But bearing in mind that many drivers will ignore the 'guidance' and also bearing in mind that lack of enforcement will encourage such behaviour, and also bearing in mind that there are insufficient police resources to adequately police speed limits in a discretionary manner, - the only alternative is technology. Said technology, despite the beliefs of some, in the majority of locations does give a very generous margin before triggering. In a way, therefore, the technology *is* being discretionary in that it ignores minor infringements.
Unfortunately, since they are now seen as the be-all and
It's nonsese to suggest that speed limit enforcement is the 'be all and end all' of road safety policy - because it isn't. It is the one type of road traffic offence that can be readily detected via technology, and for that reason, and because human resources are scarce, it is policed in that fashion. If technology could be devised economically to detect other road traffic offences then it would be. (It *is* of course in relation to traffic light jumping).
Further, since they
Who was at the wheel" case to be heard. 575This is the version the Camera Partnerships would have you believe. In fact the truth is that cameras have generated monolithic cash hungry quangos full of committees and fake road safety...
FWIW I do accept that there should be a nationwide rebuttessment of all speed limits by an independent body not subject to political (particularly local political) pressure. I do accept that some speed limits are inappropriate.
Who was at the wheel" case to be heard. 574Mark Foster I have twice recently put myself and my pbuttengers at risk of collision be adhering to the advisory speed limit flashed up on the matrix sign on the centre reservation. This most...
Uno-Hoo!
