Our civilization depends on respect for the rule of law. Obedience to a law must be seen as right by the vast majority. There has to be a sense of trust that the rule is right and enforced fairly and with human common sense. The cameras violate that trust in several ways and dangerously weaken respect for law in general.

In terms of usefulness, the cameras provide no feedback until weeks after the event. This is especially true at times when the road is empty of other cars, whose slowing may alert you to your speed. In fact, under road conditions conducive to going at higher speeds, constant monitoring of the speedometer is needed to keep below a limit which is set arbitrarily low.

One must use common sense when driving. Just because that country road has a sign with an oblique line does not mean it is safe to drive at 60 mph on it. I was recently on such lane with stretches where 30 mph seemed too fast for safety.

There is also a cry-wolf effect of blanket limits. As you know, there are stretches of road where normal speed cues are deceptive, and where a low speed limit is a very helpful advisory. The problem is that one does not know what is real and what is arbitrary. So genuine safety signs get ignored.

Much more useful than cameras are those signs which tell you your speed as you approach. I would like to see them at all deceptive black spots.

2. Are you seriously suggesting that the TPA’s tenuous post-hoc analysis (complete with revisionist history) trumps a peer-reviewed BMJ-published meta-analysis of all the data collected in peer-reviewed studies on the effects of the introduction of speed cameras on accident rates. Come on.

3. Yes, I am aware that people slow down for speed cameras, but while it may be a little annoying or look a bit weird, I’m not aware that such behaviour has been the cause of any accidents. Are you?

People driving at 55mph in a 30mph zone – frequently. I know much of London’s traffic doesn’t get above about 10 during the daytime but crossing the road at night and in rural residential areas, it’s a whole different story. Besides, in all honesty, I totally agree with you that tailgating is dangerous, but that is completely irrelevant to whether speeding is dangerous or not. Perhaps I should be clear: you compared minor speeding with major tailgating. I did the opposite to show you how ridiculous that comparison was.

2. The meta-analysis linked to by Adam looks like statistical noise. Not very convincing. Re citation, the TPA is using real data. However you mash it, there is no evidence there that the cameras help.

3. I see the slowing at certain GATSOs when I am driving. Anecdotal, yes, but, for example, it happens almost every time on the Hendon Way just before Brent Cross going north.

P.S. Tailgating of 2 or 3 car lengths at 70 miles an hour is common enough to be observed routinely. How often do you see drivers going at 55 in a 30 mph residential zone?

2. Citation needed. The systematic review that Adam linked to above does not support your argument.

3. Again, citation needed. Has that ever, y’know, actually happened? And is that really more dangerous than driving too fast in a built up area and mowing down pedestrians?

P.S. When I am driving, people driving at 55mph in a 30mph zone scare the crap out of me — much more dangerous than being an inch or two closer than an arbitrary safe distance. See, I can do hyperbole too!

2. The statistics in no way support the idea that speed cameras help.

3. If you want a mechanism for why the cameras may be causing accidents, just see driver behaviour around known speed camera sites where fixation on speed causes sudden slowing.

A good driver will judge his speed according to road conditions – not the speedometer. There are deceptive places for which a recommended speed with an immediate feedback sigh is helpful.

But burying your nose in the dashboard for fear of getting a ticket is dangerous.

P.S. When I am driving, tailgaters scare the crap out of me – much more dangerous than being a little over an arbitrary speed limit.

I would suggest that the advent of the boy-racer phenomenon in the mid-nineties and the ever-increasing ownership and use of mobile phones whilst diving since the mid-late nineties had a lot to do with the slowdown, as did the massive rise in migrants from Eastern European countries and Africa since 1997 where driving standards are generally a lot lower, along with the big rise in motorbike ownership (and particularly powerful motorbikes) that happened during the period from 1996 to 2004, and the corresponding number of motorcyclist fatalities and injuries.

There were also massive cuts in traffic police numbers from around 16,500 in 1987/88 to around 7,500 in 1996/97 (under the Tories) and about an additional 1,000 since then (under New Labour). It’s funny how none of the anti-camera newspapers ever mentioned to their millions of readers – either at the time the cuts were taking place or since – about the more than 50% cuts that took place under the Tories, but they have been ranting on about “the 11% cut in traffic police” since 1997 over and over again for the past six years. The reality is of course that but for speed cameras, we wouldn’t have heard a peep out of them about the 11% cut!

I read that Oxford has just nixed all their speed cameras too. Not sure why.

The data, by the way, do include persons injured/killed regardless of whether they were passengers, cyclists, pedestrians, or whoever.