Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 08:57

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: T2000 Classic
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 15:16 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 15:14
Posts: 420
Location: Aberdeenshire
Don't know whether this is naughty or not - if so then feel free to lock/delete.

I saw this clanger on T2000 today:

Speed cameras
13 April 2006

Nathaniel Porter argues that speed cameras are not appropriate "if (a given) accident was not caused by speed".

If nobody involved in the accident was going too fast, how come they didn`t avoid each other? Stationary objects don`t collide.

The problem with arguments like his is that we end up with fewer cameras overall. Irrespective of the theoretical cause of the accident, let`s make some good come of it and take the opportunity to press for a speed camera. Agonising over whether a camera is appropriate simply gives support to the pro-speed lobby.



Does anyone else think this is a blatant disregard for road safety? It doesn't even pretend to be in the interests of saving lives. The original poster who wrote this is clearly only concerning himself with erecting as many speed cameras as possible, regardless of them achieving anything useful - by his own admission.

"Irrespective of the theoretical cause of the accident" essentially reads "despite what actually caused the accident, lets spend more tax £££'s on cameras"

Does anyone else think this is a fairly typical sort of unproductive viewpoint from such an organization and it's supporters?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 15:22 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 16:12
Posts: 1040
Location: West Midlands
Well if the author is financially involved with a speed camera manufacturer, then it all makes sense.

From a road safety perspective it makes no sense at all, but Transport 2000 has nothing to do with road safety, it is all about forcing everybody into cattle trucks*, as they are primarily funded by public transport companies.

* Actually this isn't quite true - the standards of the average cattle truck is a lot better than most public transport.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 15:27 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 15:14
Posts: 420
Location: Aberdeenshire
Rewolf wrote:
Well if the author is financially involved with a speed camera manufacturer, then it all makes sense.

From a road safety perspective it makes no sense at all, but Transport 2000 has nothing to do with road safety, it is all about forcing everybody into cattle trucks*, as they are primarily funded by public transport companies.

* Actually this isn't quite true - the standards of the average cattle truck is a lot better than most public transport.


Hmmm. True.

Cows at least are garunteed that the cattle truck will pick them up at the right time and get them to where they're going, for the time they need to be there.....

Perhaps Paul Smith should seek funding from Ford Motor Company and General Motors.....


Going by current T2000 thinking, we should all be living in 19th Century slums right next to our work to avoid the need for private travel.....

Promoting high density housing, lift sharing etc. They really do think this is Victorian Britain don't they?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 15:55 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 14:00
Posts: 1271
Location: Near Telford, UK / Barcelona, Spain
jamie_duff wrote:
Promoting high density housing, lift sharing etc. They really do think this is Victorian Britain don't they?

Ah... But only for "the peasants"... Not for "People Like Us" ie trendy leftie T2000 Hamsteadites!

_________________
"Politicians are the same the world over... We build bridges where there aren't any rivers." - Nikita Kruschev


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 23:18 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 07:53
Posts: 460
Nathaniel Porter on T2000 is PeterE's mate, otherwise known as ndp on the safespeed site.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 15:11 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 23:17
Posts: 499
wayneo wrote:
Nathaniel Porter on T2000 is PeterE's mate, otherwise known as ndp on the safespeed site.


Speaking of ndp, he hasn't posted for ages - the forum is lost without him.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 16:35 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 21:17
Posts: 3734
Location: Dorset/Somerset border
Quote:
Speaking of ndp, he hasn't posted for ages - the forum is lost without him.


It's only about a month...


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 18:33 
Offline
Suspended
Suspended

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 13:06
Posts: 133
Location: chesterfield
Luckily road cameras don't need tax investment, they catch enough speeders to be self funding.

watch out they may breed like rabbits, thell be everywhere, you wont be able to take a 1 mile journey at breakneck speed without a ban.



GOOD :lol: :lol:

_________________
Why not put on speed limiters we have the technology only idiots break the speed limit


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 18:45 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 23:17
Posts: 499
the sensible majority wrote:
Luckily road cameras don't need tax investment, they catch enough speeders to be self funding.

watch out they may breed like rabbits, thell be everywhere, you wont be able to take a 1 mile journey at breakneck speed without a ban.


Yes, and the drunk driver gets off without so much as a parking ticket. Wake up and smell the coffee.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 22:03 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 14:00
Posts: 1271
Location: Near Telford, UK / Barcelona, Spain
the sensible majority wrote:
Luckily road cameras don't need tax investment, they catch enough speeders to be self funding.

watch out they may breed like rabbits, thell be everywhere, you wont be able to take a 1 mile journey at breakneck speed without a ban.

I'm sure that then things will be absolutely peachy...

But...

If one is to take the government's own research establishment's (TRL) figures as reasonable, only about 5% of accidents are caused by "ordinary" drivers exceeding a posted limit... So what would you suggest that we do to reduce the other 95%? Unfortunately, nobody has yet invented a "bad driving camera" - there used to be a human version called a "traffic policeman", but they'll have been totally obsoleted because of all the cameras.

Any ideas "sensible majority"?

_________________
"Politicians are the same the world over... We build bridges where there aren't any rivers." - Nikita Kruschev


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 04:31 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 02:50
Posts: 2868
Location: Dorset
pogo wrote:
Unfortunately, nobody has yet invented a "bad driving camera"

Yes they have... :P
I don't believe it's been used in the UK and of course it's not as good as a nice police officer. :)

_________________
Andrew.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 21:37 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 13:36
Posts: 1339
the sensible majority wrote:
Luckily road cameras don't need tax investment, they catch enough speeders to be self funding.

watch out they may breed like rabbits, thell be everywhere, you wont be able to take a 1 mile journey at breakneck speed without a ban.



GOOD :lol: :lol:


Yes 35 mph on a dual carriageway and "breakneck speed" are in fact the same thing. :roll:


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 09:51 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 15:14
Posts: 420
Location: Aberdeenshire
Dont worry TSM - speed cameras are nothing an angle grinder can't sort out :evil:

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 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 can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.025s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]