Safe Speed Forums

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/tm ... _page.html

FLASHY MOTOR

Apr 6 2005

Alfa is the most snapped

By Vanessa Allen


ALFA Romeo sports coupes are flashed by speed cameras more often than any other car.

Drivers of Ford Fiestas are most likely to obey the limit and are caught on camera the least.

And it was revealed that roadside cameras have caught more than 12 million drivers in Britain since being introduced in 1992.

The Italian-made Alfa Romeo GTV was the most likely to be snapped speeding, followed by the Mercedes E class, Alfa Romeo 147, Mercedes CLK and Porsche 911.

Four types of BMW were also in the top 10, the survey of 50,000 drivers by Auto Express magazine showed.

The Ford Fiesta was least flashed, followed by the Citroen Saxo, Skoda Fabia, Nissan Micra and Citroen C3.

Three quarters of drivers thought that traffic police relied too much on speed traps to catch dangerous drivers, the poll showed.

Magazine editor David Johns said: "Drivers are ready to wage war on speed cameras and the attitude that they are the best way to catch bad drivers.

"A camera will criminalise someone doing a few miles an hour over the limit but will ignore tailgaters and drunk and drugged drivers. Only more police can catch these real criminals."

Meanwhile 12 million drivers have paid at least £700million in fines since the controversial traps were brought in 13 years ago. But annual road deaths have not fallen significantly for a decade and rose by 2.5 per cent in 2003.

Campaigners claimed that mounting anger over the enormous increase in prosecutions could provoke a backlash in the general election.

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed safety campaign, said: "What party would dare ignore the pain of 12 million voters and the disgruntled chattering in every pub in the land?

"Most motorists who have received speeding tickets know full well that they were driving at a safe and appropriate speed at the time of the so-called offence and they resent being abused."

He claimed Safespeed research showed most drivers caught were "responsible motorists driving a few miles an hour over the limit".

But illegal drivers with uninsured, unregistered cars were seldom caught.

Mr Smith said: "Cameras do not work. Why else, when roads, cars and hospital treatment are getting better, did deaths go up?

"Drivers looking for cameras are not looking for hazards. While the focus remains on speed, far more important road safety issues are neglected."

But road safety group Brake insisted cameras do work and said a government survey showed deaths and serious injuries down by 40 per cent at camera sites.

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

Just wait for BRAKE to campaign for Alfa Romeos to be banned

Nah...I recon it will be red cars that will be banned. I am sure they are the greates risk to road safety...

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed safety campaign, said: "What party would dare ignore the pain of 12 million voters and the disgruntled chattering in every pub in the land?

He claimed Safespeed research showed most drivers caught were "responsible motorists driving a few miles an hour over the limit".
Too many good ideas by you to quote individual ones, especially the bit about speedo watching.


Is the bit about "a government survey showed deaths and serious injuries down by ?????? at camera sites." a new thing?(my bold)
If so is it a partial climbdown, or a new excuse for yet more cameras, claiming that those that are there do work , but .we need more.........................????
(never trust govt spokes peps who start to change ideas)

Good work Paul.

Good bit of publicity there

However, of course, we should bear in mind that 12 million tickets does not equal 12 million drivers. How many of the tickets went to repeat 'offenders'?

Nope. It's the bugbear of us all here because it proves nothing. Look up the pages on regression to the mean in the main site.

It isn't a lie to say accidents have reduced at camera sites, but it would be a lie to say that cameras caused the reduction. Notice how careful they are not to make that claim while still inferring it.

Sorry, correct me if i am wrong , but wasn't the origonal claim that cameras reduced accidents. It then changed to within x miles of blackspot. Now it seems to be at "camera sites". Since we have seen the surfing effect (and they have acknowledged it) the reduction zone is now getting smaller and smaller.
As i said , is it a partial backdown/backpedal, or a more sinister trick to get more cameras in on the grounds that they have "proved" that accidents reduce at camera sites.
When a politician says something, look for the hidden meaning.

The claims of reductions 'at camera sites' goes right back to the original 2000-2002 pilot schemes. It was the justification used to guillotine the pilot after 2001 and railroad the partnerships in.