Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Tue May 26, 2020 14:12

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 21:13 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member

Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 15:49
Posts: 393
Number of Road deths up by a third in Cumbria in 12 months
Published on 10/07/2007

THE number of people killed on roads across Cumbria has risen by just under a third in 12 months.

Figures released by the Department for Transport show that 59 people were killed on the roads in 2006 — up from 45 in 2005.

But despite the increase, the number of people seriously or slightly injured on roads across the region, fell in the same 12-month period.

In 2006 there were 285 serious road casualty injuries down from 382 and there were 166 fewer people who were slightly injured in the same period.

Carlisle MP Eric Martlew, who sits on the Commons Transport Select Committee, said: “The increase does not come as a surprise. We have seen some horrendous crashes last year involving young people.

He added: “But you can read too much into one year of figures.

“What we need to do now is ensure numbers are reduced.”

Nationally the number of people killed in road accidents fell to 3,172 from 3,201.

Paul Smith, founder of the anti-speed camera group Safe Speed, said: “The fall of just under one per cent in road deaths is further damning evidence of policy failure. Most of our European neighbours are achieving falls of four per cent or more.

“Our road safety policies aren’t working. There’s far too much focus on vehicle speeds and no focus at all on driver quality.”


Figures broken down by police area do not detail how a person died or was injured or what age they were.

However, nationally the number of children killed on roads increased by 20 per cent.

A spokesman added: “The number of children killed or badly hurt on our roads has been halved since the mid-1990s.

“But any fatality or injury is one too many, and we are continually striving to reduce casualties further.”

A Commons report is due out in two weeks which, it is thought, will recommend tougher restrictions for learner drivers in a bid to cut the number of accidents.


http://www.nwemail.co.uk/news/viewartic ... ?id=518688


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 23:36 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
Ban parents from driving their kids to school. My logic:

The vast majority of drivers in proximity to large volumes of children are parents dropping off or picking up their kids, so to remove these vehicles from the equation immediately increases the kids' chances of survival (maths as simple as the physics!). This would also mean fewer parked cars around the school to obstruct the kids' view of the road, reducing the likelihood of them stepping out into traffic. Though unnecessary in this scenario, educate all the parents that the yellow zig-zags outside schools are no stopping, not reserved parking areas for parents collecting children (just because ignorance irritates me).

The wonderful side-effect of this scheme is that the exercise kids get walking/cycling to and from school/the bus stop will reduce childhood obesity, causing heart disease and diabetes in young adults to plummet, not only saving lives on the roads, but in society as a whole for years to come!

I await my phone call from the Nobel Committee imminently.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 00:54 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
RobinXe wrote:
Ban parents from driving their kids to school. My logic:

The vast majority of drivers in proximity to large volumes of children are parents dropping off or picking up their kids, so to remove these vehicles from the equation immediately increases the kids' chances of survival (maths as simple as the physics!).


There's been a substantial decline in child pedestrian fatalities in recent years, which I believe is mainly due to a reduction in exposure. In other words, the kids are far safer in cars.

_________________
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  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 08:46 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 14:09
Posts: 18
Location: Cumbria
I see they've finally noticed what a rubbish year we had last year in Cumbria, only a few months late!

What really annoys me about this story is the attitude of our local MP who seems to believe that "speeding" is the root cause of all these accidents when anyone vaguely interested in road safety can clearly see that what actually causes them is bad driving: there were reports in the news the other day about one accident on the A6 (where Mr. Martlew has campaigned for a speed limit reduction) which apparently happened because two cars were racing each other. I hardly think that a 10mph speed limit reduction would have had any bearing on the outcome of that situation, but evidently the council thinks it will. Presumably they'll also stick some "surprise" speed camera vans in there as well and blame accidents caused by panic braking on speed.

I suppose all we can hope for is that our new chief police constable will talk some sense into them when he arrives, but to be honest that seems like wishful thinking...


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 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 cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 1.446s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]