Weather
Speed camera vandals 'putting lives at risk' (From South Wales Argus)
Get involved: Send your photos, video, news & views by texting ARGUS NEWS to 80360 or email
us
Speed camera vandals 'putting lives at risk'
7:50am Tuesday 19th May 2009
VANDALS who are damaging speed cameras throughout Gwent are putting lives in the area at risk, the Wales Road Casualty Reduction Partnership have warned.
Since May 2008, three cameras have been vandalised throughout Gwent including an incident involving the speed camera installed on the M4 westbound roadworks at Tredegar Park.
The camera was set on fire by vandals at the beginning of this month.
Now the body is warning lives are being put in danger as the cameras are installed to reduce accidents and protect roadworkers.
Manager of the Wales Road Casualty Reduction Partnership, Jim Moore said that those responsible for the damage have a total disregard for other people’s safety.
He said: “People seem to think we can place cameras where they can make the most money. This is not true.
"We can only put cameras where people have been killed or seriously injured, at sites of community concern or at roadworks.”
Mr Moore added that the cameras were proven to save lives and reduce the severity of collisions. They also help protect roadworkers such as those currently working on the widening of the M4.
He said: “Each time a camera is vandalised and put out of action all road users are put at risk.
“This is a criminal offence and Gwent Police are actively pursuing those responsible.”
Gwent Police received the call reporting that the speed camera at Tredegar Park was on fire on May 9 at 10.30pm.
The incident is being treated as suspicious and any witnesses are asked to contact the police on 101 or Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111.
More News stories
- Winter weather hits A&E waiting times
- Severn Barrage would be 'disastrous' - RSPB
- Health chiefs want to cut hospital stay lengths
- Teens get engineering taste
- Gwent jobs threatened as clothing chain closes
- Gwent star storms top 40
- Body found in Penarth is missing Cwmbran woman
- Homes plan for city ex-garden centre site
- Expenses ‘privilege’ an outrage - MPs
- Little Mill junction could get safety revamp
Your Say YourGwent
Pawl, says...
9:07am Tue 19 May 09
What about the cameras they put in locations on the motorway just to harvest the fines?
Automatic signs showing actual speeds are more effective for the majority of drivers.
jilted john, newport gwent says...
9:10am Tue 19 May 09
But no you put those huge lumps of plastic or tarmac instead that wrecks our cars ive had a few near misses were drivers are trying there special way to have less of an impact to there car.
Maybe they only need a reminder of their speed like those digital speed cameras
I think there great. But then your not going to have a fine for that reminder and no one official benefits .
sassylady35, Newport says...
9:38am Tue 19 May 09
ifonlyitweretrue, penperlleni says...
10:48am Tue 19 May 09
How many more have to die on the A4042 at the Little Mill/Usk turning?
papa, Newport says...
10:49am Tue 19 May 09
If someone needs a couple of quid for a can of petrol, please let me know!!
Salem, Blackwood says...
11:39am Tue 19 May 09
papa wrote:Here Here..these Cameras are nothing more than Revenue Raisers..I applaud these modern day "Rebecca's Daughters"!!!
Speed cameras are nothing more than revenue raisers. They may put some of them where people have been killed but in many cases people were killed because they crossed where they shouldn’t have or didn’t observe the traffic correctly when they did cross and the driver always gets the blame!
If someone needs a couple of quid for a can of petrol, please let me know!!
The Rabbit, newport says...
11:52am Tue 19 May 09
jilted john, newport gwent says...
12:06pm Tue 19 May 09
The law only applies to Joe public.
Ive been behind many a police car no sirens no blue lights yet there doing more than the speed limit for that road.
I am very much a speed watcher in my car. I would not give the satisfaction of some jumped up police officer finger pointing me.
I would love to flash them down and do a citizens arrest personally myself but im sure they would give me a good ear bashing.
But it’s not illegal to do so.
KazB, Cwmbran says...
