Give speed cameras to Brown
I’m a big believer in the necessity of speed cameras to help improve behaviour on Bermuda’s roads. So I was pleased to hear that Transport Minister Ewart Brown has asked Public Safety Minister Randy Horton to expedite their installation.
Alas, I doubt it will make any difference. There is no budget for them this year, and Mr. Horton seems to lack the determination necessary to make them a reality.
Perhaps Dr. Brown himself should be given responsibility for their implementation.
Archives By Date
Totally agree.
Whilst I dislike much that Brown does, he does have get-up-and-go plus, he seems to get his legislation passed; the recent limo legislation is a classic.
Posted by Martin on 10.07.06 at 20:48
Maybe this is linked to the recent incorporation of Brown & Co International Speed Camera Inc??
Posted by Margaret Hilda Roberts on 10.07.06 at 22:18
One of the Bermuda urban myths is that Government was on the verge of setting up speed cameras (hence the "speed tracked by camera" signs that went up around then) when the PLP took over from the UBP, and decided not to use them. Is this true?
We've got to do something about the speed and lax behaviour on the roads. I'm not sure cameras do it, as the "punishment" is so seperated from the deed. Nothing beats a motorcycle cop - and they are rarely seen.
Where is the police commissioner in all this?he has been very low profile since taking over.
Posted by Tiger Bay on 11.07.06 at 08:14
Speed cameras will not reduce the number of serious accidents in Bermuda. They don't in the UK where speeds are a lot higher and they won't in Bermuda.
The only thing that will reduce the number of serious accidents is a change of attitude.
Posted by Bandit on 11.07.06 at 08:37
you hit the nail on the head bandit. on the head.
doubt those maniacs that overtake me at speeds exceeding 70mph on harbour road really care about getting caught. they think they're invincible. not only will they never be caught, but they'll never be hurt/killed or hurt/kill another.. cause it just doesn't happen to them.
bet you if government installed a 'three tickets and you're out' policy, as in lose your license for good.. and bus it for the rest of your life... people would get a clue and slow down.
bermuda's past 'soft' enforcement. bermuda needs strict, unbreakable enforcement now.
bet it would help with the congestion as well.
i really don't see how speed cameras will help. here in the uk, everyone slows down before to get to the cameras. it's actually caused quite a few accidents due to those speeding suddenly slamming the breaks so that they aren't caught. the only way to avoid it would be if speed camera were installed like every 1/4 mile. you won't really have chance to pick up speed without another camera popping up. quite frankly, i'd rather have more police officers or an external traffic monitoring organization... and stricter penalties for breaking the law.
i've never had a light slap stop me from doing what i wanted..
...now the threat of not being able to do something if that made my life more convenient (and in some cases more economical) if i broke the law again... that would make me stop and think twice.
you'll always have the daredevil tho. always.
Posted by kristen sousa on 11.07.06 at 09:41
The problem with speed cameras and the associated ticketing is that they only penalize the owner of the vehicle who is not necessarily the driver of the vehicle when the infraction occurs.
Posted by Darkside on 11.07.06 at 10:03
I believe this has been one of the hold ups, changing the law to make the owner of a vehicle responsible no matter who is driving it.
Cameras are great for government revenue, but nothing beats shifting speed traps with real live policemen. Or enforcing the 5000 outstanding warrants - many of which are for traffic offenses.
What happened to the points system that's been discussed for years?
The roads are so unsafe that many people are stopping driving bikes - thus compounding the traffic woes.
We've got to do something. Cameras may be a short term solution - but we need to get police back on the roads.
Posted by Tiger Bay on 11.07.06 at 10:12
Bring back the clamp!
If people get caught speeding just take their vehicle right then and there. Especially bikes. Make them walk home and tell them they can claim their vehicle in 24 hours at the pound. $100 for the tow and to get it out. Three tickets in a year and the wheels come off for three months.
PS: The pounds closed Saturday and Sunday so any Friday bookings you're out of luck.
Posted by SmokingGun on 11.07.06 at 11:11
Nice idea SmokingGun. It would probably work too!
Over here some kids at a school made a couple of dummy policemen and put them outside the school. They actually worked really well at slowing the traffic down for the few days they were there. Unfortunately, one of the heads fell off and eventually they were removed.
