Road Safety Minister David Jamieson has called on Durham Police to explain why more people were being killed and injured on its roads.

County Durham has just one static speed camera. Its police force has up to now focused on mobile and hand-held cameras instead.

But 42 people died on its roads last year - an increase of 56% on 2001. The Durham force says it considers the figure a "blip" and is confident its approach is an effective long-term solution.

Recent government figures show forces which use static as well as mobile speed cameras, saw road deaths fall dramatically.

Should speed cameras be made compulsory for use by all police forces? Would it keep road deaths to a minimum?

The following comments reflect the balance of views we have received:

We should adopt the same measures as in the US, when the school lights flash, the limit is 20, and often overseen by a deputy Sheriff. It's the perpetual speeder in this type of location who is the road menace, this is where the cameras should be, not on clear dual carriageways and all should be fitted with film.
Geoff Bray, Forfar

I have campaigned for two years to get speed bumps put outside the nearby local community centre because young children and the elderly are frequently endangered by cars driving too fast for the design of the road. The council have refused to consider this. On the other hand the same council has a speed camera on a straight dual carriageway, in a non residential area, catching cars travelling quite safely at 47 mph. Seems like road safety is only important if it makes money?
Russ, Bristol

As a student about to take his driving test I don't understand what all the fuss about speed camera's. Surely if everyone travelled at the legal speed we wouldn't have this problem. The main problem with them is by making them noticeable, if you do that people slam the breaks on when they see it whereas if they are hidden people will not know where they are and should travel at the right speed (in an ideal world).
Theo, Haslemere

Most of the previous comments are missing a valuable point. The issue is whether speed cameras slow drivers down and improve driving generally. From the comments related to the amount of revenue that they generate suggest, they clearly cannot be working, otherwise they would not be making much money! The only thing that will save lives on the roads is VERY severe penalties for drivers causing accidents on the road, like they have in Norway. Knock someone down while crossing the road at a crossing - lifetime driving ban, automatically. Has the added benefit of getting all the lunatics off the road!
Ralph, Sowerby Bridge

More traffic police and not tax revenue cameras are what is required. How much attention is focused by drivers on the fear of cameras for being a couple of miles over the limit rather than the road - speed cameras kill and are simple yet another stealth tax. This is the oppression of the many for the crimes of a few.
E.PENDLEBURY, Ropley

If the government is serious about engaging drivers and actually making a difference to accidents they should only use speed cameras at REAL accident black spots. For those long haul trips, camera watching is fast taking over as the nation's alternative to I-spy.
Bryan, Scotland

Speed is obviously a factor in road deaths, as well as drinking, using mobile phones, and just bad driving. It is, however, the easiest thing to monitor because it's the car, not the driver that is detected. I don't think there is any argument against speed enforcement by camera, and arguing about where they should or shouldn't be placed is just skirting the issue. If you don't break the speed limit, you won't get penalised.
Paul Mullins, Surbiton

Every day thousands ignore the limits with no regard to weather or road conditions Peter B, UK

What we really need are anti-pedestrian cameras. The biggest threat on these dark nights on my motorbike journey from West to East London is from pedestrians. They just plough their way across slow/stationary traffic and never look at ANYTHING except the other side of the road. I have more close shaves from pedestrian red light jumpers than anything else. Where are the measures to protect traffic users from dangerous pedestrians?
Graeme, London

People are right in saying speed kills, but only in inappropriate situations. Measures should be taken to reduces instances of speeding in urban areas, streets around schools and accident blackspots. In these areas measures such as traffic calming may be more effective. A speed camera won't necessarily stop speeding outside a school but a big lump in the road will!
David, UK

I can't believe there are people saying speed cameras should be hidden! Do you want to stop people speeding or catch people speeding? Do you want drivers to slow down and avoid an accident or speed on and get caught by a camera just before running a child over? Get real - they should be highly visible and used in urban areas and accident blackspots only (and the fines collected should go to charity).
Matt F, Bristol

The speed limit of the road where the camera is located should be clearly displayed and also on the post where the camera is mounted. If the police do not show clearly the speed limit they are only out to make money. If they do it means that they are really interested in helping the motorist to keep to the limit. Anyway there should be a system of building up to the penalty of 3 points and �60 fine - say one or two warnings before the penalty and payment. The way it's done now is angled at 'getting the motorist'. Are speed cameras used on the Continent?
Martin Anderson Stuart, Kirkcudbright

It is possible to fit all cars with Satellite tracking systems, such as LoJack, that will automatically report speeding offences. You could speed on your way to work and come home to the fine in the evening. It would also save millions in insurance claim investigations if all cars were fitted with video cameras linked to a central monitoring system. Of course it wouldn't save lives.
David R, Plymouth