12:43pm Tue 19 May 09
Owain Vaughan wrote:Exactly what I was going to write.
"We can only put cameras where people have been killed or seriously injured, at sites of community concern or at roadworks.” So pretty much anywhere then?
I don't agree with vandalism in general, but if they are going to do it, speed cameras are one of those I don't mind seeing getting a bashing.
Most drivers will know when you're on the roads, you might be doing above a certain limit, then you see a camera, and the brakes go on!! That's what causes accidents and injuries!!! Most of us are sensible, and yes, possibly do a couple of miles over the limit, but we're not dangerous. In other articles I've commented on, if you want to catch people who are breaking the law .. more police cars, more foot patrols, more police presence.
Salem, Blackwood says...
1:47pm Tue 19 May 09
Most of them are there PURELY to enable the companies making and installing them a lot of money...... which they most gratefully pass on to their SHAREHOLDERS who just HAPPEN to be members of .............??? Well, you GUESS which political party for yourselves - you think corruption ONLY applies to expense fiddling???
wolvesfan, Cwmbran says...
7:05pm Tue 19 May 09
Speed cameras are just revenue raisers, the statistics don't back their claims to be effective in reducing injuries/ deaths due to rtas.
Most of this has happened naturally as car asfety improves and people wear seat belts and the improved medical treatment patients receive.
That said the turning you mention at Little Mill is atrocious and I just don't know how they can improve iut- they have had lots of attempts that's for sure, but it seems worse now than ever.
Gareth, Newport says...
7:05pm Tue 19 May 09
and there was me thinking that it was the motorists who drive at excessive speeds for the road conditions who are putting the lives at risk.
sorry guv, i was doing 120 in the rain, but it wasn't my fault. i wouldna done it if the speed camera was working.
TK355, S Wales says...
9:22pm Tue 19 May 09
TK355, S Wales says...
9:22pm Tue 19 May 09
Salem, Blackwood says...
1:49am Wed 20 May 09
Little or no Improvement has occured, but the Prosecution of Drivers continues..
We all know its a Cash Cow, the Police know its a Cash Cow and our Smirking Politicians also know its a Cash Cow.
It'll never Stop, because the Money's too easy to come by.
It just shows where the priorities are for the Police, when Muggers, Rapists and Child Offenders get a written warning, but the Motorist who pays dearly for the right to drive nowadays, gets Penalised for everything from eating an Apple, Laughing behind the Wheel, up to the heinous Crime of exceeding the Speed limit by as little as 5mph!!!
daiwa, Torfaen says...
9:31am Wed 20 May 09
wolvesfan, Cwmbran says...
11:00am Wed 20 May 09
So if it's not the police...who is it that prosecute you?
lets be fair if you are in the police nine times out of ten you get away with speeding anyway.
This government is obsessed by revenue from speed cameras- look at what they want to do now, turn most A roads into 50mph limtes- allegeldy to improve road safety, but I am sure you will see plenty of enforcement with cameras in place.
Speed rarely kills, drunk and drugged drivers do and I don't see them being caught by cameras.
D.G., Newport says...
11:24am Wed 20 May 09
Why should police officers waste their monitoring traffic speeds - I want them out investigating crimes that can't be done by camera.
KazB, Cwmbran says...
12:05pm Wed 20 May 09
KazB, Cwmbran says...
1:31pm Wed 20 May 09
Those who are doing excessive speeds rarely get to pay the fine, because they are driving stolen cars,they are too young to be prosecuted or they end up dead.
wolvesfan, Cwmbran says...
2:35pm Wed 20 May 09
D.G. wrote:if the legal speed of the road is reduced from 70 to 50 on the A40 will you support it?Becuase that is what is planned and you can be sure as hell speed cameras will follow.
I'm totally in favour of speed cameras as a way of making money. It cuts my tax bill and penalises speeding drivers. If you don't want to pay the Speed Tax, don't speed.
