Speed camera placement

The current law on speed camera placement states that a speed camera can only be placed at a point where the 85th percentile speed is above the prosecution threshold. Given that it has long been established that the 85th percentile speed is the speed at which the safest drivers drive, the current law means that speed cameras can only be placed in areas where the safest drivers believe that the speed limit has been set too low. Conversely, speed cameras cannot be placed in areas where the speed limit is just right or too low and it would therefore be dangerous to exceed the speed limit. I propose that the law should be changed so that speed cameras can only be placed at points where the 85th percentile stick to the speed limit.

Why is this idea important?

The current law on speed camera placement states that a speed camera can only be placed at a point where the 85th percentile speed is above the prosecution threshold. Given that it has long been established that the 85th percentile speed is the speed at which the safest drivers drive, the current law means that speed cameras can only be placed in areas where the safest drivers believe that the speed limit has been set too low. Conversely, speed cameras cannot be placed in areas where the speed limit is just right or too low and it would therefore be dangerous to exceed the speed limit. I propose that the law should be changed so that speed cameras can only be placed at points where the 85th percentile stick to the speed limit.

Remove the right of councils to put obstacles in roads designed to curb speeding.

Councils just like any other user of OUR roads should NOT be allowed to place obstacles in  roads designed to curb speeding.

I agree with maximum speed limits on roads; speed kills and in built up areas, lower speed limits are justified.

The following obstacles are dangerous and unnecessary for the following reasons:

Speed humps:

  • Waste fuel as drivers speed up and brake hard between humps.
  • Harm the environment due to the additional energy used in speeding up and slowing down.
  • Cause illegal and unnecessary wear on vehicle suspension / brakes.
  • Cause driver "fatigue" in which a driver is looking for the next hump rather than looking out for children playing at the side of a road.
  • Most are so large the actually PREVENT you from being able to achieve the legal speed limit.
  • They are put in roads at complete unncessary expense to the tax payer.
  • The are undemocratic as they prevent someone from being able to break the law and suffer the consequences – would we consider chopping off someone's hands to prevent them stealing??
  • Cause unnecessary death by slowing down our emergency services.

Chicanes:

  • Blatent obstruction jetting out into the road, often with poor signing and little warning for the given speed limit.
  • Restrict TWO WAY traffic to one lane.
  • Have no effect on speed whatsoever unless at the last minute an oncoming vehicle is spotted – at which point a potential collision may occur.
  • Cause unbelievable distraction to drivers, especially if driving in an unfamiliar area.

Why is this idea important?

Councils just like any other user of OUR roads should NOT be allowed to place obstacles in  roads designed to curb speeding.

I agree with maximum speed limits on roads; speed kills and in built up areas, lower speed limits are justified.

The following obstacles are dangerous and unnecessary for the following reasons:

Speed humps:

  • Waste fuel as drivers speed up and brake hard between humps.
  • Harm the environment due to the additional energy used in speeding up and slowing down.
  • Cause illegal and unnecessary wear on vehicle suspension / brakes.
  • Cause driver "fatigue" in which a driver is looking for the next hump rather than looking out for children playing at the side of a road.
  • Most are so large the actually PREVENT you from being able to achieve the legal speed limit.
  • They are put in roads at complete unncessary expense to the tax payer.
  • The are undemocratic as they prevent someone from being able to break the law and suffer the consequences – would we consider chopping off someone's hands to prevent them stealing??
  • Cause unnecessary death by slowing down our emergency services.

Chicanes:

  • Blatent obstruction jetting out into the road, often with poor signing and little warning for the given speed limit.
  • Restrict TWO WAY traffic to one lane.
  • Have no effect on speed whatsoever unless at the last minute an oncoming vehicle is spotted – at which point a potential collision may occur.
  • Cause unbelievable distraction to drivers, especially if driving in an unfamiliar area.

Remove Road Clutter

There has been a significant increase in road clutter in the form of signs, pedestrain crossings, lollypop ladies, speed humps, speed cameras, speed restrictions and worst of all, the dreaded thing that blocks half the road for traffic entering a village so they have to stop and give way to those exiting the village.

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with the principal speed limits and traffic crossings on busy roads but what on earth happened to:

 

stop, look, listen and good old 60,40,30,20 mph zones

I dread to think how much public money is wasted on this road clutter. I believe there have been a few pilot tests in some parts of the country where all road clutter has been removed and it has resulted in an all round safer environment.

Why is this idea important?

There has been a significant increase in road clutter in the form of signs, pedestrain crossings, lollypop ladies, speed humps, speed cameras, speed restrictions and worst of all, the dreaded thing that blocks half the road for traffic entering a village so they have to stop and give way to those exiting the village.

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with the principal speed limits and traffic crossings on busy roads but what on earth happened to:

 

stop, look, listen and good old 60,40,30,20 mph zones

I dread to think how much public money is wasted on this road clutter. I believe there have been a few pilot tests in some parts of the country where all road clutter has been removed and it has resulted in an all round safer environment.