A little known fact amongst all those "I'm a good driver" yet speed brigade, especially those who invest in radar detectors. They are illegal even when not turned on in motor vehicles in France. If discovered you face a hefty fine with the possibility of your car impounded. Why haven't we adopted that Euro law?
Mick Downes, Erith

Speed cameras are good in dangerous places i.e. outside schools, junctions, etc Martin, Oxford

More traffic police. Less "Trial by Camera" A rural village near me has been campaigning to have a camera installed as it is being used as a "Rat Run" so the police surveyed it for them. Worst offenders? The RESIDENTS! Enough said.
Danny

Speed Cameras are good at catching people in the act but really have no influence on the way people drive when not in areas of speed cams. They should be put in all areas to show that there is a serious effort, as long as there is proof money is being used to fund police departments.
Nick Fulcher, Calgary, Canada

Here in the States I have noticed that speed cameras are becoming popular for one reason only: generating revenue. Accident rates don't seem to be falling because of the cameras, but city coffers seem to be swelling, thanks to the cameras. Automobile insurance companies are making a pretty penny, too.
Shawn, North Carolina, USA

We should be doing whatever it takes to reduce the amount of drivers on the road. If it takes cameras to catch dangerous drivers in the act then so be it. Far too many people take for granted driving and see it as a right more than a privilege. And as a result, bad drivers get licenses and worse drivers get back on the road after drinking and driving charges. With less cars on the road a better more organized public transit system would be needed and would inevitably lead to cleaner air. It's a no brainer.
Billy, Cumberland BC, Canada

Yes their should be as many speed cameras as possible their is no excuse for speeding.
Niall Hewitt, Banknock

It is very clear from the comments here that the general consensus that state enforcement of what it believes to be best for us is the only viable approach to social issues. I cannot remember the last time that anyone mentioned personal responsibility. I appreciate that there is no personal responsibility in your wretched little country.
Steve, UK

Speed cameras should be allowed anywhere David Swaddle, Twickenham

Speed cameras should be allowed anywhere, provided that the local police force can demonstrate that it allows them to divert more money, manpower and resources to catching criminals in other acts.
David Swaddle, Twickenham, England

Come on - they're better than speed bumps!
Sarah, Reading, UK

Personally I do slow down if I know a speed camera is ahead - but that takes the whole point away. If speed cameras are going to reduce speed on more than a few stretches of road they need to be unmarked!
Bill, UK

My village has a limit of 30 mph for about 500 yards because of the village primary school. The usual limit is 50 mph. Everyday I am passed by people doing 50-60 mph during drop off and pick up times. All these people that say that speeding is not a crime. Would they be happy if I could not stop in time because I was speeding and ran one of their children over?
Mike G, Peterborough

No, and No. There is no evidence that supports the assertion that speed cameras reduce fatal accidents. There is, however, ample evidence that they raise revenue - I wonder why the government want them so much? More traffic police would be a much better thing to reduce the incidences of downright dangerous driving that we meet every day.
Steve Hamilton, Braintree, Essex

By speeding you are breaking the LAW, simple, no if and no buts Lisa, UK

How about educating the pedestrians about the dangers of jay walking and telling children how to cross the road - there would be much less accidents if these people looked where they were going too! It takes two to tango!
Shawn, Blackpool

Make sure the speed limits are reasonable, then enforce them with all you've got. The technology is there to apply the law everywhere all the time, no more cat-and-mouse. Small tickets for 10mph above the limit, huge fines for 20mph above, licence withdrawal for 30mph above.
Leszek Luchowski, Gliwice, Poland

If 70+MPH on a UK motorway is so dangerous why are the accident statistics in France (82mph), and Germany (unlimited on some roads) similar to ours? Does a different law of physics apply in the UK?
John, Watford

Why so many speed cameras? Because motorists can't be trusted to drive within the speed limits.
John, Walsall

I am from Ukraine and completely for using speed cameral everywhere. It is quite obvious to improve the situation on the roads and hope in future, one day, a couple of speed cameras will appear in our country too...
Taras, Kiev

Speed obviously affects the impact of any collision, but the key issue is avoiding accidents. Drivers should always ensure that i) they're concentrating on the road, ii) they follow the Highway Code, and iii) they can stop within whatever stretch of clear road they can see in front of them. If they do that, then accidents will only happen if something veers out in front of them, or if there's some mechanical failure.
Dai, Wales

I agree with the police: drivers slowing down en masse when they notice speed cameras is just as dangerous as speeding. More subtle ways should be employed to catch offenders.
Maddie, England

Yes speed cameras should be everywhere. I have absolutely no sympathy with people who break the law and behave as though they are the victim when they are caught.
Jane, Wales, UK

Speed cameras in the right place are a good idea, but on straight fast roads - who are they protecting? Stuart, London

I saw some idiot behind me reading a newspaper while driving his car. He swerved across the white line a couple of times and nearly hit me. How does a Camera capture these kinds of people.. More Traffic Police is the answer, funded by strategically and logically placed cameras.
Paul, Berkshire