Why should police officers waste their monitoring traffic speeds - I want them out investigating crimes that can't be done by camera.
Speed cameras don't work, end of. And as for cutting your tax bill thats a proposterous argument.The only person cutting the tax bill for you is the same motorists who are paying 75p a litre on tax to the govt.
Gareth, Newport says...
3:56pm Wed 20 May 09
after all that, you still decide to speed and get caught, then whose fault is it?
i've been caught twice. once was doing 34 in a 30. yes i was annoyed, but no one's fault but my own.
personal responsibility people.
Gareth, Newport says...
4:07pm Wed 20 May 09
KazB wrote:if someone is breaking the law, they are breaking the law - why should they get away with it just because they have a disabled person with them? in fact, if you have adisabled/poorlypers
Must add ... most decent people get to a speeding fine for a few miles over; that is those going to work and earning their daily crust, or possibly someone taking a disabled person to the hospital .. yes it happened!
Those who are doing excessive speeds rarely get to pay the fine, because they are driving stolen cars,they are too young to be prosecuted or they end up dead.
on with you, surely you should be driving more conscientiously?
and this one isn't aimed at you per se KazB, but it is interesting to see so many people demanding stronger action against law breakers right unti the moment that it is them - or someone they know - committing it.
then comes the excuses as why that particular law is wrong, or that society shouldn't penalise them, but someone else for breaking another law.
Salem, Blackwood says...
4:09pm Wed 20 May 09
A collision requires a Hazardous Condition (Bald Tyre, Wet Surface, Drunk Driver, etc..) and an initiating event (Sudden Lane Change, Misjudged Overtake, Poor Observation, etc..). That triggers an Accident Sequence which will become a Collision/Casualties unless something can Stop it. Driver reaction, Anti-lock brakes, Crash-Barriers, Seat Belts, Airbags etc.. can all mitigate the likelihood of a Crash or its severity.
So explain how a camera can either remove the Hazardous Condition, the Initiating Event or Mitigate the Sequence once it has been triggered.Cameras cannot prevent a collision or save a life. Yet there are several examples of where Cameras have contributed to Accidents and even Death.
Claims for the success of cameras are bogus and fraudulent
Gareth, Newport says...
4:23pm Wed 20 May 09
Salem wrote:good argument. I'll always take their success claims with a pinch of salt.
Perhaps someone from Wales Road Casualty Reduction Partnership, could explain exactly how cameras perform their magic????.....
A collision requires a Hazardous Condition (Bald Tyre, Wet Surface, Drunk Driver, etc..) and an initiating event (Sudden Lane Change, Misjudged Overtake, Poor Observation, etc..). That triggers an Accident Sequence which will become a Collision/Casualties unless something can Stop it. Driver reaction, Anti-lock brakes, Crash-Barriers, Seat Belts, Airbags etc.. can all mitigate the likelihood of a Crash or its severity.
So explain how a camera can either remove the Hazardous Condition, the Initiating Event or Mitigate the Sequence once it has been triggered.Cameras cannot prevent a collision or save a life. Yet there are several examples of where Cameras have contributed to Accidents and even Death.
Claims for the success of cameras are bogus and fraudulent
i think they would do well to be up front and say: "you know what, they ARE to catch you breaking the law and to raise money."
more lobbying is definitely needed to increase speed limits (car safety has moved on a lot since the 60s and 70mph in a modern car on a motorway is pretty crazy) in the right areas, and decrease it in others.
Salem, Blackwood says...
6:07pm Wed 20 May 09
Gareth wrote:Thanks mate I might also add..if as they claim they are not being used as revenue raises why are they used predomently on safe roads such as Dual Carriageways/Motorwa
Salem wrote:good argument. I'll always take their success claims with a pinch of salt.
Perhaps someone from Wales Road Casualty Reduction Partnership, could explain exactly how cameras perform their magic????.....
