The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Are speed cameras the only sensible way to get drivers to go slower?
Lets face it, speed bumps are a right pain in the buttocks. So are cameras, but they work.
The only reason they work, is that people don't like to part with money. So fining people every time they're caught speeding would be a good way to slow them down, yes?
Thoughts?
Lets face it, speed bumps are a right pain in the buttocks. So are cameras, but they work.
The only reason they work, is that people don't like to part with money. So fining people every time they're caught speeding would be a good way to slow them down, yes?
Thoughts?
Page:
They should all be bright yellow though.
Yes, it's unfair to hide them like that, but that still happens around the Country - there are cameras hidden behind big signs, around bends etc.
I think it was a good idea a couple of years ago to paint them bright yellow, that works. I remember in the days when they would camouflage them in trees, sneeky lto.
A bit of an overdue answer, but meh...
I'm in two minds about speed cameras. For me it's all about location. Just up the road from me, there are about 5 cameras on each side of one long-ish road - that's about 10 cameras for one road! This, however, is a great idea because that road is a prime boy-racer strip, with schools etc. situated by it. Many people have been run over there, some even killed. Since the cameras were placed, I don't think one accident has occurred (they've been there for a couple of years now). They limit you to 30 and it's impossible/pointless to speed back up after leaving the vicinity of one as the next one is right in front of you. This is a good example of effective camera placement.
Now for the bad.
Carriageways, single or dual, where pedestrians cannot cross or rarely do on the roads that they can. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but most carriageways are mini-motorways - in the sense that they are designed without sharp bends, gradients and traffic lights. This is to make driving at higher speeds much safer than on a suburban street/main road etc.
So where is the sense in putting cameras on these roads, where most of the time, speeding does not occur as you can go much faster than normal anyway (dual carriageways being at 70mph - motorway speeds).OK, so there is still the existence of 'Dave' and his mates bombing around in their Nova GTE's with half the paint not even on yet, tinny sound systems and an exhaust that sounds like a vibrator has been shoved up the pipe (oo-er). These people are still going to screw their cars as much as they can, increasing the headache of high premiums for the rest of us young drivers. But hey, these people deserve to crash their cars and be taken off the road if they're putting the rest of us in danger.
I went off one one there, let me straighten up.
Motorways. I have to admit, the only time I have seen speed cameras on motorways is when road works are taking place. If I see one, I will slow down for it - common sense so as not to endanger the workers.
However, if the motorway is clear, like YH, I will go over the speed limit - I have done many a time and will continue to do so, purely because there is no threat of danger ahead, I know the road and I know my car. I know for a fact the only time I will be in an accident is at the cause of someone else - but when there is no-one there, there is no threat so I am safe to go a little faster and save a bit of time. You may see that as wrong, but I honestly don't.
At the end of the day, Speed cameras are only good depending on where they are placed.
Speed bumps should be abolished. My car now needs a new suspension arm because the wheel base is to narrow to safely negotiate a bump without turning the inside of my car into a salad shaker.
I'm in two minds about speed cameras. For me it's all about location. Just up the road from me, there are about 5 cameras on each side of one long-ish road - that's about 10 cameras for one road! This, however, is a great idea because that road is a prime boy-racer strip, with schools etc. situated by it. Many people have been run over there, some even killed. Since the cameras were placed, I don't think one accident has occurred (they've been there for a couple of years now). They limit you to 30 and it's impossible/pointless to speed back up after leaving the vicinity of one as the next one is right in front of you. This is a good example of effective camera placement.
Now for the bad.
Carriageways, single or dual, where pedestrians cannot cross or rarely do on the roads that they can. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but most carriageways are mini-motorways - in the sense that they are designed without sharp bends, gradients and traffic lights. This is to make driving at higher speeds much safer than on a suburban street/main road etc.
So where is the sense in putting cameras on these roads, where most of the time, speeding does not occur as you can go much faster than normal anyway (dual carriageways being at 70mph - motorway speeds).OK, so there is still the existence of 'Dave' and his mates bombing around in their Nova GTE's with half the paint not even on yet, tinny sound systems and an exhaust that sounds like a vibrator has been shoved up the pipe (oo-er). These people are still going to screw their cars as much as they can, increasing the headache of high premiums for the rest of us young drivers. But hey, these people deserve to crash their cars and be taken off the road if they're putting the rest of us in danger.
I went off one one there, let me straighten up.
Motorways. I have to admit, the only time I have seen speed cameras on motorways is when road works are taking place. If I see one, I will slow down for it - common sense so as not to endanger the workers.
However, if the motorway is clear, like YH, I will go over the speed limit - I have done many a time and will continue to do so, purely because there is no threat of danger ahead, I know the road and I know my car. I know for a fact the only time I will be in an accident is at the cause of someone else - but when there is no-one there, there is no threat so I am safe to go a little faster and save a bit of time. You may see that as wrong, but I honestly don't.
At the end of the day, Speed cameras are only good depending on where they are placed.
Speed bumps should be abolished. My car now needs a new suspension arm because the wheel base is to narrow to safely negotiate a bump without turning the inside of my car into a salad shaker.
I don't think there is an answer.
SHEEPY wrote:
> The speed limit is there for a reason
What is that reason?
(May sound a stupid question, but I'm looking forward to your answer...)
> The speed limit is there for a reason
What is that reason?
(May sound a stupid question, but I'm looking forward to your answer...)
cookie monster wrote:
> Forest Fan wrote:
> Did you know the Green Party want to lower the speed limit!
>
> I wont be voting for them then.
I don't think anyone will.
> Forest Fan wrote:
> Did you know the Green Party want to lower the speed limit!
>
> I wont be voting for them then.
I don't think anyone will.
SHEEPY wrote:
> The speed limit is there for a reason
To be broken!
I jest.
Maybe.
> The speed limit is there for a reason
To be broken!
I jest.
Maybe.
Your Honour wrote:
> I think the problem on the motorways is that people drive at speeds
> that are too different.
>
> Half the queues I've sat in have been down to someone going from the
> middle lane into the fast lane, but only doing about 70. So everyone
> in the fast lane has to slam on their brakes, and it causes a
> consitina effect.
>
> If everyone was doing the same speed, it wouldn't matter if it was
> 100mph, because you wouldn't get some slow ass muppet put out in
> front of you and hold everyone up.
>
> See?
Yes, thats why the idea of cars being computer controlled is intruiging. There was a feature on tomorrows world where about 6 computer controlled cars were able to be driven at exactly the same speed and with a relatively short gap between them because if anything happened the computer could react fast enough to stop a crash. It was interesting stuf, but i doubt it will ever be implemented.
> I think the problem on the motorways is that people drive at speeds
> that are too different.
>
> Half the queues I've sat in have been down to someone going from the
> middle lane into the fast lane, but only doing about 70. So everyone
> in the fast lane has to slam on their brakes, and it causes a
> consitina effect.
>
> If everyone was doing the same speed, it wouldn't matter if it was
> 100mph, because you wouldn't get some slow ass muppet put out in
> front of you and hold everyone up.
>
> See?
Yes, thats why the idea of cars being computer controlled is intruiging. There was a feature on tomorrows world where about 6 computer controlled cars were able to be driven at exactly the same speed and with a relatively short gap between them because if anything happened the computer could react fast enough to stop a crash. It was interesting stuf, but i doubt it will ever be implemented.
The speed limit is there for a reason
Page: