jont wrote:petes wrote:MGF wrote:Both. Hidden for general deterrent. Visible to reduce speeds at specific hazards.
That would be my thoughts on the issue. To me, making all speed cameras clearly visible is as good as telling drivers they can drive at whatever speed they like elsewhere. There needs to be an element of uncertainty as to where enforcement might be taking place.
Why should enforcement only be about speed? I'd rather see covert enforcement of /all/ driving rules. To mis-quote you from above, making all road safety enforcement about speed sends the message that so long as you're not speeding, you can break whatever other traffic laws you want (mobile phone use, insurance, license, VED, MOT, disfunctional lighting etc etc).
Perhaps it shouldn't. I guess the issue is that criminality in terms of speed is quantitative, measurable and black and white. As such, it lends itself well to automated detection systems. I'm not sure how you'd use similar systems to prosecute people for more subjective motoring offenses, although tailgating could probably be monitored quite easily.
As suggested, I've started a new thread on the speed debate.