[idi banashapan]

I don't see why this is being applied to A roads - generally speaking, there shouldn't be any pedestrians about. If there are pedestrians walking up an A road, maybe they deserve to be hit for being so bloody stupid.

Second to that, country roads, that also have a 60mph limit, can be dangerous at that speed. this is why it's down to the driver to take into consideration a speed that suits the conditions, be them visibility, weather, cornering, etc. you don't HAVE to drive at 60mph. that said, people crawling along at 20mph can also cause accidents on country roads if someone drives around a low visibility corner that can easily flow at 40mph and rear ends them. so lack of speed can also be dangerous.

so, in conclusion;

speed doesn't kill - it's those who can't handle it/are irresponsible that do
lack of speed can kill - if you are not confident enough to drive at a reasonable speed, don't drive at all... you're putting others at risk.

more cameras mean more people suddenly hitting the brakes. the best thing that can be done if the government want to stop speed is have better police presence on the roads. camera locations are learned so people know when to slow down or to take a different route to avoid them if they want to go fast - they will still speed whatever. whereas you never know where you'll see the next police car, especially if they are unmarked.

cameras are stupid, but so are excessive speeders. the government will not stop either of them if they carry on in this way.