Safe Speed Forums

I'm on soon after noon today by telephone as a panellist in a phone-in show for about 30 minutes.

Talking about the HC smoking recommendation.

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

That was very enjoyable and helpful. It ran for about 45 minutes.

Anyone hear it?

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

Listen again for a week at;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/networks ... devans_fri

Richard Evans with the Radio Wales Phone-in - Friday

Paul starts about five minutes into the programme with further contributions later on.

I think it has all got a bit silly, but I don't like travelling in a car with someone who is smoking and anything that would give me an excuse to ask them to stop would be welcome.

You came across very well Paul.


David said:
“If you do have an accident at that time, you are not in total control of the vehicle”
Well duh, yet he didn’t actually justify his point. What if a driver takes their hand off to change gear and they have an accident, are they still not in total control?
He came across as a bit of an odd one: never blew his nose, never used the radio and his comment about satnav made him look silly. Yes of course you have to discipline yourself to manage potential distractions.


I don’t smoke (never have) but I will say this: non-smokers should avoid the temptation of trying to simply put themselves in the position of a smoker to visualise the situation – people not accustomed to handling cigarettes could easily be fool themselves into believing their handling them is more distracting than they actually are simply because they’re not used to them, which obviously isn’t the case for a smoker.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

You would rather be in a car piloted by someone going through the effects of nicotene withdrawal?

I'd rather walk

Although he didn't quite agree with Paul on the smoking issue, Edmund King seems like a sensible person who sees the obsession with numerical speed for what it is. Have we ever investigated ways of using this for our (and ultimately every road user's) gain?

If we could forge official links with established, "mainstream" road safety organisations like the RAC Foundation, it would nip in the bud these allegations that we're some fringe group of nutters who just want to be able to mow down children.

The facts are very obviously on our side; in theory, once we've addressed the "image problem" (that's putting it a bit strongly, but still), there'll be nowhere for the pro-camera "truth-stretchers" to hide, because they won't be able to get away with ignoring us due to who we are (as opposed to what we're saying). It's the only weapon they've got left and they need to be disarmed. Truth will out; it's just a question of how soon.

_________________
Paul Smith: a legend.

"The freedom provided by the motor vehicle is not universally applauded, however: there are those who resent the loss of state control over individual choice that the car represents. Such people rarely admit their prejudices openly; instead, they make false or exaggerated claims about the adverse effects of road transport in order to justify calls for higher taxation or restrictions on mobility." (Conservative Way Forward: Stop The War Against Drivers)

The trouble with the RAC is they can't seem to decide whose side they're on.

The fact is that the RAC were originally set up before the 1st World War to defend the motorist against the landed, horse drawn carriage-owning magistracy. In those days the motorist was generally a city-dwelling, rich man, but not part of the 'nomenclatura' and generally a person to be harassed and bullied by the state !! The attitude of the state in that era was encompassed by the Duke of Wellington regarding railways almost a century previously - "I see no reason for these infernal machines to force their way into general use, they will only encourage the lower orders to move around the country, needlessly."

So now here we are in the 21st Century and a few changes have occurred. The average motorist is no longer a rich man, the magistracy is no longer reliant on horse drawn transport, but is still as reactionary as ever, and accepts anything the Government tells it without comment or criticism.

So what of the RAC ? It no longer supports the ordinary man and motorist; the breakdown division was sold off in the 80s, leaving the comfortable club in Pall Mall for the 'Members', a small body of rich individuals. The RAC Foundation was established to speak up for the motorist, but it has singulary failed in this task, preferring to suck-up to the Government and agree to virtually anything the 'Sir Humphreys' of the DfT propose. It no longer has any claim to represent the motoring public.

In short, the RAC Foundation are effectively another arm of government, being put on display from time to time to agree the latest imposts that the DfT wish to impose on us. Their original purpose has long ceased to provide any guidance to the officials within it, such as Mr Edmund King. Let's hope he disappears into obscurity soon; he is completely useless as the advocate for the motorist!!

_________________
Good manners maketh a good motorist

To be fair, the RAC Foundation are more pro-motorist than the DfT; they quite often bring out press releases saying the government should be spending more on roads, for example.

But they don't seem to be able to make up their minds on speed cameras; one day they'll support them and the next day they'll be against them.

I've always thought the AA to be worse Government yes-men than the RAC.

The RAC, AA etc. are not motoring pressure groups and we should not expect them to be. Safespeed, the ABD and the like are not in the same category.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.