[b3lha]

Originally Posted by RSVX

Im sorry, but how is that any different than seeing a cop on the side of the road and slamming on your brakes?

The difference is that cops (usually) have a certain amount of intelligence: You don't have to jump on the brakes when you see a cop car because they normally won't bother to stop you for 36 in a 30 zone if you are driving safely. In fact they would probably be more likely to stop you if you did suddenly jump on the brakes because that can be dangerous.

But whether people brake for a cop or a speed camera is not really the point. The point is that there is solid scientific evidence that the speed camera policy is detrimental to road safety. All of the evidence can be found on the safespeed website that I linked to earlier.
Paul Smith, the founder, has done a huge amount of research using data obtained from the government under the freedom of information act. His conclusions clearly show a decline in road safety since the introduction of speed cameras.

Furthermore, he has documented the extent to which our government are fiddling the statistics in their official reports in order to make it appear that speed cameras are improving road safety rather than just generating millions of pounds as a form of stealth taxation.

Originally Posted by RSVX

I agree, that big brother needs to be limited...

I also remember that when I lived in the UK, areas with speed cameras were marked... has that changed? Because its very easy to read the sign, slow down... and go about your day.

Some cameras are marked. Some aren't. Some are mobile. If they are so easy to avoid, why do 1 in 5 drivers now have speeding convictions?