The Conservatives in Wales lose their last ditch attempt to stop the speed limit change from 30mph to 20mph. The change will be coming into force on the 17th September

  • Jerkface (any/all)
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I have seen documented evidence many times that enforcement does NOT alter people’s behaviour in a way that persists after enforcement ceases. They simply adapt to the enforcement level, whatever that happens to be. I don’t think that enforcement is a reasonable component of street safety. We can’t have street daddies on every corner keeping us safe.

    • Hyperreality@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The UK Department for Transport estimated that cameras had led to a 22% reduction in personal injury collisions and 42% fewer people being killed or seriously injured at camera sites. The British Medical Journal recently reported that speed cameras were effective at reducing accidents and injuries in their vicinity and recommended wider deployment. An LSE study in 2017 found that “adding another 1,000 cameras to British roads could save up to 190 lives annually, reduce up to 1,130 collisions and mitigate 330 serious injuries.”

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_enforcement_camera

      “Our research suggests the growing use of average speed cameras in motorway roadworks and increasingly on sections of A-road is reinforcing the road safety message as they are extremely effective at slowing down drivers. … “For instance, on the A9 in Scotland the number of deaths has halved since average speed cameras were introduced between Dunblane and Inverness in October 2014.

      https://roadsafetygb.org.uk/news/average-speed-cameras-more-effective-study-finds/

      All but one of the studies showed effectiveness of cameras up to three years or less after their introduction; one study showed sustained longer term effects (4.6 years after introduction). Reductions in outcomes across studies ranged from 5% to 69% for collisions, 12% to 65% for injuries, and 17% to 71% for deaths in the immediate vicinity of camera sites. The reductions over wider geographical areas were of a similar order of magnitude.

      https://www.bmj.com/content/330/7487/331

      We can’t have street daddies on every corner keeping us safe.

      You can and thanks to the revenue cameras generate, it generates enough revenue to save the tax payer money, and free up the police for other duties.

      I have seen documented evidence many times that enforcement does NOT alter people’s behaviour in a way that persists

      Given I found plenty of evidence with a 5 second search, is it possible you didn’t want to find evidence because you had already come to a conclusion about the effectiveness of speed enforcement?

      • TWeaK@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The UK Department for Transport estimated that cameras had led to a 22% reduction in personal injury collisions and 42% fewer people being killed or seriously injured at camera sites. The British Medical Journal recently reported that speed cameras were effective at reducing accidents and injuries in their vicinity and recommended wider deployment. An LSE study in 2017 found that “adding another 1,000 cameras to British roads could save up to 190 lives annually, reduce up to 1,130 collisions and mitigate 330 serious injuries.”

        “Enforcing speed limits in areas that matter leads to better compliance in those areas and a reduction in deaths”

        That doesn’t mean we should reduce speed limits everywhere, just that we need to enforce safety where it matters.

        “Our research suggests the growing use of average speed cameras in motorway roadworks and increasingly on sections of A-road is reinforcing the road safety message as they are extremely effective at slowing down drivers. … “For instance, on the A9 in Scotland the number of deaths has halved since average speed cameras were introduced between Dunblane and Inverness in October 2014.

        Mate, the A9 is a beast in and of itself. It’s the one road that connects mainland Scotland (Glasgow & Edinburgh) with the rest of the country, if you exclude Aberdeen. When the A9 has a major accident (which happens far too frequently) then you often have to detour 50 miles, easily more if you don’t pick the right route first time.

        The A9 single carriageway average speed cameras are pretty reasonable, though, more or less. What would be more reasonable would be dualling it all the way, or at least dualling the key accident hot spots, the bottlenecks. Then if they had a crash they could divert to the other carriageway, rather than queueing up traffic for half a day and expecting people to turn around and navigate across the lower highlands.


        Suffice it to say, horses for courses. We can have speed regulation and enforcement where it matters, and we can have national speed limits that leave drivers to driver to the conditions. All of these measures of changing the rules are nothing but bullshit though, not when we have no formal system of teaching the new rules to existing drivers.

        Ongoing training for drivers is needed. Not necessarily ongoing pass/fail tests, but at least a CBT course every couple years, to brush up on the latest rules if nothing else. This avenue would offer far better safety improvement than anything else.

    • TWeaK@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The severity of the punishment does not matter, as long as it meets the bare minimum threshold of being significant enough that it cannot be dismissed (a small fine is meaningless to someone who is wealthy). The only effective deterrent is the certainty of being caught.

      Arguably, we should have more enforcement, with far, far less punishment.