I think the point is something really radical needs to be done.
Posted by Bandit on 11.07.06 at 11:33
Tiger, while owners could be held responsible for those whom they lend their cars to, the further issue remains ... "How do you remove the offender (who is not the owner of the vehicle) from the road?" ... holding owners responsible in this fashion would limit the courts to assessing fines only which is not as large a deterrent as being taken "off de road".
Posted by Darkside on 11.07.06 at 14:09
Kristen & Bandit --
Can I ask where you got your data that speed camera's don't reduce accidents (or in fact, cause them)?
The UK Dept. of Transport did a 4 year controlled study in 2004 to evaluate the effectiveness of cameras, and found a significant reduction in the # of incidents and fatalities. You can find the detailed findings here.
Posted by KJD on 11.07.06 at 14:40
KJD: According to your link the highest incidents of speed reduction were at 'fixed camera' stations. There was a 50% difference between fixed sites and mobile sites.
Are the people in charge of collecting car parking fines going to be in charge of administrating these camera fines as well?
Posted by kristen sousa on 11.07.06 at 16:13
http://www.autocar.co.uk/News_Article.asp?NA_ID=220937&EL_ID=3166621&ST=fromcurrentresults
Obviously the government site your link points to says the opposite. Of course we all konw that governments would never tell fibs to cover their mistakes.
I cannot find the article at the moment but a magazine (I think it was Autocar) took the government statistics on serious and fatal accidents going back to the sisties and formed a graph. The graph shows an almost steady increase year on year right up until the end (2002 I think it was). Only two events had a big positive effect on reducing the number of these accidents. One was mandatory wearing of seeat belts in the front of a car, the other was the mandatory wearing of seat belts in the back of a car. Nothing else has ever had a major impact, and that is the truth.
Posted by Bandit on 12.07.06 at 07:41
Bandit
From the article:
That does not mean that the cameras were ineffective. Perhaps there would have been a much bigger rise without them?
kristen
Are the people in charge of collecting car parking fines going to be in charge of administrating these camera fines as well?
That's a good point. If people ignore the fines they get through the mail, what will the police do about it? With over 5,000 unenforced arrest warrants outstanding right now (I'm still amazed at that), it would seem the answer is: not much.
Darkside
while owners could be held responsible for those whom they lend their cars to, the further issue remains ... "How do you remove the offender (who is not the owner of the vehicle) from the road?" ... holding owners responsible in this fashion would limit the courts to assessing fines only which is not as large a deterrent as being taken "off de road".
Hopefully the owner will stop lending his car to someone who repeatedly breaks the limit in it. I know I would. And don't forget the demerit points system (which was passed by the Senate last year, so I assume it is in the process of being implemented now) will likely award points for speeding offences too, which will eventually result in the loss of the licence.
Tiger Bay
Cameras are great for government revenue, but nothing beats shifting speed traps with real live policemen.
Agreed, but we will never have enough policemen to provide 24/7 coverage of a significant part of Bermuda's road system, and it's unrealistic to think we should. Cameras, supplemented by real live policemen, are much more cost effective.
Posted by Phil on 12.07.06 at 08:21
Limey,
"Agreed, but we will never have enough policemen to provide 24/7 coverage of a significant part of Bermuda's road system, and it's unrealistic to think we should. Cameras, supplemented by real live policemen, are much more cost effective."
True. However, you still need warm bodies to watch the system, so you're going to have to recruit anyway. The best CCTV system in the world still needs human eyes on it. Not to mention the fact that, given who's buying the thing, odds are the system will be bought from the lowest bidder. Nothing beats boots on the ground and the Police Service staffing issue is still, in my mind, one of the top priorities for Bermuda.
Posted by Adjustah on 12.07.06 at 08:36
Limey, I understand where you are coming from. However, my brother in law is a traffic cop in Greater Manchester. The area he patrols (Runcorn/Widnes) has more speed cameras than anywhere else in the Northwest. Even so serious accidents have gone up. The main reason is that police patrols have halved in the past few years (since the introduction of speed cameras) and the general public see it as a free for all, a race between the cameras. The unfortunate outcome is that traffic cops like my brother in law now spends a large proportion of his time dealing with accidents for insurance purposes, rather than catching offenders and criminals. At the same time crime in the area (and the UK as a whole (or is that hole?)) is steadily spiraling out of control!
