Medway mum backs safety cameras

13.02 | 18 May 2010 | | 4 comments

A Medway mother of three whose husband died in a car accident has spoken out on the ‘vital role’ that safety cameras play in cutting deaths and serious injuries.

Karen Burton (left in pic), who lost her husband Steve in an accident in 2004, took part in an online survey to discuss people’s attitudes towards safety cameras.

She commented: “I’m more than pleased to see fixed safety cameras because I strongly believe they do save lives. My husband died on a notorious stretch of road in 2004 and I just wish they had been there sooner and maybe they could have helped prevent his accident. Safety cameras do make motorists drive much more sensibly.”

Katherine Barrett (right in pic), communications officer for the Kent & Medway Safety Camera Partnership, said: “Thanks to a combination of road safety campaigns, engaging with and educating motorists, and enforcement, the number of people killed or seriously injured is now 63% lower across our county’s safety camera sites, compared to the three years before cameras were installed. That’s 324 casualties that have been prevented in Kent and Medway.”

For more information contact Jeff Sims or Leah Taylor on 01622 604600.


Comment on this story

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Report a reader comment

Order by Latest first | Oldest first | Highest rated | Lowest rated

    I concur with the last two observations. I would much prefer to see an active and or preventative [pro active] roll being taken on by the police [and not other civilians].

    I believe that it’s much more versatile than fixed cameras which in some cases just move the offence elsewhere.

    If the 85 percentile rule is appreciated then it’s only a small minority of what’s left which causes problems out on the road.

    A recent survey I read points, in relation to accidents, to commercial vehicles [vans] being involved in a large percentage of town accidents and of commercial drivers [agents etc in cars] of being involved in accidents and more particularly speeding offences.

    So mobile units and more policing of the road is what I would like to see. Like they do in Durham where with pro active policing speeding and accidents have also been reduced in last few years …. without cameras.

    bob craven Lancs
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

    May I pick up on Mark’s experience. Over 15 years ago, whilst researching roads policing, I studied how it is done in California. The California Highway Patrol(CHP) told me they had no fixed carmera sites in the State(then) but will target a location with a moblie team. A patrol car and five motorcyclists will blitz a given stretch of road for – say – a week. Next week they will go elsewhere without any public notification. Was it appreciated? Well, a local mayor awarded the team a ‘citation’ for their contribution to road safety and there was a McDonalds on the targeted road. Guess where the Highway Patrol Officers took lunch every day that week. And please, no burger and CHiPs jokes I beg you.

    Roy Buchanan Sutton
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

    I came across a mobile safety camera unit (motorcycle) recently. The operator had just finished for the day and had packed the equipment away. I stopped and we had a chat – one motorcyclist to another as you do! A villager from a nearby property came out and praised the operator for the really good work that was being done, and offered us a cup of tea or coffee.

    The mobile unit operating in the village enhances the safety of all road users and is clearly appreciated.

    Mark – Wiltshire
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

    In light of Mr Hammonds recent comments regarding an apparent ‘war on motorists’, I think these sort of stories in the media are vital to show just how much public support there is for safety cameras in local areas. All partnerships should look to pump as many positive stories as possible into local media sources during the potentially difficult next few months.

    Danny, Gateshead
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.