There is no evidence that Co. Durham's recent rise in death has anything to do with speeding drivers, the police have been using mobile cameras after all. The Government is using speed cameras as another form of taxation - and that's why they are so quick to complain.
Bill, Ulster

these do nothing to help people slow down to avoid accidents, they are just there to make money rather than help road safety, what is much better are the boards that are moved around and read out your speed to you - at least these make you aware of how fast you are going and encourage you to slow down, surely that reduces accidents more??
CHRIS ADLEY, Gravesend

I challenge anyone who drives who says they do not break the speed limit. Most cars are not that happy at 30MPH driving in 4th gear and 30 - 40 MOH seems to be the norm. It is excessive speed that kills and this is not it.
Mr D Morris, Romford

Of course, on a motorway someone doing 69.9 mph is a safe driver, someone doing 70.1mph is dangerous? Get real. People bump into each other when walking - speed doesn't cause accidents. Of course our badly designed roads, badly designed and poorly maintained cars may have something to do with it.
Dave, England

So speed doesn't kill eh? Explain this then - at 40mph nine out of ten pedestrians hit by a car will be killed, at 30mph it drops to five out of 10, but at 20mph only 1 out of 10 will be killed. And if it is a money making scheme then why not foil the "plan" by driving at appropriate speeds and not getting caught - that way the government don't get any money at all - you don't need to be a genius to work that one out. And yes, I'm all for speed camera's.
Rachael, UK

There is no evidence that they make the areas where they are used any safer John, Birmingham

Speed does kill! The faster you go the less time you have to react. People are complaining about this being another money grabber - so what if it is, you don't need to worry about it if you don't break the law.
Wayne, Aberdeen

At some point in any one day I probably break the speed limit and do it unashamedly. When I get caught, I pay. On the other hand, having paid road tax, if I travel too slowly, shouldn't the road authorities be liable for a fine. Given the "waste" of fuel due to traffic jams shouldn't they be made accountable for this?
Tim Rollinson, Tonbridge, UK

When I realise I am driving past a speed camera (by seeing the markings on the road) it is my natural reflex to brake, regardless of whether or not I am driving too fast. Many other drivers have also told me that they do the same. Speed cameras are all well and good in areas where there are pedestrians, but I am greatly disturbed by speed cameras appearing on stretches of motorway. A sudden, unexpected braking of the car in front at 70 or 80mph is bound to cause serious accidents!
Helen, London

One point that seems to have been missed is that the consequence of inappropriate speed does not need to be death or injury to have a harmful effect on society. Many legitimate road users, particularly young cyclists and pedestrians have been effectively frightened off the roads by speeding traffic. This is why so few children make their own way to school nowadays causing consequential problems of childhood obesity and lack of independence
Mark Fairman, Matlock

The police should be out there patrolling the roads Neil, Surrey

These speed limits were introduced way back when a cars stopping distance was probably around three or four times longer than modern cars today, today's cars are safer than they have ever been. As has already been said here, why aren't the cameras positioned outside schools and the like. No, instead they are positioned strategically to generate revenue, we had two cameras on some recent road works on the M5 and we have been lead to believe these two cameras generated over a million pounds in revenue. Instead of generating revenue why don't the police go out there and catch some real criminals, or is that too dangerous?
Dave P, Cullompton, UK

If it can be proved that the speed cameras elsewhere in the UK are effective in reducing road deaths or accidents, then the police force should be "forced" to use more than just the one. They may very well be operating an effective long-term approach on this subject, but where safety of people is concerned, that just isn't enough. It's a sad fact that there are just too many inept drivers on our roads, and people need protection from them. So - keep going with the long-term strategy, but get a quick-fix in to keep people alive in the short-term. It's a no-brainer.
Joe, Newbury, UK

If these things aren't a cash cow then i challenge the authorities to drop the fine to zero. They could up the penalty points to four from three, so it would be 3 strikes and you're out. They should also link the cameras to the DVLA database to log untaxed cars at the same time. Fines for driving untaxed/uninsured vehicles could cover the cost of the cameras.
Dave Hough, Nottingham

I am someone who thinks that they should not be used at all so no I do not think that they should be on all roads.
Nina, UK

I'm all for anything that reduces deaths on our roads, but the cameras are there to make money not save lives Dave, UK Portsmouth

County Durham police must be ashamed of themselves for only having one static speed camera. With more and more people being killed on our roads each year speed cameras Should be made compulsory and there should be a lot more of them.
Mar Caldwell, Liverpool

I think you are all letting England become more and more like a police state with this whole camera deal.
Dee Schwartztag, USA.

