Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Wed May 22, 2019 22:36

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 94 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 18:44 
Offline
Banned
Banned

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 18:34
Posts: 90
Does Safe Speed and similar groups has facts that proves lives well be saved, if speed cameras were removed?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 19:14 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 13:54
Posts: 1711
Location: NW Kent
Hmm. Interesting question.

As an idea - suggested by my wife incidentally.

Can you show that there has been an increase in accidents at sites where cameras have been removed or put out of action?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 19:41 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 19:58
Posts: 730
An interesting question, indeed.

However, Safe Speed, to my way of thinking, is a twofold organisation.

Firstly it promotes safe and safer driving. COAST.

Secondly it ask the question "do speed cameras work? Do they always work? Are their examples of locations were speed cameras do not work or cause accidents?"

It is the role of SafeSpeed to ask questions.

So far I have not been impressed with the standard of reply from speed camera partnerships. They have not answered the questions.

They are one trick ponies, in my opinion. They claim to be safety partnerships, yet do not promote other aspects of safe driving.

A colleague at work told me of a row she had with her doctor. Every time she goes to him with an ailment (migraines, glandular fever, liver damage caused by glandular fever, etc.) He tells her: "It is because you are eating pork. If you stop eating pork, you will be well."

Her protestations that she does not like pork so never eats it fall on deaf ears. He knows that eating pork is bad for you, so that's it! If you are ill, you must be eating pork! :roll:

Speed camera partnership: "There are a lot of accidents on the road, therefore this is caused by people driving too fast."

Protestations about poorly engineered roads, badly built roads, sunlight dazzling people or causing epileptic fits in otherwise healthy drivers, etc., etc., etc., are ignored because like the doctor who knows people are made ill by eating pork, speed camera partnerships know that road accidents are caused by speed, so therefore if you stop eating pork... er... I mean, if the partnership is allowed to erect more and more speed cameras, then all road accidents (no matter what their cause) will be reduced. :roll:

_________________
www.thatsnews.org.uk / www.thatsnews.blogspot.com / http://thatsmotoring.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 21:20 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 21:41
Posts: 3608
Location: North West
we do not have"facts" that lives have been saved by the cams because there is no standardised collation :popcorn:

This has been peer reviewed by Linda Mountain's work to date in which she complained that the data was not conclusive in the appendices to her work.. as did Pennington and Baker before her. :popcorn:

PEER REVIEWED mate.. :wink: since this apparently matters more to you than human common sense which is constantly peer reviewed by all civilised and normal minded human beings :popcorn: :wink:

I am not being rude or even disrespectful to you by pointing this out :lol:

COAST on the other hand has the backing of the very people behind the speed cams and the police too. :wink: As such .. peer reviewed by the people who understand road safty since they assess miscreants per COAST titles :wink:


We have posted up the mark scheme proving this on this site three times and twice on PH :wink: It was from a Lancs Speed Aware Course. Do have a look-see into archives. :lol:

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !

But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 00:37 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
crw wrote:
Does Safe Speed and similar groups has facts that proves lives well be saved, if speed cameras were removed?


statistically yes

To return to policing and education methods before speed cameras were implimented would after a few years show less deaths on the roads.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 01:15 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 19:58
Posts: 730
anton wrote:
crw wrote:
Does Safe Speed and similar groups has facts that proves lives well be saved, if speed cameras were removed?


statistically yes

To return to policing and education methods before speed cameras were implimented would after a few years show less deaths on the roads.


Oh, god! Yes! Please! Sounds like a great idea!

I wonder if the technology for speed cameras came before or after they were required?

I mean, did someone say: "There are far too many people speeding. So let's get someone to design and build a speed camera."

Or did someone say: "What the hell is THIS crazy invention? You have a camera which can be triggered off by something going past it? You seem to think it would be suitable for photographing birds in flight? We'd never sell enough to make it viable.

"Say! I just had an idea! If it could be triggered by a bird in flight, why not by a car on the road? Yes! Yes! We can have them rigged to photograph a driver exceeding the speed limit! We'll be rich! RICH I tell you! Now all we have to do is bribe a few council officers, donate some money to senior politicians and sell sob stories to organisations like Brake, and I think we will have cracked this one!"

