Motoring
Speeding questions
Speed cameras might be causing deaths not preventing them
‘When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?’ John Maynard Keynes retorted to a critic. A pity he’s not here to ask the same question of the Department for Transport (DfT) when they lecture us on road deaths this Christmas.
Four years ago The Spectator (22 November 2003) helped to initiate the wider debate about speed cameras, hitherto primarily a concern of the specialist motoring press and the RAC Foundation. The article attracted considerable attention, partly because of the figures it quoted for cameras, drivers caught, revenue raised and the fact that, of 419 Somerset police officers caught in one year, only one was prosecuted. Somewhat reluctantly, however, The Spectator accepted the government’s justification for the strategy: research showed that cameras reduced deaths and injuries by 35 per cent.
More articles from: Alan Judd | this section
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
The great Tory tax and spend battle: seconds out...
Fraser Nelson and Daniel FinkelsteinIn the wake of Cameron’s decision to drop his pledge to match Labour spending, Fraser Nelson and Daniel Fin kelstein of the Times trade rhetorical blows over the issue that is gripping and troubling the Conservative party as it adjusts to the transformed economic context
High life
TakiFeeling the pinch
High Life
TakiParadise lost
Keynesianism isn’t the answer
The Spectator on the current financial turmoil
Low Life
Jeremy Clarke
Was he drunk?
Latest blog posts
sponsored links
Free Sky Digital Offer - Order Now
Subscribe to Sky from £16 a month. Get free equipment and free broadband - Join Now. Sky HD - be amongst the first to have it - order now.
Free Sky Digital Offer - Order Now
Subscribe to Sky from £16 a month. Get free equipment and free broadband - Join Now. Sky HD - be...
ROME CENTRE
PORTA METRONIA, ROME Standing high on the top of one of the seven hills of Rome- the Coelian- this unique
City Breaks. ROME and PARIS
ROME and PARIS: over 350 holiday rentals apartments listed: visit www.romanreference.com and www.parisreference.com or call +39 0648 903612.
Jewellery. RUFFS (Estd. 1904).
Goldsmiths by Design Welcome to Ruffs! You have found a company of Goldsmiths that specialises in the manufacture, amongst other
Spectator Business | Apollo Magazine
Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2008 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
Dwight Vandryver
December 14th, 2007 4:46amIn some instances, cameras are completely "cynical", sited in such a way as to maximize the revenue. Beware if you drive along the A5209 from the M6, there is a 1 in 7 decline at the bottom of which is a cross-roads. Well before the intersection, there is a blind bend on the decline that swings to the right. One would suppose that the camera would be sited before the bend in order not only to protect the intersection to come, but also to reduce speed before the aforesaid bend. But, hey, the camera is positioned on the other side of the bend. So, if you've managed to negotiate it without rampaging into oncoming traffic, you'll be snapped after your successful manoeuvre around the bend. Good for profit, but shite for road safety. The fact is that it is not speed per se that kills, it's just British drivers. How often has one been driving along a motorway at 70mph only to find that some numbnuts/numbtits is driving his/her car only one foot away from one's boot? [Is this sufficiently PC? One would hate to exclude the other sex!]