Tougher penalties for drink driving offences.

The current penalties for driving a vehicle while intoxicated are currently far too light. On average 3000 people a year are killed and many more injured purely as a consequence of another persons negligence.

The penalties need to be stiffer to discourage those who would think about driving drunk, and to punish those who throw reckless abandon to the law.

I would propose a zero-tolerance approach, as there really is no excuse. One does not 'accidentally' drink several pints and then 'accidentally' drive a vehicle.

I would advocate disqualifying a driver on a first offence (requiring them to retake their test) and a mandatory 3 year ban if they seriously injure someone on a first offence. Multiple offences should carry lifelong driving bans and jail sentences for causing death or disability as a result of drunk driving.

Why is this idea important?

The current penalties for driving a vehicle while intoxicated are currently far too light. On average 3000 people a year are killed and many more injured purely as a consequence of another persons negligence.

The penalties need to be stiffer to discourage those who would think about driving drunk, and to punish those who throw reckless abandon to the law.

I would propose a zero-tolerance approach, as there really is no excuse. One does not 'accidentally' drink several pints and then 'accidentally' drive a vehicle.

I would advocate disqualifying a driver on a first offence (requiring them to retake their test) and a mandatory 3 year ban if they seriously injure someone on a first offence. Multiple offences should carry lifelong driving bans and jail sentences for causing death or disability as a result of drunk driving.

Motorcycle Helmet Law

I would like to remove the anomaly under British law that makes motorcyclists the only group required by statute to wear a specific item of apparel to use public roads. We already pay for the pleasure in road and petrol taxes.

The only person affected by this anachronistic law is the rider, and they should have the freedom to choose.

Why is this idea important?

I would like to remove the anomaly under British law that makes motorcyclists the only group required by statute to wear a specific item of apparel to use public roads. We already pay for the pleasure in road and petrol taxes.

The only person affected by this anachronistic law is the rider, and they should have the freedom to choose.

Remove all speed limits on motorways

The current 70mph limit on our motorways is woefully outdated,
in the real world how many drivers actually abide by it?

I suggest a removal of the motorway speed limit, to be replaced by more charges of careless or dangerous driving.
Consider this,

Person A is driving on a motorway at 6am on clear dry Sunday morning,very few vehicles on the road.
They are travelling at 100mph.

Person B is driving on the same motorway in winter at a busy period,
weaving in and out of traffic at 70mph.

Who is more dangerous?

We need less arbitary rules and a move towards common sense allowing police to exercise their judgement.
 

Why is this idea important?

The current 70mph limit on our motorways is woefully outdated,
in the real world how many drivers actually abide by it?

I suggest a removal of the motorway speed limit, to be replaced by more charges of careless or dangerous driving.
Consider this,

Person A is driving on a motorway at 6am on clear dry Sunday morning,very few vehicles on the road.
They are travelling at 100mph.

Person B is driving on the same motorway in winter at a busy period,
weaving in and out of traffic at 70mph.

Who is more dangerous?

We need less arbitary rules and a move towards common sense allowing police to exercise their judgement.
 

Repeal motorcycle crash helmet law

The wearing of approved crash helmets on motorcycles is currently compulsory, and we frequently see proposals to extend the compulsory use of protective and high-visibility riding gear.

While it cannot be argued that such equipment can mitigate the severity of injuries caused in an accident, there is evidence that wearing full protective gear makes riders "feel" safer and inclines them to take more risk – increasing the likelihood of an accident which may injure both rider and others.

The case for compulsion is not watertight, and the decision to wear a helmet or not should be left to the rider.  The risk is all borne by the rider; so should be the responsibility.  This is the view being taken in an increasing number of US states, so why not here?

Why is this idea important?

The wearing of approved crash helmets on motorcycles is currently compulsory, and we frequently see proposals to extend the compulsory use of protective and high-visibility riding gear.

While it cannot be argued that such equipment can mitigate the severity of injuries caused in an accident, there is evidence that wearing full protective gear makes riders "feel" safer and inclines them to take more risk – increasing the likelihood of an accident which may injure both rider and others.

The case for compulsion is not watertight, and the decision to wear a helmet or not should be left to the rider.  The risk is all borne by the rider; so should be the responsibility.  This is the view being taken in an increasing number of US states, so why not here?

Review Speeding Laws

Speeding (over 70mph) on motorways should be OK if traffic conditions allow – clear road and good conditions, under 85mph should be acceptable, for example.

Speeding (over 30mph) in residential areas should be made stricter with double fines/points around schools (as in America).

All money raised from speeding fines should be ploughed back into the road system.

Police/councils should NOT have to justify speed traps/cameras.

Why is this idea important?

Speeding (over 70mph) on motorways should be OK if traffic conditions allow – clear road and good conditions, under 85mph should be acceptable, for example.

Speeding (over 30mph) in residential areas should be made stricter with double fines/points around schools (as in America).

All money raised from speeding fines should be ploughed back into the road system.

Police/councils should NOT have to justify speed traps/cameras.