Traffic institute Vias advocates a ban on reporting speed checks or other police checks via Waze, Flitsmeister and Coyote. According to Vias, these systems endanger road safety. Users of such “detectors” are flashed more often, according to a study by Vias. Should reporting (speed) checks via such systems be prohibited? Earlier today we let our experts have their say. Now it’s your turn.
Theo Dereu: I own the most expensive TomTom, occasionally use Waze and have an integrated GPS in the car. All three regularly indicate the wrong speed, especially on secondary roads where speed adjustments have recently been made. In terms of speed limit display, these things cannot be trusted and it is extremely naive to do so. Raising awareness should be enough, but in my opinion there can never be enough alcohol checks.
Steve Delanghe: I think those indicators are good for speed, sometimes it is not always clear how fast you are allowed and then Waze is okay. This is not necessary for alcohol checks, alcohol and driving do not belong together. There are still far too few alcohol checks.
Piet Corneel: Yes, a very good thing. Stop reporting the checks; the driver is stubborn and still does his own thing: driving fast, using mobile phones, not using turn signals, no respect in traffic. The fines are too low!
Benjamin Goovaerts: My coyote has often let me know in good time that there is an obstacle on the road, or that I am approaching roadworks. And yes, also speed cameras, but that’s just a reminder to keep to the speed. I have been using Coyote for years and it has actually helped me to stick to the right speed, even where there is no control. Practically no more violations. Those described in the article are using the app for the wrong reason.
Robert DeWinter: I only use Waze to know how fast I can drive, and constantly adjust my speed limiter to the maximum allowed speed. It is also no longer available here in Belgium. On a route of 500 meters you can sometimes have 3 or 4 different maximum speeds. I am now more concerned with following everything to avoid getting a fine than with traffic. This sometimes leads to dangerous situations. Thank you gentlemen legislators for making such a mess of things.
Kevin Eyselbergs: Why don’t you just drive the permitted speed? Are those 2 minutes of time saving really so crucial that you risk your own life or that of someone else? Abolishing those detectors is simply giving speed devils a free pass to flash even more, with possibly all the consequences that entails.
Cris Verwilligen: Redundant. The goal is higher safety, right? Then such a tell-tale can help. I don’t use it because I think driver assistance systems make you lazy, you drive more on autopilot. What I do think is that they should make the rules clearer and more logical. As before: residential area 30, built-up area 50, single-lane road 70, two-lane road 90 and motorway 120. Now it is: is it 50 or 70 or something else? No more laws or bans, back to the basic principles: keeping an eye on the track.
Marco Brilmans: Banning tell-tale signs but failing to address/clarify infrastructure, signaling and situations has nothing to do with safety. We have speed checks in places where there are no cyclists or pedestrians, so you may wonder what the added value is? Mobile phone use is still possible, dangerous and often unclear situations still exist, drivers with a lifelong driving ban on the road? Yes, it still happens… Does the pursuit of money or safety take precedence?
Vias calls for a ban on reporting speed and alcohol checks: “Anyone who has a radar detector will be flashed more often” (+)
DEBATE OF THE DAY. Is a ban on reporting speed and alcohol checks, such as with Waze and Coyote, a good idea?
Free unlimited access to Showbytes? Which can!
Log in or create an account and never miss anything from the stars.