Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Mon Dec 18, 2017 04:14

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: 7th May 2004: Scotsman
PostPosted: Fri May 07, 2004 03:57 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
http://news.scotsman.com/edinburgh.cfm?id=519162004

Police say speed cameras cut deaths

ALASTAIR DALTON TRANSPORT CORRESPONDENT


THE controversy over speed cameras was reignited yesterday when Scotland?s second largest police force claimed they had played a key role in helping to eliminate child road deaths for the first time since records began.

Lothian and Borders Police said cameras had made a "significant contribution to reducing child casualties" as it announced that no youngsters had been killed on the force area?s roads in the year to March.

However, campaigners against speed cameras, who claim they primarily raise money rather than increase road safety, said drivers? reaction times to danger was much more significant.

Police said the 420 children injured last year - 54 children seriously and 266 slightly - was also the lowest for more than 50 years, and some 12 per cent fewer than 2002.

The number of adults injured showed a record decrease too. The number of adult road deaths increased by 12 to 47, but it was still the fourth lowest in 60 years.

Assistant Chief Constable Ian Dickinson said cutting speed was unpopular with many drivers, but it been proven to dramatically reduce casualties and deaths.

He said: "Speed cameras in particular, sited exclusively at locations of proven crash risk, have made a major contribution. Without doubt, unpopular though they are, they have made a significant contribution to reducing child casualties." Mr Dickinson said a 1mph fall in average speed cut casualties by 5 per cent.

He said educational initiatives like the Junior Road Safety Campaign had increased awareness among children. Safer vehicles had also played a part, along with other speed reduction measures such as speed humps and 20mph zones.

The zero child deaths total is the first since 1927, when 20 children were killed on Edinburgh?s roads alone.

Mr Dickinson said: "Not to have any children killed on our roads is a real cause for celebration. I hesitate to call the figures a success because the 420 who were injured is still a tragedy. For many, their injuries will have been serious, life changing injuries."

Brake, a road safety charity, said it welcomed the news. Simon Collister, its campaigns officer, said: "The targeted use of speed cameras reduces casualties by 35 per cent.

"The implementation of 20mph zones on roads around schools is proven to significantly reduce the casualty risk to children and other vulnerable road users.

However, Safe Speed, a Highlands-based road safety campaign that opposes speed cameras, said it was "totally unreasonable" to count speed as a factor.

Paul Smith, its founder, described the lack of child road deaths in Lothian and Borders as "very encouraging".

However, he added: "It is extremely annoying and dangerous that the authorities place so much emphasis on speed these days when our road safety entirely depends on road users reacting to danger.

"I would very much prefer to see more emphasis on the skills and behaviours that are already saving thousands, and clearly have the potential to save many more."
=================================

_________________
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: Fri May 07, 2004 14:15 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 15:43
Posts: 2416
Quote:
He said educational initiatives like the Junior Road Safety Campaign had increased awareness among children. Safer vehicles had also played a part, along with other speed reduction measures such as speed humps and 20mph zones.
If they're running two or more "solutions" to the problem side by side, how can they possibly know which one is responsible for any improvement?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 07, 2004 15:08 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Gatsobait wrote:
If they're running two or more "solutions" to the problem side by side, how can they possibly know which one is responsible for any improvement?


This is an absolutely classic problem that comes up again and again. It is frequently extremely hard or literally impossible to determine which scheme delivered what proportion of the benefit.

But that won't stop the spinners claiming the entire benefit for their pet scheme.

We have to be vigilant...

_________________
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  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 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:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 3.634s | 15 Queries | GZIP : Off ]