More people are killed in the home than on the roads, yet we don't ban people living in houses. What is needed is realistic speed limits to suit the conditions at the time. What's the point of having to drive at 50 mph on some of Scotland's motorways, then being allowed to do 60 on the A80, or A77 which are much more dangerous? There is a clearer need for more traffic police to catch drunken or dangerous drivers than more speed cameras.
Alastair Nelson, Johnstone

I have nothing against speed cameras but I object to the way their position is usually obscured or camouflaged. WE all speed, as you can see on any motorway today, no one is only doing 70mph and if you do 80 everyone still overtakes you. The ultimate view is that all cars should have speed limiters or smart cards that send an automatic signal to the police whenever the car goes over a speed limit.
peter, Hong Kong

Make the sentence for traffic offences resulting in death a life sentence, i.e. until the offender dies in prison with no chance of parole whatsoever. Force the offender's property to be sold and the proceeds given to the victim's family. For other traffic offences make the punishment a two year ban from driving, with a compulsory retest before being allowed to drive again. Enforce these sentences rigorously. Watch the number of fatalities drop rapidly.
Andrew, London, UK

This is surely not a question that has to be asked; we either break the law or follow it. Speed cameras protect innocent people and punish those who decide to break the law. If you have nothing to hide, then you've nothing to fear.
Gary Chatterton, Leek

Funny how many good drivers we have writing in telling us that speed doesn't kill - no speed doesn't but the less time you have to react does Mark, Cardiff, Wales

I think that the government should focus far more attention on recruiting more traffic police than installing extra speed cameras. This would catch out dangerous drivers who would not be caught out by speed cameras. This includes motoring offences such as driving under the influence of drink or drugs, driving whilst map-reading/using a mobile phone etc, driving without due care and attention, driving without insurance, aggravated vehicle taking, dangerous driving, etc.
Phil Ade, Kent

Yes, speed cameras are a good thing. The only people that would have a problem is those breaking the law!
Stephen B, Nottingham

Speed cameras are nothing more than an additional tax revenue raiser for our nannying government. That they may reduce accidents is merely a secondary benefit to their primary purpose. Another stealth tax.
Ed, Lancashire

It's really scary reading how many drivers are against speed cameras, as this can only mean that they intend to speed even before they get in their car, and are upset at the thought of being caught. Those who say bad driving is the root cause are probably right, but surely obeying the speed limits is part of good driving. Today something like 10 people will die on the roads in this country. Surely we should all be doing everything possible to reduce this carnage. Maybe speed cameras aren't the whole answer, but at least they're a start.
John, North Wales

Yes they should be compulsory, and they also should not be highly visible. All that does is encourage speeding between cameras followed by sharp braking whilst at the camera. If you don't know where they are the only way to avoid being caught by one of them is to not break the law and the speed limits.
John, Ipswich

Speed does not kill, dangerous and inconsiderate driving does Chris, UK

Speed cameras are a good idea in certain circumstances i.e.: junctions, traffic lights, around schools and residential areas etc. but out on the open roads?
Chris, UK

Stand along any road with a speed camera and watch the cars speeding until they reach the camera, then the brakes go on hard until they have past the camera then the throttle goes down again. This action itself is dangerous. Cameras should be hidden and there should be more of them.
Steve Butler, Southend-on-Sea

Certainly not!
I consider myself a very good driver. I do not speed. I find it insulting that we as adults are not allowed our own judgement on safety. People are going to be stupid drivers speed cameras or not. What has happened in Blackpool is they have lowered the speed limit on virtually every road and put static cameras in places you wouldn't even believe and then also sent out the mobile crew. In my mind the people running red lights are much more of a hazard. But is that enforced? Are seat belts? Will mobile phones usage be? I doubt it!
Sharron, Blackpool

Putting in a speed camera after a random accident is like hitting a wall with a fly swatter after the fly has moved. If you are a camera partnership you can rake in lots of money and say look no more accidents, i.e. no swatted flies unfortunately the flies, like the accidents will move elsewhere.
Tony Foote, Christchurch

Speed does not kill, bad driving does! Scott, Dudley

Cameras can't catch the real idiots who cause accidents - people who stay in the middle lane of a motorway or do their makeup or read maps whilst driving. In urban areas with children or other pedestrians perhaps there is a case, but not on main trunk roads.
Mike,, Worthing

Speed cameras do nothing but ENCOURAGE bad driving. Drivers slam their brakes on to avoid being caught and then speed up again! They just don't serve any purpose other than raising money.
Anon police officer, large Northern city

So many of these comments say that speeding is dangerous driving. Perhaps so but there are many other forms. Having only taken my driving test very recently I can say that practically nothing I was taught actually applies to 'real' driving. If the driving test was about real driving experiences rather than manoeuvres and checking the mirror then there might be fewer accidents.
Matt, Bristol

The main concern I have about speed cameras is that it doesn't capture the idiots who drive within speed limits but cause potentially worse accidents through reckless driving. With all the extra cash being collected where are the Motorway patrol cars. As a regular driver down various route with plenty of cameras, there are plenty of incidents of this which go unnoticed and un punished.
Mark, Epsom