_________________
www.thatsnews.org.uk / www.thatsnews.blogspot.com / http://thatsmotoring.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 01:18 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
Thatsnews wrote:
We'll be rich! RICH I tell you! Now all we have to do is bribe a few council officers, donate some money to senior politicians and sell sob stories to organisations like Brake, and I think we will have cracked this one!"


Tell you what, I think the best protest an organisation such as Safe Speed could organise would be a national "don't break the speed limit" month.

A whole month of no speed camera "revenue" would hit them where it hurts a?

...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 01:19 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
(now that IS trolling!)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 01:34 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 16:51
Posts: 1323
Location: Stafford - a short distance past hope
weepej wrote:
(now that IS trolling!)


No its not - it's an interesting idea.

I'm not interested in the finances of Camera Partnerships.

If "everyone" tried to keep below the speed limit, my money say there would be little or no impact on KSIs, as those who cause them - criminals, drunks, the unregistered and uninsured, and irresponsible boy racers, would not take part. There would be a big decrease in camera income, but also I suspect, an increase in minor and no injury shunts caused by people paying more attention to their speed than the road. (There "might" be an increase in KSIs for the same reason, but I wouldn't be so confident of that).

I'd like the partnerships to publish comprehensive statistics giving the actual speeds of all those caught speeding by cameras - I'd warrant the overwhelming majority would be just two or three miles an hour over the prosecution threshold.

Sadly, your experiment will never happen.

_________________
I won't slave for beggar's pay,
likewise gold and jewels,
but I would slave to learn the way
to sink your ship of fools


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 01:58 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 18:54
Posts: 4036
Location: Cumbria
weepej wrote:
Tell you what, I think the best protest an organisation such as Safe Speed could organise would be a national "don't break the speed limit" month.

A whole month of no speed camera "revenue" would hit them where it hurts a?

...


It would need MUCH more than a month though. One of the biggest problems with scameras is that even after a year or two of operating we still can't be sure that a particular camera is saving lives. (I say "we", obviously, the scamera partnerships seem to be able to make their minds up rather quicker than that! :wink: )


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 02:08 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9259
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
Mole wrote:

It would need MUCH more than a month though. One of the biggest problems with scameras is that even after a year or two of operating we still can't be sure that a particular camera is saving lives. (I say "we", obviously, the scamera partnerships seem to be able to make their minds up rather quicker than that! :wink: )


Trouble is that after a month ,or two - the SCP would start to take credit for any reduction in KSI/SI/ Accident figures- and the local Press would be sure to hear of it . Then , roll in more cameras to effect a cure in other parts . Carefull what you wish for !!!!!!!!!!!!1

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 09:09 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
I don't think there is an organisation that could organise this.
The economic effect would also hit the country. I doubt that all your goods would get delivered. less appointments could be fitted in to a day.

Congestion would be worse as more cars would be on the road at any time.
Some journeys would become a 2 day trip.

I would like to have the funds and technologies to have a sat nav speed limit governed car and force politicians to drive it for a week to experience 100% speed limit observance.

Actually I would love to fit a sat tracking device to Jim Fitspatricks car and see how he drives. :D

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 11:42 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
anton wrote:
The economic effect would also hit the country. I doubt that all your goods would get delivered. less appointments could be fitted in to a day.

Congestion would be worse as more cars would be on the road at any time.
Some journeys would become a 2 day trip.


Or congestion could improve, journeys end up being quicker and there would be less serious injuries, benefitting the economy (how much does a single KSI cost the economy, hundreds of thousands to millions I'd imagie).

Let's be clear anton, we're both making assertions here.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 15:51 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 14:26
Posts: 4364
Location: Hampshire/Wiltshire Border
prof beard wrote:
I'd like the partnerships to publish comprehensive statistics giving the actual speeds of all those caught speeding by cameras - I'd warrant the overwhelming majority would be just two or three miles an hour over the prosecution threshold.