Forget speed cameras, In the UK it will not be long before the police are armed.
Posted by Bandit on 12.07.06 at 09:23
I think that if they can get a photo of the license plate, then they can geta photo of the driver. Presumably the ticket would be mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle, so include a shot of the driver (even if from the rear) and let the owner decide who to chase after once he pays the ticket
Posted by Andrew on 12.07.06 at 11:17
The biggest thing we do when we over analyse something and focus too much on the parts as opposed to the big picture is forget the intrinsic values of the whole.
If we spend time and money on cameras etc. we expect them to do a specific task. But that is all they will do. If we put more police on the roads then we will not only have that task taken care of but we will also have the value of a true officer capable of handling all required tasks. We must seek the right balance between technology and good old-fashioned man/woman power.
You know... chase down drive-by shooters, muggers, rapists and thieves. Heck even help little old ladies climb down from a tree....
Posted by SmokingGun on 12.07.06 at 11:28
Speed cameras only slow people down when they are speeding in that vicinity and in the end just become another revenue producer for Government (if they can collect the fines). My solution to speeding is this and it won't be politically popular. Restictions on vehicles so that they cannot go faster than 30mph or maybe 35 but still have the power to carry 2 people in the case of bikes. You will never get the public to voluntarily slow down and all the blood on the front page of the paper will not stop kids from going fast. Sadly the Government blew it bigtime by allowing bigger vehicles when they should have been doing the opposite. We don't need 4x4's but I can understand that people feel more safe in one.
Posted by Ali on 12.07.06 at 11:44
The Mayor of London is considering increasing the congestion charge for drivers of "Chelsea Tractors".
The real answer is simple - more police, better trained and visible. SG is correct.
Posted by sandgrownan on 12.07.06 at 11:50
Ali - I've always been a big proponent of restrictors and I think your suggestion is very valid. Especially with the larger vehicles. It's an easy fix that would be a benefit to everyone. Even those that have serious death wish.
Posted by SmokingGun on 12.07.06 at 11:52
In a program recently on in UK, the presenter was trying to convice a motorist who was in the market for a new car to buy a sensible car rather than a 4x4. Even though the 4x4 used twice as much fuel, cost nearly twice as much in road tax, that statistics prove that you are 30% more likely to have an accident and that poor visibility proved that pedestrians, especially children were most at risk, the motorist still chose the 4x4 because it looked nicer. Since when has an essentially agricultural farm vehical looked nicer than a Mercedes Benz? This is a strange world.
With respect to slowing all vehicals down to a 30-35 mph maximum it will not fix the problem. The problem is attitude. I now live on the Isle of Man where we have no national speed limit, we have many, many cars and bikes capable of 180-200MPH, and they get used!. This year so far we have had only 2 road fatalities. One a young pedestrian listening to an MP3 player, who started to cross the road without paying attention, knocked over by an elderly lady who just did not have the reactions. The other a motorcyclist who went into a hedge avoiding a car overtaking a bus. The second one was particularly tragic as the man was not only consious at the scene but said he felt ok and did not want to go to hospital. He was taken anyway and died later that day from a blood clot.
Our problems differ from Bermuda's but it still comes down to attitude.
Posted by Bandit on 12.07.06 at 12:14
"With respect to slowing all vehicals down to a 30-35 mph maximum it will not fix the problem. The problem is attitude." - Bandit
Actually Bandit I would beg to differ. By forcing a vehicle to drive at a slower pace it will actually force a change in attitude as well. I do not disagree that attitude is a real major issue but by changing the perameters we will have a better shot at controlling bad attitudes.
Posted by SmokingGun on 12.07.06 at 12:27
SG, Back in the seventies, in the days of Peugeot 103s, Mobylettes, Cyrus, Yamaha Chappys etc. none of them were capable of much more than 35mph and yet the majority of road fatalities involved them. The attitude was my bike is faster than yours and it would often be decided on a race from Freezer Fresh to Palm (or one of several other places). Trying to weave between cars, anything to get there first. While not racing many would ride pretty much flat out all the time weaving between cars for practice. I am sure amongst young people that attitude has not changed
Right, I am off to watch some motorcycle racing (legal stuff). When this is free and on your doorstep it would be stupid not to!!!