A collision requires a Hazardous Condition (Bald Tyre, Wet Surface, Drunk Driver, etc..) and an initiating event (Sudden Lane Change, Misjudged Overtake, Poor Observation, etc..). That triggers an Accident Sequence which will become a Collision/Casualties unless something can Stop it. Driver reaction, Anti-lock brakes, Crash-Barriers, Seat Belts, Airbags etc.. can all mitigate the likelihood of a Crash or its severity.
So explain how a camera can either remove the Hazardous Condition, the Initiating Event or Mitigate the Sequence once it has been triggered.Cameras cannot prevent a collision or save a life. Yet there are several examples of where Cameras have contributed to Accidents and even Death.
Claims for the success of cameras are bogus and fraudulent
i think they would do well to be up front and say: "you know what, they ARE to catch you breaking the law and to raise money."
more lobbying is definitely needed to increase speed limits (car safety has moved on a lot since the 60s and 70mph in a modern car on a motorway is pretty crazy) in the right areas, and decrease it in others.
ys etc..instead of outside Schools and "RatRuns"???
KazB, Cwmbran says...
7:51pm Wed 20 May 09
Gareth wrote:Fair comment Gareth. Glad to say it wasn't me driving that time. I have to admit I have been caught 2 or 3 times in the 20 odd years I've been driving and everytime, I admit, fair cop. Usually doing a few miles over 30 or 40 - my bad! as they say.
KazB wrote: Must add ... most decent people get to a speeding fine for a few miles over; that is those going to work and earning their daily crust, or possibly someone taking a disabled person to the hospital .. yes it happened! Those who are doing excessive speeds rarely get to pay the fine, because they are driving stolen cars,they are too young to be prosecuted or they end up dead.if someone is breaking the law, they are breaking the law - why should they get away with it just because they have a disabled person with them? in fact, if you have adisabled/poorlypers on with you, surely you should be driving more conscientiously? and this one isn't aimed at you per se KazB, but it is interesting to see so many people demanding stronger action against law breakers right unti the moment that it is them - or someone they know - committing it. then comes the excuses as why that particular law is wrong, or that society shouldn't penalise them, but someone else for breaking another law.
My bugbear with speed cameras is that it's just another 'government money making scheme' taking cash off hard working taxpayers.
The criminal element always appear to get away with it. Unless anyone can prove me wrong??
parcel, newport city says...
8:05pm Wed 20 May 09
It was my fault, I was in a hurry to get back.
I was then given the following options, to avoid having points on my licence and a fine:
To attend a "Speed Choice! workshop held in the locality and to pay a course fee of £60.
I chose the latter and it was a very humbling experience, as the facts of road traffic accidents and the consequences were carefully explained to a group of us who attended.
Since "that time"(3 motorbikes and a car later) I have had no further speeding tickets.
I have attempted to keep to all speed limits on all roads, its such a pleasure to drive at 30 mph and then when the speed limit increases, to be able to accelerate away reaching the higher speed limit.
Very satisfying!
Whoosh!
KazB, Cwmbran says...
8:21pm Wed 20 May 09
TK355, S Wales says...
10:15pm Wed 20 May 09
"IF IT'S NOT THE POLICE THAT PROSECUTE YOU, WHO DOES?"
The Crown prosecutes you, that's why they are called the CROWN Prosecution Service
westsi1983, Newport says...
11:52pm Wed 20 May 09
I personally disagree with the Gatsos for the very reasons cited on this forum. The new gantries being errected for the variable speed limit will be camera fitted, (else why vary the speed limit) and their frequency will make speeding a total waste of time (thankfully, as I am fed up of being hounded by other motorists on the road for only being 1 or 2 over the limit rather than the desired 10 - 20 that seem to flash up on the council's little signs... I don't see these working too well tbh.
However, I far prefer average speed enforcement. There is nothing more annoying than having cruise control set to 1 below only to have to brake at a camera to avoid some idiot who doesn't understand what their speedometer says, and then after the camera find another idiot plastered on your bumper because you're not 10 over...
