Breakfast's roving reporter Max Foster has taken to the streets to check out the size of people's humps over speed bumps.
Are speed bumps really such a bad thing?
A recent report from the London Assembly suggested speed bumps be replaced by other traffic calming measures, especially speed cameras.
Rob spoke to campaigner Thelma Bradshaw in Derby who said bumps, "are just a complete menace."
Thelma's group has just succeeded in persuading their council to take out 140 offending bumps, after a three year campaign.
She explained speed bumps actually endanger lives by holding up emergency services whilst speed cameras are far more effective at catching those who speed illegally.
The Metropolitan Police told the London Assembly 34 of its vehicles had been damaged by speed bumps in a three month period.
And the London Ambulance Service claimed bumps add three minutes to their response times, which is critical in treating heart attack victims.
The London borough of Barnet has started to rip up its speed bumps.
But traffic consultant Keith Hopper told Breakfast that bumps remain important in creating safe environments in residential areas.
He said that speed cameras are, "never going to be the right solution".
But Keith supported the idea of 20 mile per hour zones, which is one of the proposals put forward by London Assembly's transport group.
Other arguments against bumps come from bus drivers complaining of back problems and residents concerned about noise from the slowing traffic.
A spokesman for environmental action group Transport 2000 says the only real problem with bumps is when motorists abuse them by accelerating in the small space in between.
He claims: "The backlash against them is from a vocal minority. On the whole, the public accepts them."