SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Speed cameras have been the focus of motorists' anger and frustration for years, although we are told repeatedly that they are an effective means of reducing death and injury on the roads. But is this really the case?
Whether speed cameras actually do save lives seems an easy assertion to test: measure the numbers of casualties at a site over a period, say two years; introduce a speed camera; re-measure the number of casualties over an equal period, and any reduction is due to the camera. But it's not really that simple. Many other factors are at play that might make cameras appear to be more effective than they really are. And these factors are often ignored when evaluating the performance of speed cameras at improving road safety.
Do speed cameras actually save lives?
[...] In road safety data, there is a general tendency for collision incidents at a site to reduce anyway following a short-term rise in their number, without any treatment (such as a speed camera) being applied. In statistics, this is known as regression-to-the-mean (or RTM). We also know that the long-term trend in collisions has generally been downward due to factors such as improved vehicle safety and better driver education[PDF].
So if we observe a reduction in casualties at a site following the installation of a camera, we need to ask how much of this reduction would have happened anyway (the RTM effect)? How much is due to general trends in road safety? And how much can we actually attribute to the camera itself?
[...] To make matters worse, half of the UK's fixed speed cameras may not even be turned on. So the situation is far from simple.
Methods to accurately account for RTM and trend often require knowledge of advanced statistics which may not always be available within a road safety team, and so it is likely that these confounding factors are not being considered consistently across the country.
[...] So, do speed cameras save lives? The answer is almost certainly yes, but probably not always to the extent that people are led to believe.
https://theconversation.com/do-speed-cameras-really-save-lives-87701
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 21 2017, @07:44PM (3 children)
Install cameras in your car, and GPS devices in your car, and use them.
Then you'll have evidence of your own, and you might thereby expose wrongdoing as well.
As always, the best check against abuse of power is competition.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 21 2017, @07:56PM
No, the best check against abuses of power is to take away an abusive government's toys. Just don't let them conduct mass surveillance on the populace. A number of cities in the US have successfully gotten rid of things like red-light cameras and speed cameras, so it's doable.
I'd rather be less safe than have these things, which generously assumes they do increase safety.
(Score: 2) by Kell on Wednesday November 22 2017, @07:22AM (1 child)
How is this a troll? This is a reasonable position to take.
Scientists ask questions. Engineers solve problems.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday November 23 2017, @01:29AM
Not the modder, but I find amusing the idea of competition as a guard against abuse of power.
I can guarantee you two parasites will happily share the same victim especially if they derive benefits in different ways. You only need to look on how your govt, your bank and your comms provider compete to suck you dry of your money.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford