good thing as it made our streets safer...

I disputed that and still do. What it does is give an excuse for the bobbie on the beat to be reassigned to other duties (or made redundant as part of a cost cutting exercise). The cameras are only really any good for after the event evidence, and often the images are of such poor quality that people cant be identified.

That looks like it was the thin edge of the wedge. Today just about every square inch of a city has video surveillance, your civil liberties are being infringed, and now our dictatorial, nanny state has decided that we really dont know how to drive and are lowering the speed limits (oh and charging some hefty revenue supporting fines as well).

Every time a speed camera is installed there is always the argument of saving lives, but is rarely (or never) backed up by genuine statistics. Of course lowering speed will reduce the possibilities of hitting things. Why not set the speed limit to 0 then no speed related accidents can occur...

It is interesting comparing the attitude of people in the UK to that of the USA. In the UK we just seem to accept these restrictions and regulations to our lives and liberty, whereas in the USA people fight tooth and nail against them.

Dont get me wrong I am not advocating speeding or breaking the law in any way, but I do disagree with the attitude of the UK legislature who think that they know best for all of us... It would be interesting to see how many politicians were elected if the speed cameras and erosion of privacy and civil liberties were on the platforms that they were elected on. I doubt many votes would be cast in their favour.
_________________
Mike Barrett

[mcwarre]

Safety my backside!

It is just another revenue generation scheme - pure and simple. It is about time that someone started challenging these Nazis. Speed doesn't kill; inappropriate driving does. Remember that everyone is entitled to their own opinions but not their own facts.

[s3dbw]

So lets get the petition started to try and head of this nonesense!

[Darren]

You don't think they take any notice do you? Far too busy filling out their expense claims
_________________
Darren Griffin

[s3dbw]

Probably not, but as MikeB states, as a country we always just roll over and accept the inevitable. It just makes my blood boil that the vast majority of people in this country are manipulated by politicians pampering to the demands of minority environmental pressure groups.

Sorry rant over!!

[Darren]

[gareth71]

Sign the petition here.[/url]

[Darren]

Signed
_________________
Darren Griffin

[DarrenR21373]

It is not even so much the fact that those in charge are constantly imposing ridiculously low speed limits that gets me - it's the fact that they always have to be enforced with speed cameras.

With modern vehicles being so much safer than those when speed limits were originally thought up, speed limits should be being raised, particulary on motorways, dual-carriageways and single carriageways that are wide and straight. 50 is just ludicrous.

Yet again, another money-making racket from this incompetent, greedy, corrupt Government. Why can't they deal with the important things like terrorism, illegal and mass immigration, the completely screwed economy, etc, and leave the motorist alone. Let those of us lucky enough to still have jobs and be paying tax do our jobs in peace.

EDIT: Petition signed
_________________
Drive carefully; the Government needs all the Taxpayers it can get.

[DennisN]

I'm in favour of Specs cameras for all VWs and all black cars.
_________________
Dennis

If it tastes good - it's fattening.

Two of them are obesiting!!

[aj2052]

In My opinion are these being introduced purely because they possibly gain more revenue than fixed cameras because it is harder to evalaute your speed than passing a fixed camera thus perhaps a driver may think he can speed up over the limit because he may have been held up up earlier thus increasing the danger in other parts of the spec range and defeating the whole purpose, perhaps somebody should request thsi info under the freedom of information act,
petition signed
_________________
Moto G5s Plus, Sygic 17.4.8

[Pocketgps]

We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?.
Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!