Safe Speed Forums

I challenged safe speed and others to prove with facts not your own opinions speed cameras do not save lives.

Especially if safe speed and others done any research say from Monash Uni, they would noticed the truth "speed cameras save lives".

This is the ONLY place with which I shall respond to your query.
I am editing out your other entries on sight, as I will only accept one entry per topic. And for this query THIS area is the only place you may ask a specific challenge question.

This Challenge area is not generally for individuals but for opposing Media Represented Bodies. Are you such?

First I have never been so busy in my personal life, as sadly my partner of some 24 years, as you I am sure are aware, has passed away.

He would have been delighted to answer patiently and carefully, all of your queries step by step. However I am trying to now run his Campaign and deal with many things that are eating up my time. As we are very concerned about this area of Road Safety and rather obviously, believe what we state, I simply do not have the hours in the day to go through your points and spend some considerable time explaining the entire Safe Speed website to you individually.

I am not trying to pass off your serious query, but please read the website and when you have, then return to this area only, to ask specific questions.
I will not tolerate the widespread bombardment of the same question throughout this forum. Other moderators have warned you of this, and whilst I am happy to take your query seriously, you have to be even vaguely aware that I have many things to do that are simply more important than explaining the website to you right now.

Please read it very carefully, Paul's sentences are very specific and detailed. Each area has been very well thought out and he has tried very carefully to explain all the facts that have led to each conclusion.

I ask you to only ask one specific question at a time, as my time is limited. I am fully aware of your questions throughout this forum and I have requested previously, that you just ask, specific questions only. This way good debate may be established and a good conclusion can be attained (whatever that result may be). (i.e. agree to disagree, agreement to either side in whole or in part.)

Many of the points that I make above are equally applicable to many users of this forum and not just toward yourself.

I try at all times to treat people with respect and take all questions seriously, but there are times and places.

Thank you for your interest in Safe Speed. We hope that we may answer some of your queries, and in time all of them.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

Thanks for your comments Safespeedv2 and sorry to hear what happened to your long time partner

But with "This Challenge area is not generally for individuals but for opposing Media Represented Bodies. Are you such? " are you saying as a member of the public like many in Safe Speed are, I cannot ask you a specific question that I have already asked and which still have not been answered with evidence which is:

Do you have evidence that is not connected to you or Safe Speed or similar groups that proves "Speed cameras don't save lives at all. They make the roads more dangerous"?

Especially as unlike some, like Safe Speed, thatsnew, tol and odim, I have back up my opinion with evidence like a link to Monash Uni and their studies on speed cameras saving lives.

As abuse, lies and ducking and weaving people from the like of thatsnew, tol and odin, because they are scare of the truth, is not providing evidence to their claims, like removing speed cameras lives well be saved or naming vehicles on a web site is against The UK Law.

Have you read the Monash report yourself? if so can you give me your interpretation of what the report finding are.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

Thank you.



What I was referring to was that you posted the same set of questions up on many areas, which is 'bombardment' and usually if one wants respect this is not a good way to get it. So I have confined, *that* question to here. However you may of course ask other questions in other areas of the forum provided that you obey the rules and guidelines of this forum.
Like I say we are happy to debate. I ask for specific questions as this help to deal with one aspect at a time, and so progressive thought can be created.



(See my note below - but this is a BIG and loaded question.)

Yes, one can concur from figures coming out that lives are not being saved but it requires an understanding of the figures to 'see' the truth through the government stats. This is involved and takes time to explain. I know that Paul had been working on some of the latest figures and was putting more evidence together. I have yet to delve into these latest figures. There is clear evidence from earlier figures (on the website) that show these trends of patterns that 'show' (and therefor prove') that cameras do not save lives. Another example is the Hospital figures do not correlate with the Police figures which is bizarre, and these figures show higher casualties. We have deaths at camera sites too. When you start to put all of these and many more points together - the puzzle starts to 'fit' and the true picture emerges. Hence my serious point about reading the website - first

I do not enter into slanging matches (see slanging match policy of the forum) - this is not the purpose and certainly not with me. You see I see that by you stating this - and checking the posts I cannot 'see' where you 'have' posted the information ? Then you are leaving yourself exposed to potential ridicule.
If you are going to use information - great - show us a link to it as a minimum, or post (if not too big) sections of the relevant (but not out of context) components. Then it can be held against our own data, but before you 'look' at answers from one particular organisation you first have to find out - what questions were hey answering (some are VERY 'loaded' questions) and how long was the research, what area did it cover etc so all these points can be taken into account. Plus even the individual doing the research has to be considered too.
Then you have to look at the camera sites, over what period, data prior to that study period, Regression to the mean - was it considered etc.
Just looking at answers in this day and age is (sadly) only the beginning, not the conclusion. Governments debate about research for years sometimes!

Now this is just flaming and you again get no respect for it. All you are doing here is slagging off people. You see if you get respect, make a point and then 'debate' the points, even if people disagree this is fine. But your frustration and anger are showing through with the above comments and all that you will achieve is to anger people and if you anger people you will never get their respect. If you loose people's respect then they will NEVER listen to you. And so you will end up never getting people to 'hear' your point because they have already turned you off. Hence the slagging matches, which I will then delete as it is not going to ruin my forums that my partner worked so hard for.
You then add on the insulting comments that they are 'scarred', but this is just plain silly and again wins you no friends or respect. Hence you dig yourself into an ever increasing hole. You get everyone upset and then you get banned.

This is exactly why I have asked you to post here, so that I can explain precisely this to you. Debate does not include slagging matches. We require facts and information, or general driving chat conversations where points are deliberated.

Now do you see what I am driving at ?

Perhaps by asking one point - a SMALL point at a time, whilst the 'conversation' may move more slowly, it establishes the most important fact that the people that you are conversing with, 'get you' and you 'get them' eg you 'understand' each other. By asking very loaded questions, and then answer with even more loaded and in some cases insulting answers all you do is create a slagging match. As this is not tolerated on this forum - you then get upset if you are banned.

We welcome debate.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.