So what's wrong with speed cameras raising revenue?

I recently drove a 300 miles round trip across country, hardly using any motorways. I found I was increasingly confused by speed limits. 40 Mph followed by 20 mph, followed by 30, then National speed limit, then to 50 then 30 and so on.

Where, as an experienced driver, I would have expected a 30 or even 20 mph speed limit, there was none but, on a dry, clear day with wide verges and no houses in sight, 40mph was indicated on a dual carriageway. However, to drive along the same stretch of dual carriageway on an icy, foggy night at 40 would have been madness. Yes, I understand that I am not obliged to drive at the speed limit and should exercise judgement to drive to suit the road conditions but, with so many varying limits, it may be simpler to suspend judgement and use the speed limits as a guide. During my drive, I found that my concern about keeping within sometimes uncertain speed limits was a real distraction.

By all means slow down traffic in areas of high population but please can we have consistent and reasonable limits. Personally, I'd like to see smarter limits for times when the weather is bad, when schools are out, when there is an unexpected hazard and so on. I hope technology in the future will help.

We live in Lincolnshire, which for its population has a high proportion of road deaths and casualties. Quite a few years ago, there was a major drive towards safer roads, the main thrust being speed restrictions and cameras. From over a hundred deaths a year, that total has halved.
So hurray for the cameras.

As well as the distress of human loss, fewer accidents must surely save money as well. Less emergency response times, less hospital costs.

How often has someone overtaken you when you have been dutifully obeying the speed limit for you to pull up behind them at the next junction, traffic light?

I agree Anya. Some drivers just won't do what they're supposed to do unless there's the risk of a fine.

The fairly busy road at the end of our road has a 20 mph limit very clearly marked but many drivers ignore it and seem to be doing at least 35 mph - and just drive over the zebra crossing when people are waiting to cross. One day I crossed at the zebra crossing and, because I had bags in both hands, couldn't indicate my thanks with a wave. The driver shouted a sarcastic remark at me for not thanking him (as if he had done me a favour rather than that he had just obeyed the rules of the road) and then accelerated away at breakneck speed. Charming.

I do sometimes understand, though, why drivers get annoyed at stretches of road where the speed limit goes up and down very often and for no discernible reason. I think that sort of thing does make people suspicious that there might be more than safety concerns involved.

if they did raise the speed limit on Motorways..to 80mph all you would get is drivers then speeding above the 80mph just like they speed above the 70mph now....if they raised it to 90mph you would then get them speeding beyond 90 etc etc so where would it all end,and the story goes on..leave it at 70.

If there is a speed limit and you are caught speeding then tough. If you don't agree with the speed limits , then do what you can to get them changed. Speed does kill . It always amazes me that some people seem to think we can pick and choose which laws to abide by just because one does not like them.

I'm a reformed character so far as speeding is concerned. My reformation followed being caught speeding and a growing acceptance that speed is dangerous.

I'm not in favour of increasing the 70 limit on motorways because so many people drive badly. Driving too fast, too close, under taking etc alongside which, many drivers either ignore or have no idea about the distance needed to stop a car.

NotTooOld is correct, we have relatives in the police force who candidly admit that they go to spots where it's easy to catch motorists going over the limit, it's more to do with targets than money though.
motorways are the safest roads in Britain, more people die on ordinary roads, so the speed limit could be safely put up.

Speeding fines go directly to the Treasury and the Driver Awareness course fees go to the organisers and Camera Safety/ Police. Funds are given from the Treasury to the councils each year to spend primarily on road safety.

If spyder08 is correct in saying that there are many problems caused by bad driving, I can't see that an increase in allowable speed would be a good idea.

I have seen complaints in the past that there were no cameras on certain accident blackspots because (it was believed) they would not bring in much money, while drivers on safer routes were filmed and fined.

Do you remember the massive pile up on a bridge last year ? We live near there. They are trying to reduce the dual carriage way speed limit on the approach and for a mile the other side from 70 to 50. There are temporary 50 mph signs all along but they are totally ignored as people know there are no cameras. As a trial this is a failure. Without cameras people will carry on regardless. I agree if your daft enough to speed then you should pay. If this brings revenue so be it.

I've no objection in principle but I wish they wouldn't dress up their 'catch the speedsters' campaigns as 'road safety'. I think the main objective is to make money, which is ok, but why can't they use some of that money to keep the roads mended? Round here they are just full of potholes and that's main roads as well as the lanes.

I'm happy to stick to speed limits - or try to. I have been caught doing 34 in a 30 limit, and went on that lovely course (actually I did learn quite a bit about modern engines and driving economically), so I'm much more careful nowadays. I do wish though that councils would use some of the money they earn to keep road signs clean and clear of foliage. They're very good at cutting the verges around the posts but don't clear the signs. Or does the money go to central government.

I think motorways/dual carriage ways would be much safer if there were more traffic police giving out fines for tailgating and driving to close too. The sight of a police car coming up behind always makes drivers more sensible.

Manufacturers just seem to make cars that go faster, and if a car has a top speed, then there is some idiot out there who is going to try to go for that. I no longer drive, but I do find when a passenger that on motor ways the traffic seems to 'draw' you along, and I think it is sometimes possible to be going just that much faster than one should, just because of that. I may well be wrong, but a friend who does drive says she finds it difficult not to be drawn into the rush. Having said that there is really no excuse, and I think fining is fine especially if it makes our roads safer.

I wonder if by any chance spyder08 is a man? Most women I know are quite happy to stick to the speed limit. Its there for a reason. The argument spyder puts forward is one that DH and his friends use. Doesn't tend to cut any ice with me. Road safety matters. Speed kills. Obviously we can do without bad drivers but who admits to being a bad driver? Its always someone else!

As far as i can see the real problem here is the difference between motorways and other roads. Our speed limits were set quite a while ago and have not moved with the modern technology now on cars. Personally I think 70mph on a motorway is too slow. There was talk some time ago of raising this to 80 but this seems to have fallen by the wayside.
I travel fairly regularly on motorways (our eldest daughter lives in Scotland) and I think there are many more problems which are caused by good old plain bad driving! I would also say it's not always the oldies causing the problems either!

I agree. I'm all for speed cameras, and if the local council makes money out of them - so what?