If speed was the proven cause of all accidents, then yes. Speed however is only one of the factors involved. The major cause of accidents is a momentary lack of concentration caused by drugs, including alcohol, tiredness or youthful over exuberance. Speed exacerbates the result of any of the above three. But then it does so when travelling in a plane or train or even when running and cycling.
James Johnson, Thetford, UK

We hear time and time again that these cameras save lives. They Don't! Statistics show that since their introduction road death statistics have remained more or less constant. What has changed is the amount of fine revenue collected. I think cameras should be used, but sited only at known accident black spots, clearly visible and signposted.
Johno, Harrogate

As a law-abiding motorist, I find the behaviour of some other motorists who seem to think the speed limit isn't for them intimidating, and on occasion frightening. I experience tailgating, dangerous overtaking and headlight flashing - though rarely when on a road with speed cameras.
Ian, Reading, UK

The people who get caught by fixed speed cameras are bad and dangerous drivers Phil, Bracknell

Why is all this negative? If drivers who break the LAW don't like being punished, there are a number of easy solutions. Increase speed limits to say 100mph on motorways; 75mph on country lanes and 50mph outside schools and then no one would break the speeding laws and therefore not be fined. So there would be a few deaths, but hey life is not important is it. Alternately, if drivers who break the law and receive punishment are upset because other criminals get away with drugs/theft etc then increase the penalties for these offences and the resources put into detection and prosecution.
Phil, UK

Speed limits are imposed for safety purposes. Exceeding the speed limit is breaking the law. For breaking the law you should be punished. Speed cameras are there to detect law breakers. Would these same people who whinge about speed cameras be happy if thieves, of their own property, were not detected and punished?
Andy Bishop, London

The government can still raise its extra road taxes (sorry fines) and actually do something about the cause of most accidents - bad driving, without the need for cameras. Everyone should have to take an advanced driving test EVERY few years. If you fail you have to take a compulsory driving skills course before you re-take your test. Lots of room for generating money there, and you will actually be doing something positive toward improving driving skills.
Graeme, England

Speed cameras in residential areas, where pedestrians are at risk: yes. On all roads: definitely not. In areas where there are no pedestrians, how is there any justification for the expense, and the inconvenience a camera causes? You drive at your own risk, for the sake of a handful fewer deaths a year, it's not worth it. If cameras were really about reducing speeds, and not raising revenues, they would put points on your license, rather than result in a fine.
Damian Leach, UK

I have a heard a few comments that Speed Cameras are revenue earners and I agree, but I do have to ask what is wrong with that, if you are illegally speeding then you should be punished and the police force, who are under-funded as it is should benefit. I agree cameras are not a solution, simply a tool. Tougher punishments for dangerous driving such as prison or community service. Drivers who cause injury or death due to Drink, Drugs or Careless driving should be charged with sentences concurrent with causing injury or death by any other means.
Keith Pratt, Cardiff

Static cameras are a major distraction and can be a hazard for drivers Ant, Southend

The Durham Police have the right idea. Enforcement of speed limits by Police with hand-held radar not only enforces speed limits, but also discovers criminals at the wheel. Drunks, drug takers, burglars with property in the boot, absconders from justice, etc. The effect is similar to what was discovered years ago, that if the Police go after burglars then inevitably they pick up rapists as well, because offenders are likely to be involved in more than one criminal activity.
Frank Elliott, Newcastle

Durham police are using hand-held devices because drivers can't spot them and slow down as they do for static bright-yellow cameras, so two things happen - drivers don't slow down and the police force make extra revenue. It is for the latter reason they refuse to install more static cameras. And to the people who point out that adherence to the speed limit is the key, of course it is, but this is the real world and until cars themselves can regulate their own speed according to the roads they are on, speed cameras will remain the only viable alternative.
Carl, Liverpool, UK

Absolutely not. The real cause of accidents in the vast majority of cases is driver error. Drivers are so focussed on where the cameras are they are neglecting basic skills and observation. The real solution is more traffic police and greater driver education. I am afraid casualties will rise again once the public become conditioned to the presence of cameras.
Keith Fitton, Cockermouth

Durham's Chief Constable has it absolutely right and others should listen to him. Speed does NOT kill, bad driving is the killer - good drivers keep to speed limits. Our police need to do more to deal with bad drivers, at least in Durham they are trying to do that and for that they should be praised, not pilloried.
Michael, Scunthorpe

We have to many speed cameras as it is, the solution to the problem is to have better roads
John Shearer, Hebburn

If the objective is to reduce speeds to safe levels, we just need more of the devices which display your speed (hopefully with a smiley face) as you go past. This is the style we need and not so much of the big brother approach, which encourages aggression and bad driving.
Graham Shelton, Oxford