What gives people the right to hassle the law abiding on the road? I think people would find it offensive if thieves heckled us on the street for purchasing our goods, but yet this bullying and intimidation seems perfectly acceptable on our roads????
Truth is cameras used to work far better when we feared the one hidden in the hedge round the next bend... but thanks to some bright spark, we know where they are, and moreover, where they aren't and now speed routinely safe in the knowledge of not getting caught...
I don't understand this "money makers" thing with speed cameras, as for them to make money, one must first exceed the speed limit, and by a fair old margin too!! To say that burning down a speed camera is risking public safety is a bit of an exaggeration. I, however, work in highways, and know all too well the dangers of working on live roads - which is why road works generally have a speed limit covering them. I find it laughable that people think that these limits are put up purely as an inconvenience to them...
One day someone IS going to get killed by a speeding driver along the Newport M4. Either a roadworker, or far more likely, a law abiding citizen taken out by a law breaking idiot! Thats perhaps what the SCSP are referring to, but I doubt somehow they have the intellect to think in those terms...
D.G., Newport says...
1:46pm Thu 21 May 09
wolvesfan wrote:I don't use the A40, so can't really comment on that. I'm not convinced by your "speed cameras don't work, end of" argument.
D.G. wrote: I'm totally in favour of speed cameras as a way of making money. It cuts my tax bill and penalises speeding drivers. If you don't want to pay the Speed Tax, don't speed. Why should police officers waste their monitoring traffic speeds - I want them out investigating crimes that can't be done by camera.if the legal speed of the road is reduced from 70 to 50 on the A40 will you support it?Becuase that is what is planned and you can be sure as hell speed cameras will follow. Speed cameras don't work, end of. And as for cutting your tax bill thats a proposterous argument.The only person cutting the tax bill for you is the same motorists who are paying 75p a litre on tax to the govt.
I don't see what's preposterous about the tax cut argument. As you say, the people cutting my tax bill are the motorists who (like me) pay 75p per litre tax on petrol and (unlike me) break the speed limit.
Salem - good post, but I'd argue that Excessive Speed is a hazardous condition as much as wet road surface and/or bald tyres because it also increases braking distance.
wolvesfan, Cwmbran says...
6:18pm Thu 21 May 09
TK355 wrote:No the NIPS are produced by whichever relevant police force has caught you.
Wolves fan, Cwmbran "IF IT'S NOT THE POLICE THAT PROSECUTE YOU, WHO DOES?" The Crown prosecutes you, that's why they are called the CROWN Prosecution Service
Statute has dictated this
Your case will only go over to the CPS if you dispute the driver/speed etc. That is why it is a fixed penalty notice and negates the need for prosecution.
Hope for Cwmbran, Cwmbran says...
5:40pm Sat 23 May 09
It is like reading my post with your name on it. 70 on a motorway is silly now and 30 on a built up estate with kids playing is also silly. However, you choose your speed, you pay the fine or face the consequences.
Personal responsibility does seem to lack so much nowadays but needs to come back especially in these difficult times, far too often people are eager to criticise others, but sometimes it is worthwhile looking at yourself: MP gets a bath plug for second home hmmm you drive 40 mph in a 30 zone erm; Councillor claims travel expenses hmm you dump old sofa on World Heritage site erm. I know which ones I think are more scandalous.
Speed cameras are just like traffic wardens, but imagine if speed cameras had target quotas with bonuses or were run as a proper money making business. I guarantee you that it would be a very rich company very quickly until people realised how serious they were about it. Just don't speed.
Id does bug me though when roadworks are empty and the 50 mph signs remain as this just flies in the face of being sensible.
Local Advertisers
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
Owain Vaughan, Newport, Monmouthshire says...
7:55am Tue 19 May 09
So pretty much anywhere then?