The Conservatives in Wales lose their last ditch attempt to stop the speed limit change from 30mph to 20mph. The change will be coming into force on the 17th September

  • Hyperreality
    link
    fedilink
    6
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    police running deceptive speed traps.

    Here’s the thing with speed traps.

    Turns out that after people have been fined a few times, they suddenly do feel that 20mph roads are 20mph roads.

    Almost as if they knew the road was 20mph all along, but decided to ignore the clearly marked speed limit (and often the speed limit warning on their satnav) because they hadn’t faced any consequences for it before.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21 year ago

      I have seen documented evidence many times that enforcement does NOT alter people’s behaviour in a way that persists after enforcement ceases. They simply adapt to the enforcement level, whatever that happens to be. I don’t think that enforcement is a reasonable component of street safety. We can’t have street daddies on every corner keeping us safe.

      • Hyperreality
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The UK Department for Transport estimated that cameras had led to a 22% reduction in personal injury collisions and 42% fewer people being killed or seriously injured at camera sites. The British Medical Journal recently reported that speed cameras were effective at reducing accidents and injuries in their vicinity and recommended wider deployment. An LSE study in 2017 found that “adding another 1,000 cameras to British roads could save up to 190 lives annually, reduce up to 1,130 collisions and mitigate 330 serious injuries.”

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_enforcement_camera

        “Our research suggests the growing use of average speed cameras in motorway roadworks and increasingly on sections of A-road is reinforcing the road safety message as they are extremely effective at slowing down drivers. … “For instance, on the A9 in Scotland the number of deaths has halved since average speed cameras were introduced between Dunblane and Inverness in October 2014.

        https://roadsafetygb.org.uk/news/average-speed-cameras-more-effective-study-finds/

        All but one of the studies showed effectiveness of cameras up to three years or less after their introduction; one study showed sustained longer term effects (4.6 years after introduction). Reductions in outcomes across studies ranged from 5% to 69% for collisions, 12% to 65% for injuries, and 17% to 71% for deaths in the immediate vicinity of camera sites. The reductions over wider geographical areas were of a similar order of magnitude.

        https://www.bmj.com/content/330/7487/331

        We can’t have street daddies on every corner keeping us safe.

        You can and thanks to the revenue cameras generate, it generates enough revenue to save the tax payer money, and free up the police for other duties.

        I have seen documented evidence many times that enforcement does NOT alter people’s behaviour in a way that persists

        Given I found plenty of evidence with a 5 second search, is it possible you didn’t want to find evidence because you had already come to a conclusion about the effectiveness of speed enforcement?

        • TWeaK
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          The UK Department for Transport estimated that cameras had led to a 22% reduction in personal injury collisions and 42% fewer people being killed or seriously injured at camera sites. The British Medical Journal recently reported that speed cameras were effective at reducing accidents and injuries in their vicinity and recommended wider deployment. An LSE study in 2017 found that “adding another 1,000 cameras to British roads could save up to 190 lives annually, reduce up to 1,130 collisions and mitigate 330 serious injuries.”

          “Enforcing speed limits in areas that matter leads to better compliance in those areas and a reduction in deaths”

          That doesn’t mean we should reduce speed limits everywhere, just that we need to enforce safety where it matters.

          “Our research suggests the growing use of average speed cameras in motorway roadworks and increasingly on sections of A-road is reinforcing the road safety message as they are extremely effective at slowing down drivers. … “For instance, on the A9 in Scotland the number of deaths has halved since average speed cameras were introduced between Dunblane and Inverness in October 2014.

          Mate, the A9 is a beast in and of itself. It’s the one road that connects mainland Scotland (Glasgow & Edinburgh) with the rest of the country, if you exclude Aberdeen. When the A9 has a major accident (which happens far too frequently) then you often have to detour 50 miles, easily more if you don’t pick the right route first time.

          The A9 single carriageway average speed cameras are pretty reasonable, though, more or less. What would be more reasonable would be dualling it all the way, or at least dualling the key accident hot spots, the bottlenecks. Then if they had a crash they could divert to the other carriageway, rather than queueing up traffic for half a day and expecting people to turn around and navigate across the lower highlands.


          Suffice it to say, horses for courses. We can have speed regulation and enforcement where it matters, and we can have national speed limits that leave drivers to driver to the conditions. All of these measures of changing the rules are nothing but bullshit though, not when we have no formal system of teaching the new rules to existing drivers.

          Ongoing training for drivers is needed. Not necessarily ongoing pass/fail tests, but at least a CBT course every couple years, to brush up on the latest rules if nothing else. This avenue would offer far better safety improvement than anything else.

      • TWeaK
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        The severity of the punishment does not matter, as long as it meets the bare minimum threshold of being significant enough that it cannot be dismissed (a small fine is meaningless to someone who is wealthy). The only effective deterrent is the certainty of being caught.

        Arguably, we should have more enforcement, with far, far less punishment.

    • TWeaK
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -41 year ago

      Here’s the thing about your comment: police don’t run speed traps on 20 roads. You’re talking bollocks.

      • KalChoedan
        link
        fedilink
        81 year ago

        Here’s the thing about absolute statements: they only need a single counter-example to be falsified. There’s a 20mph road about 200m from my front door. There’s a police speed trap there roughly once a month. You are talking bollocks.

        • TWeaK
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -41 year ago

          Interesting, that’s the first I’ve heard of it - at least, aside from temporary 20 zones around schools and the like. I think most forces are avoiding 20 limits because it’s legally not that well tested, there’s a slightly higher potential for someone to come up with a novel defense. I guess that doesn’t stop revenue coming in from people who just take the fines without challenging them.

          Could you please tell me, which country are you in? England/Wales/Scotland.

            • TWeaK
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -11 year ago

              think it’s pretty clear that due to budgetary constraints enforcement is lacking in all areas

              It is and it isn’t. I’ve noticed a hell of a lot more police on the roads over the last year or so. Speed traps come and go, but often those aren’t run by police but private contractors - it’s less about budget constraints and more about profitability. Like I say, there’s a higher risk that someone will get off a 20 speeding charge, in which case they not only miss the revenue but also incur court costs.

              Cheers for the information though, it’s nice to hear updates in their practices, and how it varies across the country. Like, in a couple places I’ve seen some really deceptive looking cameras - not in a van but on tripods. There’s definitely an element of trying to catch people out, while more or less skirting within the bounds of the law.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        What the heck? In your other comment you say they make these 20 zones to fund corrupt police running speed traps on them… Which is it?

        These reductions in speed limits are primarily political, while corruptly funneling money to overpriced contractors and police running deceptive speed traps.

        • TWeaK
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          These reductions in speed limits are primarily political, while corruptly funneling money to overpriced contractors and police running deceptive speed traps.

          I’m talking generally about speed limit reductions here. Not just 30 to 20, but 60 to 50, 40 to 50 or 40 to 30. Sometimes it’s done with valid safety intentions, backed up by data. More often than not it’s done as part of some bullshit political project.

          From another of my comments:

          The limits are assigned so politicians can pat themselves on the back and maybe score some votes. Sometimes also so some new speed trap locations can be created, catching people out in areas where the road feels like it has a higher speed limit (although this is perhaps less true for 20 zones).

          I’m not aware of police extensively enforcing 20 zones, but I am aware of police enforcing speed limits in areas where it has been reduced for arbitrary reasons. Quite often these involve civil works that are ludicrously overpriced and under-delivered, which reeks of corruption.