I'm distressed to see all these comments about seeing cameras as revenue earners. Surely the point is to encourage adherence to the speed limit all the time, not just at accident black spots. Why else have those limits in the first place? If people obeyed speed limits as a matter of course, would that not be part of the safer driving so many people are talking about?
Mike, Cambridge

Please, please, please start putting cameras at traffic lights, where they stand a chance of preventing accidents! Jim, Swansea

Forget cameras, all new vehicles should be fitted with speed regulators at manufacturing stage, thus eliminating the problem of speeding. Either that or make sure the fines and punishment far more costly and inconvenient to the offender, such as an on-the-spot 3-month driving ban for doing 35mph+ in a 30mph zone, as well as the usual fine and points.
Matthew Hughes, Carmarthen

Cameras at black spots; schools, etc. definitely, and are far better than sleeping policemen. Cameras purely for revenue rising, i.e. on straight roads in the country, definitely not. We are taxed enough as it is and surely but steadily makes the general public become more disenchanted with the police with the resulting reduction of assistance in graver matters.
R W K Gardiner, Kirkbymoorside, UK

Speed cameras, both static and mobile, are a great success as a road safety tool. Or so we're told. They're such a panacea that during the period from their introduction in the early 90's to the current mass proliferation, the historical downward trend in annual UK fatalities has almost halted for the first time on record. The death rate now remains stubbornly static at around 3400 a year. Meanwhile, the number of speed cameras (which we're told are a great success on the basis of small, selective, statistically meaningless local studies) multiplies apace. You don't need a numerate degree to spot the paradox - though it helps you to understand the technical tricks used to deceive the unwary.
Simon Baynham, Cardiff

According to the governments own figures speed related deaths only account for 7% of road deaths each year. Don't you think we should be looking towards the other 93% of causes rather than installing more speed cameras?
Adam, UK

A bad driver can be a menace at 5mph Stevie, Isle of Purbeck

Speed limits are set for the safety and comfort of all. But as a society limits are ignored significantly. Ask a parent "do you want vehicles to drive slowly down your road where you child has to walk" They will say yes. Put that person in a car and they are quite likely to speed. So if as a society we want the roads to be safe and the limits adhered to but as an individual behind the wheel we feel we are a special case then enforcement must be used.
John Shephard, Easbourne

To those who question whether speed cameras are good: If your child was knocked over by a speeding motorist, what would YOU say to that??
Tony B, UK

In response to Tony B, UK, What would my child be doing walking across the M11 Southbound carriageway? ( in the middle of nowhere, not an accident hotspot ) and why hasn't he/she been educated to know that roads are dangerous places.
Colin, Dagenham, UK

Tony, if my child was knocked over by a speeding motorist I would ask what could a camera have done to save my child? Precisely nothing. On the other hand, with good education (such as the now non-existant Green Cross Code) my child would not have been on the road in the first place!
Herbert, Swindon

The local council have been putting up speed cameras and speed limits of 30mph all over this area of Somerset. At this speed, driving on these roads, people take risks and overtake on corners or in dangerous areas making driving more dangerous. Locals have taken to turning speed signs away from the road and defacing cameras! These restrictions are ridiculous.
Caroline, Taunton

All traffic lights should have cameras and they should also be installed outside schools etc but otherwise they are a revenue raising plague. Target dangerous drivers and inappropriate speed.
Paul Bignell, Herts

Speed does not kill, and these cameras are just a way to get money from us Nat, UK

No, definitely not. They should be used at accident black spots. They should not be used to source revenue for under funded police forces.
G Walker, Thetford

Show me some hard evidence that these so called "safety cameras" save lives.....so far all the evidence and research that has been done shows no difference or in fact a slight increase in road accidents. speed alone doesn't cause accidents, its inappropriate speed that causes accidents, 20mph in a built up area is too fast in some cases, just like a person joining the motorway at 40mph causes more of a problem than someone joining at 70-80 mph.
Anthony, Cardiff

Speed cameras are a revenue earner shown by the positioning of them on dual carriageways and areas that are not accident blackspots.
Tony Murphy, High Wycombe

At last, some common sense. Speed cameras are NOT a panacea for all the ills of the motoring world but rather allow the blas� idiot who bimbles around at 10mph below the speed limit completely oblivious to their surroundings, road conditions, priorities and other traffic to bask in the illusion that THEY are not the problem. More police, fewer cameras on sticks.
Peter D, High Wycombe

Oh yes speeding is braking the law so lets keep the cams and while your at it lets start using all the CCTV systems to spot the litter bugs and hit them with �30 fines, and then anyone who looks like they had a drink we can fine them too, and all the cyclists who ride on the pavement we can catch them too. See how mad it can get when you let the law become automatic!
Gary Blake, Plymouth

Perhaps we should bring back the old ways, and have someone walk in front of the vehicle with a bell when in built up areas George, UK

Actually the root cause of most accidents is frustration, and the root cause of frustration is slow and incompetent drivers, who don't have confidence behind the wheel.

