Speed cameras Editorial New Statesman January 12th

Your superb editorial omits the fact that unlike anti-theft cameras in shops, speed cameras are only activated when an offence has already been committed, and that – unlike with other offences – they are only used when they are clearly visible to potential offenders.

Of course, speed cameras, like all road safety interventions, are sometimes a blunt instrument for solving a complicated problem. But that is an argument for more, not less technology to make the users of potentially lethal machinery accountable. On-board speed governors activated by roadside beacons can automatically control vehicle speed according to local and weather conditions (without motorists having to worry about legal intervention). “Black box” recorders in vehicles, opened with a magistrates warrant after collisions to establish their cause, can be easily installed.

So far billions of pounds has been spent building roads (with crash barriers, anti-skid surfaces etc.) and cars (with air bags, crumple zones, seat belts etc.) that make it easier for drivers to use without worrying about the consequences of bad driving. It is time that available and often cheap modern technology is used to reduce danger at source. This means making motorists accountable and thereby protecting pedestrians, cyclists and other road users still at risk from bad driving.

Dr. Robert Davis
Policy Advisor, Road Danger Reduction Forum