Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Tue Jun 09, 2026 14:48

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2005 19:20 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 01:42
Posts: 686
Our SCP friend has no hope of supporting the claim that speed cameras reduce the number of accidents, so opted to go for the severity argument instead.

Point taken, but Wiltshire & Swindon SCP have not published details of total number of accidents vs number of KSI accidents before and after camera deployment. Without this, the lower speeds=lower accident severity (on motorways) argument cannot be won or lost.

They have not offered proof of less accidents and they have not proved lower accident severity. They have not even demonstrated that people have actually slowed down.

If the SCPs want support from the more intelligent half of the Public for motorway speed cameras, they're going to have to do better than this....

_________________
“For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.” - H. L. Mencken


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2005 19:49 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member

Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 13:50
Posts: 2643
JJ wrote:
Quantify your statement and provide the figures. You can't.


That's really rich, coming from you.
I would normally be a lot more scathing than that, but Paul has strict rules about ad hominem attacks.

Quote:
This goes against all of the research and reporting from the qualified organisations that have reported on this sch as TRL and the organisations responsible for the WHO report.


I asked you for a link to that report, but I see none is forthcoming.
What are you so scared of?

Quote:
Again, quantify it. You can't. The relationship is directly proportional, what is the factor that relates the 2? You can't say and the energy imparted in the fatal force is variable but never the less directly proportional.


You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you?
Show me any model which shows any quantifiable relationship between free travelling speed and impact speed. You can't, can you?

BTW As you're now speaking about energy imparted, here's a little quiz for you:

A car hits a pedestrian without braking. What proportion of the car's kinetic energy is dissipated by the pedestrian?
Clue: the car is hardly slowed at all by the collision, so it has almost the same amount of kinetic energy after the collision as before.

Cheers
Peter

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2005 19:54 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Pete317 wrote:
I would normally be a lot more scathing than that, but Paul has strict rules about ad hominem attacks.


I could make an exception...

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2005 20:11 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member

Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 13:50
Posts: 2643
SafeSpeed wrote:
With near miss incidents outnumbering crashes by between 5:1 and 30:1 (depending on the definition of a near miss) the average impact speed in an incident is clearly a tiny fraction of free travelling speed.

Or

The lowest free travelling speed in common use on UK roads is about 30mph. We know that around 20% of child pedestrians die in 30mph impacts and 10% die in 20mph impacts. But in the real world the percentage of child pedestrians killed is 0.4% and the average impact speed must be tiny to achieve this proportion.


Or even that, out of something like 300,000 accidents we only have something like 3,000 fatalities.

If there was any proportionality whatsoever between free travelling speed and impact speed then we'd have a lot more than 1% fatalities.

Cheers
Peter

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.044s | 10 Queries | GZIP : Off ]