While I agree that the logical solution on the roads is for the rest of us to suffer at the speed of the slowest in the pack (where is natural selection when you need it?), and I do think that everyone should have the right to drive, it doesn't mean that many people are not capable of driving perfectly well at speeds higher than the set speed limits.

Aren't pedestrians killed in accidents with vehicles going at 30 mph? Perhaps we should bring back the old ways, and have someone walk in front of the vehicle with a bell when in built up areas.
George, UK

My mum got caught on a speed camera a year ago in Leicester. The camera is positioned in a 30mph zone and about 50 yards from the start of a 40mph zone. All that camera does is generate money as the road is not an accident blackspot. How do I know this? A colleague of my mum's lives only 2 minutes walk from the camera for 25 years and there has been only 10 accidents in that time!
Helen, UK

These cameras should be put absolutely everywhere. Paint them green and put them in trees. There is no excuse for breaking the speed limit, as in doing so lives are endangered. Cameras must be fixed on every road, as only when negligent drivers are fined to the point where they can't bear to go on living will they be properly motivated to drive safely.
Paul, Cardiff

Speed cameras only help brainwash more and more people into believing that driving below a given limit is, by definition, safe, whilst travelling above the limit is dangerous. You only need to look at the comments here to see this in action, yet such an untruth is perhaps more dangerous than speed itself. Those that disagree would be wise to check the Government-backed research by the Transport Research Laboratory. Driving standards, and therefore safety, would increase far more if there were more counties like Durham, who would rather rely on the skill and judgement of, and education by, highly trained drivers themselves.
Matt, UK

A lot of drivers carry on at their own merry speed, and when a speed camera comes into view, they hit the brakes Howard, Berkshire

There is a kind of Speed Camera, I believe it is caused the SPECS system, which really does force drivers to keep their speed down, as these cameras work in pairs or more, with a distance of a mile or more between the cameras, and are connected to a system which works out the drivers' average speed between the 2 points where the car is scanned by the camera. This then forces a driver to keep his or her speed within the limit, as a sudden (and maybe dangerous) brake before the camera is useless.
Howard, Berkshire

Here in the Netherlands (the country which invented the speed cameras) we have a long history of being liberal in our approach to people destroying things which are classed as the State targeting the innocent citizens, therefore, may I suggest that you should do as we do and become more culturally aware and start destroying these "big brother" controlling devices!! Seriously, the death rate in the UK is much lower than here in the Netherlands. This is due not to the speed cameras (we have more per person then you!) rather it is down to the European approach that Pedestrians, Cyclists (we have lots of them) & Public transport are given priority over the individual in his/her own vehicle. Therefore, if you want to see what your roads will look like in 10 years come across to the Netherlands and be very scared.
Joseph Sanderson, Maastricht, The Netherlands

Simple solution (men will hate it). Fit cars with devices so that they can't go higher than 70mph, and as you enter towns/cities make it mandatory to adjust the setting to 40. There should be a way to check when the 'adjustment' was made. This could be used for 'spot checks' on cars and it could actually be very useful to those drivers who 'accidentally' break the law as modern cars are so smooth and fast that its hard to realise how quickly you are going.
Seema, Canada (ex-UK)

Remember the 'speed kills' TV ad of a while back, showing the motorist skidding down the road. If he had been travelling at 30mph he would have stopped here... Well, if he had been trained to drive properly he could have controlled his car and steered around the child, and if the child had been educated not to run into the middle of a busy high street there would have been no problem. Please put the emphasis for road safety in the right place, with pedestrians and drivers using their sense and their senses coupled with sufficient education to how to handle situations.
Mike Christie, Manchester

Speed cameras are a legitimate law enforcement tool Andy, Fleet, Hampshire

Speed cameras, from my point of view, are not an effective deterrent. People speed between the cameras then slow down when they know they are coming up. The mobile ones are probably better as they catch people off-guard, yet still when booked for speeding it is normally not off-putting enough to stop the driver speeding in the future. The penalty for speeding needs to be increased drastically to put people off. The new mobile phone laws are a much better deterrent due to the strictness of the penalty.
Jez, Halifax

Norfolk Police say their statistics show that flashing speed warning signs, triggered by a speeding vehicle, are far more effective in reducing speeding than speed cameras. These signs are also cheaper to install. So why are there more cameras than flashing signs? Flashing signs don't generate revenue! So much for the safety argument.
Richard, Wortham

The figures show that seriously injured and fatalities figures which have traditionally always declined at a steady rate, have levelled out. Let drivers get back to concentrating on driving safely rather than watching their speedo, or looking for devious tax raising traps, and the figures will continue to fall. The real motto should be Speed CAMERAS kill, not speed kills.
Dave Pickles, Warrington

The only effective solution must be to improve the quality of drivers through training Nick Lane, Poynton

