They were a scam when they were placed in areas that weren't accident blackspots and the limit had been changed from 60/70 to 40/50.
People not breaking the law yesterday were suddenly criminals the next day. Kerching.
Essex were the worst, but the people on the SCPs made themselves a lot of money (nice salaries and expenses) so the not-for-profit line was true and b***ocks at the same time. And then the rules about siting a camera within xx miles of a blackspot, but as the crow flies. Funny how this meant cameras on totally different roads, but within that distance.
Around here, a country road was once 60mph and down to 30mph as it approached my road (then 20mph very shortly after). For some unknown reason, the council has decided that people can't go from 60 to 30, so have inserted a huge section of 40mph on the previous 60mph stretch. The road here is no different to the miles of 60mph limit after it, so why the hell did we need to have a traffic order to change the speed limit for a few hundred yards? And if I just went to 60 after leaving the 30, I'd be done for speeding! What a wasteful exercise to have councils and the Highways Agency creating these 'buffer zones' because they've decided motorists are incapable of coping with a change in speed of 30mph.
Can you imagine if this happened everywhere? (Good work creation exercise). 70mph, 60, 50, 40, 30, 20mph signs off a motorway and into town - such as Islington, the first London borough to introduce a 20mph blanket limit throughout the borough. Nobody on the major roads is taking any notice of it, and the police think it's a joke on main roads.
I am not saying speed cameras are a bad thing - near blackspots they're very effective, but nearly everyone speeds at one time or another (or those who rely on their car speedos are always going slower than the limit). Even the police wouldn't argue that there aren't times where accelerating can get you out of a problem, hence no desire for cars to limit your speed and causing a crash.
I get that speed plays a factor in every accident, but speeding became the number one enemy in the 90/00s and people were brainwashed to a degree that some people just drove looking at their speedo and nothing else.
Clearly given how badly people drive, hence these new powers being introduced to give FPNs, they figure that if they're doing the speed limit then there can't be anything wrong with their driving. Totally ridiculous.
FWIW, I probably drive slower than just about everyone else in and around town. I keep to the limit (or lower) because there are obvious, identifiable risks. In rain, fog or ice, you adjust for the conditions - so you won't see me wrapped around a tree, down a ditch or tail ending someone (but, of course, I might be rear ended).
On a motorway, I'll often drive at 80-85mph to maintain the flow of traffic - but I'd also accept any fine and points because I know it's illegal, even if the police won't usually bat an eyelid at 85mph or less.
It's about driving to the conditions and, personally, increasing the limit to 80mph isn't going to make me suddenly go faster as 80-85 is a comfortable speed that still retains some degree of fuel efficiency. Go to 90 or beyond and it would be far too expensive for most people to get anywhere. I'll admit that some people will see things different and go faster, but don't see that as a reason to hold everyone else back.