Check it www.southern100.com
Best
Posted by Bandit on 12.07.06 at 12:41
Bandit, I grew up in those days but I think you miss the point. If any cycle rider wants to kill themselves it is their (unfortunate) perogative. If, however a lunatic driving 70mph in a car kills me that is a different situation. Limiting speed will not eliminate accidents but it would definitely reduce them.
PS did you have a gear pin on your cyrus?!
Posted by Ali on 12.07.06 at 12:49
Bandit,
"Yamaha Chappys" and you sound positive about it
We must have known each other, very few male Bermudians my age would talk about a Chappy as if it was COOL :) And even less people had one !
Personally I had a Mobylette, a Peugeot 103, and a Maxi Puch (with a 70cc block & piston).
A Maxi Puch ...now there was an uncool ride to be seen on !!!!
Posted by Two Cents on 13.07.06 at 04:33
A Maxi Puch!!! Jeeez
I had a Merlette (silver/grey), a Peugeot 102 (but not for long) and (yes indeedy) a Chappy!! I knew a few people who had them. One guy in particular put a small sprocket on the back for more speed. Once you got used to how to change through all 3 gears they were not too bad.
Shame Limey deleted the earlier posts about attitude and showing that it has always been there. The average number of fatals in Bermuda has been roughly one a month ever since I can remember. If the attitude does not change nothing else will.
Oh yes, 2 vehicals doing 35mph (restricted) in a head on crash will impact at 70MPH. It will not be pretty and the chance of death is high, especially if one is on a bike.
Posted by Bandit on 13.07.06 at 07:25
http://www.autocar.co.uk/News_Article.asp?NA_ID=220937&EL_ID=3166621&ST=fromcurrentresults
Obviously the government site your link points to says the opposite. Of course we all konw that governments would never tell fibs to cover their mistakes.
I cannot find the article at the moment but a magazine (I think it was
Autocar) took the government statistics on serious and fatal accidents going back to the sisties and formed a graph. The graph shows an almost steady increase year on year right up until the end (2002 I think it was). Only two events had a big positive effect on reducing the number of these accidents. One was mandatory wearing of seeat belts in the front of a car, the other was the mandatory wearing of seat belts in the back of a car. Nothing else has ever had a major impact, and that is the truth.
Posted by Bandit on 13.07.06 at 08:22
Bandit
From the article:
That does not mean that the cameras were ineffective. Perhaps there would have been a much bigger rise without them?
kristen
Are the people in charge of collecting car parking fines going to be in charge of administrating these camera fines as well?
That's a good point. If people ignore the fines they get through the mail, what will the police do about it? With over 5,000 unenforced arrest warrants outstanding right now (I'm still amazed at that), it would seem the answer is: not much.
Darkside
while owners could be held responsible for those whom they lend their cars to, the further issue remains ... "How do you remove the offender (who is not the owner of the vehicle) from the road?" ...
holding owners responsible in this fashion would limit the courts to assessing fines only which is not as large a deterrent as being taken "off de road".
Hopefully the owner will stop lending his car to someone who repeatedly breaks the limit in it. I know I would. And don't forget the demerit points system (which was passed by the Senate last year, so I assume it is in the process of being implemented now) will likely award points for speeding offences too, which will eventually result in the loss of the licence.
Tiger Bay
Cameras are great for government revenue, but nothing beats shifting speed traps with real live policemen.
Agreed, but we will never have enough policemen to provide 24/7 coverage of a significant part of Bermuda's road system, and it's unrealistic to think we should. Cameras, supplemented by real live policemen, are much more cost effective.
Posted by Phil on 13.07.06 at 08:23
Limey,
"Agreed, but we will never have enough policemen to provide 24/7 coverage of a significant part of Bermuda's road system, and it's unrealistic to think we should. Cameras, supplemented by real live policemen, are much more cost effective."
True. However, you still need warm bodies to watch the system, so you're going to have to recruit anyway. The best CCTV system in the world still needs human eyes on it. Not to mention the fact that, given who's buying the thing, odds are the system will be bought from the lowest bidder. Nothing beats boots on the ground and the Police Service staffing issue is still, in my mind, one of the top priorities for Bermuda.