My own views on speed cameras are reflected by all your printed replies. However, in Somerset we now have the added scourge of SpeedWatch - one citizen spying on and reporting his neighbours. Where are the police for whom we so dearly pay?
Ron Smith, Langport

The one point which appears to be conveniently overlooked by those who say the cameras are only there to make money, is that no money would be made if people abided by the law. I live in a 30 mph limit where drivers regularly do 50mph on a blind bend just prior to a zebra crossing where children cross to go to school. That's my child on the crossing and it could be yours too.
Bob, Leatherhead

Since the police have all but disappeared from our roads the overall standard of driving has fallen Peter, UK

Nothing is done about the actual reasons for the creating of accident blackspot. Off the top of my head half of Cambridge camera locations are in places where a stupid planning decision has obstructed visibility and has created a road hazard. Instead of reversing the decisions and making the sites safe, the police and the council are arming them as speed traps. This allows them to do some "spinning" while the people will continue to die.
Anton Ivanov, Cambridge

It is well known that speed is not the cause of most deaths and injuries on our roads. Drink & drugs along with pedestrians (especially teenagers) who think they are immortal, along with OAPs cause most accidents. However, the driving test standard is still woefully poor in this country. Everyone should be taught advanced and defensive driving techniques from the outset.
Tony Booth, Morley

How about abolishing private transport and forcing everyone to use speed limited public transport, with highly trained drivers? Instead of spending �10,000 on a car we can give that money to the government to provide transport for us. I'm sure this idea would appeal to the treasury and environmentalists.
Martin, England

The majority of drivers would have no problem with speed cameras if the speed limits were set at an appropriate level Ian, Wrexham

It won't slow down the car speed, because local people know the location of the speed cameras.
Eddie, Leeds

Here in the States, after someone tried to break into our house, a Police Officer came out within 30 minutes and went door to door asking to find out if anyone had seen anything. There are local police in each area which is a comforting presence - a bit more personal than a yellow camera on a stick instead of an officer !
Claire, Philadelphia, USA

Speed cameras on motorways discriminate against car drivers. Since the cameras cannot be set to any speed below 70mph, many HGV drivers can break their own, lower, speed limit without fear of being caught. Their limits are lower for safety reasons, yet speed cameras do not accommodate this fact.
Richard, Sheffield

I believe that they cause more deaths because people would rather brake heavy to avoid the 3 points and �60 fine without thinking of the person travelling behind Graham Cleary, Widnes

How can the government expect that after driving for 50 or so years you haven't picked up bad habits? Roads, and therefore road laws change, should there not be a requirement for retests every once in a while?
Martin, Belfast

Speed cameras are fine if used in sensible locations like outside schools. Placing them at accident blackspots is a cop-out, is it too difficult for the Government to address the real issues of poor driving standards and poor road design?
Rob, Southport

Rob, Southport and others: There is no such thing as a dangerous road! It is simply a strip of tarmac used by skilled drivers and idiots alike. If conditions dictate that 10 mph is a safe and reasonable speed then driving at 20 mph is dangerous. The laws are in place to fill the common sense gap.
Sean, Buckingham

Speed cameras are effective when in the right place. Why then are speed cameras not outside schools, multi junction roads, and places where speeding poses an obvious risk?
Gram, Eastbourne

If we really wanted to restrict speeding we would restrict the top speed of cars to 70 mph. The current approach is just a licence to print money Les, Hartlepool

Speed cameras are a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Speed does not kill (as we keep being told by lying government statistics), but rather the inappropriate use of speed may lead to accidents that could kill. No more cameras, just better and more considerate drivers are what we need.
Simon Atkinson, Nuneaton Warks

Cameras in accident blackspots - yes. Cameras to extort money - NO.
Sandra, UK

I was caught by a mobile 'safety camera van' where the limit drops to 40 at the base of a hill. I use this particular road on a regular basis and have always used the incline of the hill to reduce my speed rather than braking. Is this so bad as to warrant a fine, points and an increase in my insurance premium?
David, Sheffield

Significant research and experience in the UK, Australia and Canada demonstrates that speed cameras are nowhere near as effective as is believed. Nothing is as effective as police patrolling the roads. The spread of cameras has been matched by a huge decline in the numbers of traffic police.
Robin Davies, Carmarthen, Wales

Speed Cameras should be used to as part of a 3 strikes program. If you are flashed 3 times then you get 6 points. They should not be used as revenue raisers Phil, Stoke

The government should spend the revenue from speed cameras on fixing the real problem - the state of the roads. Use the money to make the roads safer, not to pass onto Police Forces to fill their own pockets.
Andy, Derby

90% of British drivers believe that they are "better than average". So at least 40% of you are fooling yourselves. These drivers argue that a little bit of speeding is OK, because they're better than average, have better anticipation etc and it's the other drivers that cause the problems.
Sarah Bowyer, Reading, UK