Describing speed cameras as a tax is somewhat disingenuous to the authorities. A tax is something you pay to consume a good or service that is legal - since speeding is not legal, fines on it are not a tax, no more than it would be a tax if you were fined for vandalism.

There are, however, some valid questions to be raised. Firstly, do speed cameras actually work and secondly, are the limits they are enforcing appropriate? It probably is the case that some speed limits are artificially lowered to create ’speed traps’ and the cameras are tactically placed to catch as many motorists as possible, but if a given speed limit can be argued as reasonable there seems to me to be no problem with using technology to enforce it. The trouble is that people slow down just for the cameras, which suggests they shouldn’t be as obtrusive as they currently are and their locations certainly shouldn’t be included on maps and sat nav devices. People should stick to the speed limit regardless of whether there is a camera to catch them, and it seems the only way to achieve this is if they believe that a camera could be anywhere.

Lets be honest here, speed cameras are a money making device, camouflaged as a safety device. If they were purely for safety, then why arent they predominately outside schools, hospitals, old folks homes etc. I live in Worcester, and i can honestly say that they have been positioned in places where drivers may have to speed up to pass others on filter lanes to avoid collisions. We have a world famous blind college, but no speed cameras on the surrounding dual carriageway, and if they should be anywhere, it should be there.

Well done Swindon. Its time to engage with motorists and stop alientating them.

I think that it would be safer if Cars were restricted! Motorbikes are fitted with restrictors (restricting the bike to a certain Horse Power) Why cant vehicles be fitted with a Restrictor. Or even better a radio operated restrictor! for example, look how the trolleys at ASDA can lock the wheel when you get past the front gate! Same Technology on a speed restricter! Hell it would save so many accidents and police chases would only last until they get into a 40mph zone!! lol! Thats how I would do it if I was in charge anyway!

Speed is responsible for only a small percentage of fatal accidents, there are many other factors which cause accidents, lack of attention and bad driver training are bigger causes. It make sense not to just focus on speed cameras, it is just plain wrong to think that everyone driving within the speed limit is safe and everyone driving over it is dangerous.
Driving at 30 on streets with cars on each side (someone only has to take one step before they are infront of you) is far more dangerous than driving 85 on a clear motorway. Also speed cameras take no account of conditions, the same people who complain about people doing over 70 will happily maintain their 70mph speed, without their lights on when there is a sudden torrential downpour, blissfully unaware of the their car’s capabilities (or lack of).

What is it about cars in Britain that provokes such bile? To B Foster, who states, “i can honestly say that they have been positioned in places where drivers may have to speed up to pass others on filter lanes to avoid collisions.” If you need to break the speed limit to pass a car, it would seem that the other car is already driving close to or at the limit. Why then would you need to drive any faster? If the issue is that speed limits are too low, then campaign for that. If a speed camera, in whatever location, keeps you below the limit, it is working. If you think twice about breaking the speed limit because you will incur a fine, it is working. If you do not want to be restricted by the camera, or fined for breaking the law, take up a campaign with your council and MP, or forever hold your peace. Cars hold too much sway in a country that cannot afford to subsidise such a luxury to the extent it has in the past few decades.

I am a resident of a small town just north of Swindon - Cricklade, and yesterday (Monday 14th July 2008) I drove into Swindon at about 11 am. I passed a “Camera Crew” installing a new camera by the side of the A419, northbound.

They say that “Bad news travels fast”.
Good news, clearly, does not travel at all!!!

Speed Cameras are a tax on the mind and wallet and I’ll speed when and how I like on an empty road, just as an obese person will consume sickly treats in the comfort of their own home. If you want to stop deaths on the roads, authorise the police to be more mean on those who can’t drive, like 1. The Boy Racers - Cops need to drill them on the rules of the road. 2. Middle-Aged Middle-England Moaners - Yes you stick to the speed limit but you are a danger in other ways, because some of you really are: 3. Too Stupid to Drive. Yes, many people are too stupid to drive and will cause accidents, making an area a blackspot, meaning the Gov’mnt place a speed camera on the blackspot to rake in some cash to cover the cost to the community of an accident. But, let’s blame speeding! Don’t discriminate against me because my reaction time is twice that of yours.

And, Mr Drake, does your car also stop twice as quickly? If you ever looked at the diagrams on the back of your Highway Code you’d note that thinking distance is only a small proportion of the overall stopping distance. What if a child stepped out into your empty road? Or would that child also by your standards be too stupid to matter? It is not stupid to question a law; it is, however, sheer folly to think yourself above it.

less cameras —-replace with a highway code and road test every five years/ and a rating of your performance with a grade affecting your insurance rate

drink driving/car forefited then require a test retaken and 5000 deposit/bond before re licencing against re offence

B Hunter: I can see your point, but it appears more to be a matter of poor road design (not uncommon in this country) than of the speed limit and/or cameras. Assuming the cameras were taken out, do you think that the other drivers - i.e. the ones you are trying to overtake - would still keep their speed down sufficiently for you to get past them safely?

There is a problem - not just with speed cameras - where something that starts out genuinely for the public good gets manipulated to serve economic ends. The way you deal with this is to get the decision making out of the hands of those who stand to benefit. In this instance, it is inappropriate that local government both sites cameras and receives money from traffic fines. With that decoupled - and perhaps with a little pressure applied by locals - it is then possible that your problem road would be properly assessed and improved, rather than treated as a cash cow.

i don’t think the speed cameras have a real positif impact on te roads safety. most drivers are still drving at over the speed limits and nly slow down when they see the cameras. therefore the drivers focus oon the camera signs and tend to miss other vital things on the roads.

Whilst I am now obliged to consider my wallet before safety (oh yes, I am!) I concentrate more on searching for speedtax cams than anything else, so they have made driving less safe rather than more safe. And if I saw anyone smashing one up, would I report them to the police? Never, I would aplaud them! I despise the government whores for screwing the masses.

i think this is a sad day for every1 , they shouldnt be mourned though