Safe Speed Forums

So there we have it, cameras are there to catch drivers speeding but not to reduce accidents.

Do you think they may become an ex-spokesman very soon?

Also appears in the East Anglian Daily Times -

http://new.eadt.co.uk/search/story.aspx ... &archive=0

The documents show that in none of the five accidents did the original investigating officers consider "excessive speed for conditions" a likely cause of the collision

Also given a piece in Sun, 23/april, in Clarksons column( p23) under
"Flash Bang Codswallop" - with reference to the East Anglian times.
Unfortunately cant find the text of Clarkson in www.thesun.co.uk for today.



Seems to be saying ( to borrow an old political phrase ) -the camera's not for safety.

This is interesting stuff - can anyone tell me what I need to do if I want to get hold of details of accidents used to justify a particular speed camera?

You don't expect the police to give you accurate accident stats do you? If you've seen the film Good Morning Vietnam where there were two news censors crossing out news that wasn't "official" and then handing it to Robin Williams to read out on air - well that is what you'll get back from them. At best you'll get vague or bent and inaccurate statistics that support any forthcoming scamera projects.

I wish you good luck, but I'd not hold your hopes out - I'd welcome being proven wrong on this as there may be a God !

_________________
Kill a talivan, not your speed.