Sadly it seems that this story has been updated since it first went up, so it actually provides some accurate facts. On Tuesday, a big official report came out that says a survey had been done over all of the UK’s 5000+ permanent speed camera and proved that they save 100 lives a year and aren’t just chugging in revenue.
This story made the headlines on most television news programs. Great, says I. Lives saved is good… if they’re in the right place and so forth. But…
Arse, frankly.
A much smaller clarification (or should that be “correction”) was printed in many newspapers the following day but didn’t, for some reason, make it into the main news programs. Funny, that.
Buried in the small notices of one paper, I read that the survey wasn’t across every speed camera in the country. It was, in fact just over “3,376 camera sites in partnership areas”. These partnership areas are the ones where they’ve made a move to shift camera into genuinely dangerous areas where fatalities and serious injuries have occured. Areas where there are a large proportion of correctly-places cameras.
You may recall my problems with the Welsh police (here, here, here, here, and here). Well, Gwent isn’t on of the police forces involved in the sensible rules group. They just shove cameras where and when they want and accuse you of crimes of which you’re not guilty. A picture of an easily-faked piece of plastic with some letters on is categorical proof of guilt unless you can prove otherwise, to them.
So, basically, speed cameras save lives if they’re put in sensible places. And you’re telling me they needed a bloody big survey to figure that out?
Now, why not put some along the “red routes” running through Lincolnshire? Even I will admit to bricking it when I’ve gone round some surprising corners too quickly. A speed camera before such locations would make me drive more safely and that has to be a good thing.
Oh, and one more story for a giggle. I appreciate the poor sod’s vehemence, but he did take both hands off the wheel.
