A survey by the RAC has shown that the vast majority of motorists believe that average speed cameras are a more effective way of slowing traffic than fixed location cameras.
Out of the of 2,000 motorists that took part in the survey, 79% indicated that they felt this way, with a meagre 9% voting in favour of fixed location cameras. 80% of drivers admitted that they feel fixed location cameras are ineffective at slowing drivers down beyond their immediate location.
While motorists widely agree on which cameras are best at slowing traffic, opinion is divided on what the cameras’ main purpose is. Although 37% of drivers believe that their purpose is to improve road safety by slowing traffic at accident black spots, a similar number (36%), think that they are also intended to raise funds for councils. A slightly smaller percentage (27%) believe that taking money from drivers is their main purpose.
Average speed cameras work by measuring your speed between two or more points, thus calculating your average speed over a given area. This eliminates drivers being able to simply slow down only for when they see a speed camera.
The survey’s results reflect that average speed cameras are improving road safety, as drivers are required to slow down across an entire section of a road, rather than just for a brief moment in front of the camera.
Pete Williams, road safety spokesman for RAC, is pleased with the effect that average speed cameras have had on improving road safety: “Speed is one of the main contributory factors in many road collisions so measures that effectively reduce speed over greater distances will mean fewer lives are lost or ruined on our roads. And even though drivers accept this, many still have issues with single location cameras as in places other than accident black spots, they don’t appear to have lasting effect on behaviour.”