Posted by Adjustah on 13.07.06 at 08:24
Limey, I understand where you are coming from. However, my brother in law is a traffic cop in Greater Manchester. The area he patrols
(Runcorn/Widnes) has more speed cameras than anywhere else in the Northwest. Even so serious accidents have gone up. The main reason is that police patrols have halved in the past few years (since the introduction of speed cameras) and the general public see it as a free for all, a race between the cameras. The unfortunate outcome is that traffic cops like my brother in law now spends a large proportion of his time dealing with accidents for insurance purposes, rather than catching offenders and criminals. At the same time crime in the area (and the UK as a whole (or is that hole?)) is steadily spiraling out of control!
Forget speed cameras, In the UK it will not be long before the police are armed.
Posted by Bandit on 13.07.06 at 08:25
The biggest thing we do when we over analyse something and focus too much on the parts as opposed to the big picture is forget the intrinsic values of the whole.
If we spend time and money on cameras etc. we expect them to do a specific task. But that is all they will do. If we put more police on the roads then we will not only have that task taken care of but we will also have the value of a true officer capable of handling all required tasks. We must seek the right balance between technology and good old-fashioned man/woman power.
You know... chase down drive-by shooters, muggers, rapists and thieves.
Heck even help little old ladies climb down from a tree....
Posted by SmokingGun on 13.07.06 at 08:26
I think that if they can get a photo of the license plate, then they can geta photo of the driver. Presumably the ticket would be mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle, so include a shot of the driver (even if from the rear) and let the owner decide who to chase after once he pays the ticket
Posted by Andrew on 13.07.06 at 08:27
Speed cameras only slow people down when they are speeding in that vicinity and in the end just become another revenue producer for Government (if they can collect the fines). My solution to speeding is this and it won't be politically popular. Restictions on vehicles so that they cannot go faster than 30mph or maybe 35 but still have the power to carry 2 people in the case of bikes. You will never get the public to voluntarily slow down and all the blood on the front page of the paper will not stop kids from going fast. Sadly the Government blew it bigtime by allowing bigger vehicles when they should have been doing the opposite. We don't need 4x4's but I can understand that people feel more safe in one.
Posted by Ali on 13.07.06 at 08:27
Ali,
The bigger cars are not necessarily the reason cars are going faster. I have seen people in all different types of cars (small & larger) that are disrespecting the speed limit.
Posted by ken on 13.07.06 at 08:33
Ali - I've always been a big proponent of restrictors and I think your suggestion is very valid. Especially with the larger vehicles. It's an easy fix that would be a benefit to everyone. Even those that have serious death wish.
Posted by SmokingGun on 13.07.06 at 13:13
With respect to slowing all vehicals down to a 30-35 mph maximum it will not fix the problem. The problem is attitude. I now live on the Isle of Man where we have no national speed limit, we have many, many cars and bikes capable of 180-200MPH, and they get used!. This year so far we have had only 2 road fatalities. One a young pedestrian listening to an MP3 player, who started to cross the road without paying attention, knocked over by an elderly lady who just did not have the reactions. The other a motorcyclist who went into a hedge avoiding a car overtaking a bus. The second one was particularly tragic as the man was not only consious at the scene but said he felt ok and did not want to go to hospital. He was taken anyway and died later that day from a blood clot.
Our problems differ from Bermuda's but it still comes down to attitude.
Posted by Bandit on 13.07.06 at 13:14
"With respect to slowing all vehicals down to a 30-35 mph maximum it will not fix the problem. The problem is attitude." - Bandit
Actually Bandit I would beg to differ. By forcing a vehicle to drive at a slower pace it will actually force a change in attitude as well. I do not disagree that attitude is a real major issue but by changing the perameters we will have a better shot at controlling bad attitudes.
Posted by SmokingGun on 13.07.06 at 13:14
Slightly off topic, but perhaps relevant.
I've been up and down from Sandys to St Davids 18 times since Tuesday, via South Shore, Northshore and Middle Roads, Harrington Sound Road etc., and not once did I see a speed trap...In fact I only saw around 10 police cars and no police bikes on the roads over the 3 days. What do our policemen actually do????
Steve
Posted by Steve Moffat on 13.07.06 at 17:59
Paperwork!!!
Posted by Bandit on 15.07.06 at 16:47