It would be a miracle if they published this information. I remember last year that the Hampshire partnership were asked simply to give the number of people caught at a particular camera site. They refused to give this on the grounds that it was "sensitive" information. Hardly a state secret, you would think.

We all suspect the real reason was that they never actually had the camera mounted in the box at all and they did't want to give this away.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 15:58 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6735
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
malcolmw wrote:
prof beard wrote:
I'd like the partnerships to publish comprehensive statistics giving the actual speeds of all those caught speeding by cameras - I'd warrant the overwhelming majority would be just two or three miles an hour over the prosecution threshold.

It would be a miracle if they published this information. I remember last year that the Hampshire partnership were asked simply to give the number of people caught at a particular camera site. They refused to give this on the grounds that it was "sensitive" information. Hardly a state secret, you would think.

We all suspect the real reason was that they never actually had the camera mounted in the box at all and they did't want to give this away.

And I suspect if the locations of all speeding convictions were published, it would make it very plain there were vast stretches of road where the limit can be easily exceeded but no enforcement ever took place.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 16:13 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 00:08
Posts: 748
Location: Grimsby
I think it would be better to wait, may have to be a couple of years though.
At present, there are very few scameras in North Yorkshire, due to the anti scamera stance of the incumbant Chief Constable. But, she is to leave the job and be replaced by a CC who loves scameras, and will undoubtedly have them installed anywhere and everywhere he can.
Now watch the stats.

_________________
Semper in excreta, nur quantitat variat.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 16:47 
Offline
Banned
Banned

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 18:34
Posts: 90
toltec wrote:
Hmm. Interesting question.

As an idea - suggested by my wife incidentally.

Can you show that there has been an increase in accidents at sites where cameras have been removed or put out of action?



Toltec you have to ask Safe Speed, similar groups and their supporters, as aren't their the ones who wants speed cameras removed or destroyed?

But I would like to see evidence that is not connected at all to Safe Speed, similar groups or their supporters.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 16:50 
Offline
Banned
Banned

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 18:34
Posts: 90
malcolmw wrote:
prof beard wrote:
I'd like the partnerships to publish comprehensive statistics giving the actual speeds of all those caught speeding by cameras - I'd warrant the overwhelming majority would be just two or three miles an hour over the prosecution threshold.

It would be a miracle if they published this information. I remember last year that the Hampshire partnership were asked simply to give the number of people caught at a particular camera site. They refused to give this on the grounds that it was "sensitive" information. Hardly a state secret, you would think.

We all suspect the real reason was that they never actually had the camera mounted in the box at all and they did't want to give this away.


And it would be a miracle if groups like Safe Speed has any real evidence that are not connected to them, that proves lives are at risk because of speed cameras and lives well be saved if speed cameras were removed?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 16:57 
Offline
Banned
Banned

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 18:34
Posts: 90
anton wrote:
crw wrote:
Does Safe Speed and similar groups has facts that proves lives well be saved, if speed cameras were removed?


statistically yes

To return to policing and education methods before speed cameras were implimented would after a few years show less deaths on the roads.


Anton so do you have the link to the stats to prove "statistically yes"?

And what education are you talking about, as even those the driver training is still weak, isn't it better then years ago?

Also with the increase in the number of vehicles on the roads, do you really think there would enough Police to be on every street and corner?

But then again, there would be still who think there are too many cameras and police.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 17:03 
Offline
Banned
Banned

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 18:34
Posts: 90
prof beard wrote:
weepej wrote:
(now that IS trolling!)




I'd like the partnerships to publish comprehensive statistics giving the actual speeds of all those caught speeding by cameras - I'd warrant the overwhelming majority would be just two or three miles an hour over the prosecution threshold.

Sadly, your experiment will never happen.


And I would challenge Safe Speed and similar groups to show the stats and facts that is not connected to them in any way, that proves removing speed cameras lives well be saved?

Sadly, I guess this well never happened, as there are no facts or stats, that proves removing speed cameras lives well be saved?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 94 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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 : 0.221s | 15 Queries | GZIP : Off ]