Speed cameras in France: life saving or just money-makers?

To the Editor,

I write regarding a recent Connexion article about drivers being hit by a penalty crackdown.

The number of deaths on the road is quite obviously horrendous and something needs to be done. Personally I think cameras are the answer.

I hear the argument that they are a ‘money-making scheme’ but they do work. I do not think lowering the speed limit is of much use unless it is reinforced by cameras.

I also think that cameras are preferable to the increasing use of speed bumps to slow traffic. I find it ridiculous that, in an age where we are trying to reduce pollution, these things are proliferating faster than rabbits!

Each speed bump requires vehicles to slow down to almost walking pace, meaning that a driver has to accelerate once across them.

It is quite common in my region to have dozen of them in the space of a kilometre.

It means more brake particles are released into the air and increased use of petrol or diesel. The resulting pollution must be considerable.

If a reduction of speed is required, then cameras would do the job admirably: less pollution, less noise, less wear and tear on vehicles, and they would put money in the state coffers.

As long as there are ‘cameras in operation’ signs, it is the fault of the driver if they are ‘flashed’.

The cost of installing them is high, I know, but the revenue collected would eventually mean they become profitable.

K.W., Pyrénées-Atlantiques 

To the Editor,

The principal purpose of speed cameras is to raise revenue for the government. This is obvious in many cases, based on the camera’s location, often on a downhill section where the limit changes from 80 to 70km/h.

Secondly, speed alone does not always cause death. What does contribute to road deaths is the combination of speed and reckless driving, and if there was a system to catch this behaviour, cameras would be more acceptable.

As pointed out in your article, there has to be behavioural change.

Adding speed cameras will not help this. But how do you achieve it?

The basic standard of driving leaves a lot to be desired. I will not go into the subject of mobile phone use – yet another cause of accidents, I am sure.

What I would like to see are the white lines defining lanes to be made more visible. Not only are they difficult to see in the daytime, but at night and in the rain they are almost impossible to identify.

This could be a contributing factor in accidents. I wish there were cats’ eyes, such as those used in the UK.

M.J., by email

To the Editor,

I am somewhat astonished by Samantha David’s article in June’s Connexion expressing near "admiration" for the people whose sport it is to destroy life-saving speed cameras because they are "annoying".

I have lived in France for over 26 years, explored various regions and never been flashed by a speed camera.

I object strongly to the accusations that they are installed to make money for the state and are in some parts unnecessary.

Besides, most cars have GPS systems that indicate an upcoming speed camera in enough time to reduce one’s speed, if necessary.

Destroying speed cameras is purely an act to defy the state, which many French people hate so much. But at the same time they request financial and other help of every kind.

The destruction of speed cameras costs the taxpayer – by which I mean all of us – millions every year, puts road users in danger, and of course reduces the takings for the state, which are partly used to improve roads.

Speed cameras cannot be the only measures to reduce road deaths, but they are a start. If everybody behaved responsibly, there would be no need for speed cameras at all – but that's a dream!

M.B., by email

Have you seen speed cameras vandalised in your area? Share your thoughts at letters@connexionfrance.com