A large survey by VTM Nieuws and HLN shows that more cities and municipalities are focusing on section checks. What do you think? Is it a good thing that municipalities can decide for themselves whether and how many section controls they install? Earlier today we let experts speak. Now it’s your turn.
Kevin Eyselberghs: “I don’t think anyone who sticks to the right speed should be afraid of section checks, right? What the cities and municipalities are allowed to do is improve their signaling, especially on the Brussels ring road with thirty signs with different speeds less than 100 meters away. This is how you make mistakes as a driver. So, drivers keep to the speed and you will not receive a fine, municipalities and cities update their signaling.”
Herman Beullens: “No, a federal study must first be conducted to determine whether there is reason to install a section control. This is to prevent it from becoming a scam. Few or no accidents, no school within 200 meters? Then no section control!”
Ken Goeste: “Municipalities have debts. That is why section checks serve to fill those holes. Nothing more, nothing less. We have the dubious honor of being the most policed country in the world. Nowhere are there more route, mobile and static controls than here.”
Luc Oostvogels: “The section checks can be a good thing, but in most cases they are a cash cow for the municipalities. That is why there should be clear signaling of section control by law. With good signaling, everyone will adjust their speed and the municipalities cannot earn anything from it.”
Serge Aernoudt: “Traffic should be something that is controlled and implemented by government agencies and should not involve private companies. Principles of equality have been violated.”
Geert Van den Berghe: “Why are section checks springing up like mushrooms? Because that is a very easy way to fill the municipal or city coffers under the guise of road safety. Traffic calmers must be removed in the hope that drivers will drive faster so that they can be fined. This is baiting. Hopefully the elections will trigger a tsunami and parties will disappear very quickly.”
Cris Verwilligen: “Issuing fines and fines is a task for the police, not for the municipality. Give that power back to the police and there will be less controversy. If necessary, have plainclothes officers make the determinations. And maybe a good idea, simplify everything and stop the fines in improving the road network. Now they feed the municipal coffers and suppliers. Abuse is lurking. Then you no longer need those cameras and privacy is guaranteed.”
Rik Tytgat: “Statistics, the hobbyhorse of the proponents. But those figures cover it all. If there is a decrease, is it at the places with section control? What is the nature and cause of the accident, and what if the numbers rise again? After the parking fee and LEZ, the latest golden share for the municipalities.”
Claude Broucker-Briké: “The more the better! Section control ensures road safety and, also importantly, money for the municipalities that can reinvest that money. There are traffic regulations to be respected!”
Frank Weygaerts: “Sometimes it is necessary, because a zone 30 is completely ignored by the drivers. But this should not be decided by the local authorities, but by the judiciary after evaluation of the code of conduct. Namely, the arbitrary GAS fines are a welcome cash cow for local authorities.”
LOOK. More local section checks in cities and municipalities:
Free unlimited access to Showbytes? Which can!
Log in or create an account and never miss anything from the stars.