Public opinion is divided on the use of AI police cameras to monitor drivers in Devon and Cornwall.
Comments flooded in after we asked readers for their opinions on the matter.
Readers voiced varying sentiments about the new enforcement technology.
Three Acusensus camera systems are currently operational, with specific locations changing regularly during the 12-month project.
The system uses two cameras to take high-speed front-facing and overhead images of vehicles and uses AI to detect any potential offences.
The images are then verified in the UK by a human to determine whether an offence has taken place.
If an offence has been correctly identified, the driver will either be sent a warning letter or a notice of intended prosecution, depending on the severity.
A significant group of commentators said the cameras were much needed.
Christopher Hamshaw said: "Fine by me, if you don't break the law, you have nothing to worry about!"
Donna Collins echoed this sentiment, saying: "I see so many people on their phones while driving so that’s good.
"If someone doesn’t wear a seatbelt they are obviously happy to exit via the windshield so that’s their choice."
Mike Feltham agreed: "Excellent news.
"Driver distractions are killers. Seat belts save lives. Don't break the law nothing to worry about."
Several readers, however, expressed concerns about the technology becoming an invasion of privacy.
Rhys Hart said: "Even more control! Big brother is always watching.
"They will claim its for your safety! It's actually quite the opposite."
Kevin Burrows said: "The only problem with this is that it encourages even less police contact.
"This just proves that the seatbelt and phone laws have not been enforced."
Meanwhile, Tony Keating tied the cameras to a larger issue of motorist persecution: "Although I agree as I see so many idiots on phones whilst driving, it’s not just about safety it’s another revenue stream from motorists.
"If it’s not, why not just give the offenders 10 points…..job done. "
Mark Sd Ashton pointed out: "It's all they know how to do now, get revenue from motorists, police force have become glorified speed cameras and do very little other than that, useless when it comes to real crime."
With this variety of opinions, it's clear that public consent for police surveillance technology is still a topic of discussion and debate in society.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here