Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 07:54

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2007 18:14 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere
According to the News and Star story, a majority of Cumbrians support roving cameras in a bid to cut road deaths in Cumbria.

http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/viewarticle.aspx?id=490793

Quote:
Safety cameras given the thumbs up

Published on 23/04/2007

SIXTY per cent of people who answered a market research survey said they would be in favour of safety cameras being able to operate anywhere in the county and not just at the current fixed sites.

The survey also reveals a continuing high level of support for the safety camera operation, with 83 per cent agreeing that safety cameras should be supported as a method of reducing casualties.

Kevin Tea, communications manager for Cumbria Safety Cameras, said: “The ongoing support from the public shows the awareness of the road safety measures taking place in Cumbria and the need to extend camera operations to further drive down the number of people being killed and seriously injured on our roads.”

Mr Tea said that the camera team were looking at research and operational changes in Australia, where the use of safety cameras was pioneered, to see if any of the methods used there could be adapted for use in Cumbria.

He said: “Despite the unacceptably high level of fatalities last year, the total number of killed and serious injury casualties was just nine short of our 2010 target.

“We are successfully slashing serious injury accidents and, together with other partners in Safer Roads for Cumbria, we need to ensure that public are aware that the majority of fatalities are local drivers and complacency or over familiarity can have fatal consequences.”

Other results from the survey carried out by CN Research reveals that:

• 53 per cent of respondents stop before the recommended three-hour period when driving long distances;

• 68 per cent of respondents do not think that safety equipment in cars lead to motorists driving more recklessly;

• Nearly all – 98 per cent – of drivers wear a seat belt while driving;

• Nearly all of respondents – 97 per cent – when passengers in the back of a car wear a seat belt;

• 98 per cent of respondents do not use a handheld mobile phone while driving.


They should have added a question asking:
After collecting enormous amounts of money from motorists who sped past cameras, yet not stopping any, don't you think that deaths should have gone down by now, instead of up?

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 05, 2007 09:59 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 18:58
Posts: 306
Location: LanCA$Hire ex Kendal
Or they could have asked something along the lines of:

"Do you agree more people have been killed at our montiored sites in the 3 years since we started in business than in the same period before we started?"

How many would (incorrectly) answer NO? :roll:

_________________
That's how Nazi Germany started. They'll be burning books next. (Brian Noble, Wigan coach - updated 20/4/06!!).


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 05, 2007 12:03 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member

Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 10:26
Posts: 194
Location: Burton on Trent
A couple of questions for Mr T.

1/ If all is going so well and you are meeting your targets WHY change a system thats 'working' and on target ( or better )

2/ Have deaths and serious injuries plummeted in Australia - IF NOT don't waste money on finding out about failed systems


:) Richard


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 00:57 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 18:54
Posts: 4036
Location: Cumbria
..."Mr Tea said that the camera team were looking at research and operational changes in Australia, where the use of safety cameras was pioneered, to see if any of the methods used there could be adapted for use in Cumbria."...

Hmmmm, I can feel a nice "jolly" to Australia for someone at the motorists expense coming on!

Still, I guess they've earned it - what with having got so close to their targets so soon. Pity more people are dying on our roads than ever before though!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 10, 2007 13:02 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 18:38
Posts: 396
Location: Glasgow
Is this the Mr. Tea from the A-team? If so, I for one wouldn't mess with him.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 10, 2007 13:15 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 15:04
Posts: 51
Location: Warrington
I really really hate the way they asked loaded questions in order to justify their actions.

_________________
Anti Road Charging Forum

http://www.traveltax.org.uk/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 10, 2007 14:40 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 18:38
Posts: 396
Location: Glasgow
He said: “Despite the unacceptably high level of fatalities last year, the total number of killed and serious injury casualties was just nine short of our 2010 target."


Spinning like a top this guy. He should get a job with new labour.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 10, 2007 14:42 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 18:38
Posts: 396
Location: Glasgow
"We need to ensure that public are aware that the majority of fatalities are local drivers and complacency or over familiarity can have fatal consequences.”

So knowing a road well is now a bad thing - moron.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 10, 2007 15:17 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:33
Posts: 770
Location: Earith, Cambs
I wonder why race and rally drivers practice before an event. Maybe not knowing the road would make them safer :lol:

What seems amazing is that in our region, East Anglia, a large poll from Anglia TV (i.e. with no vested interest and not funded by the scammers) found that 80% of respondents believed that speed cameras were there mainly to collect cash and over 70% believed they made no contribution to road safety. Why is 'Lakeland' so different? Because, IMHO, the CSCP make sure the questions asked 'skew' the results to preserve their jobs and maintain their 'nice little earner'.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 11, 2007 00:41 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 18:54
Posts: 4036
Location: Cumbria
Without a doubt!

Worse than that, if I got stopped in the street and asked to do one of their polls, I'd be faced with a difficult dilema. The questions tend to be such that you can't "partially" agree with them. This means that the harrassed shopper dying to get home will skim through and tick the boxes that they want ticking -even if they don't entirely agree because the other options tend to be things like "Paedophiles should be re-housed next to schools and given jobs as lollipo men" AGREE / DISAGREE.

I bet you'll never find a "it's not that simple" box to tick on a scamera partnership questionnaire!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 11, 2007 10:08 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 18:58
Posts: 306
Location: LanCA$Hire ex Kendal
It's on ITV Digital Teletext (Cumbria) today that CSCP will begin to operate "anywhere" in Cumbria from 1st June :shock:

So there's a Talivan coming somewhere near you :roll: Make sure they are parked in a safe, legal and convenient place or send for the clampers :lol:

Bit of a problem though in future to make claims of "success" as they refuse to reveal where/when they have operated :roll:

As Paul said about BRAKE why waste "lifesaving :? " resources on locations with no accident history?

_________________
That's how Nazi Germany started. They'll be burning books next. (Brian Noble, Wigan coach - updated 20/4/06!!).


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 11, 2007 11:01 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 22:35
Posts: 643
Location: South Wales
kendalian wrote:
Bit of a problem though in future to make claims of "success" as they refuse to reveal where/when they have operated :roll:


In some ways this will go to prove the SafeSpeed point. If they can go anywhere without warning then the idea is that people will obey the speed limit everywhere and all the time.

So what will their excuse be when casualties still fail to drop?

_________________
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.

Upton Sinclair


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 11, 2007 18:04 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 17:20
Posts: 258
kendalian wrote:
It's on ITV Digital Teletext (Cumbria) today that CSCP will begin to operate "anywhere" in Cumbria from 1st June :shock:

So there's a Talivan coming somewhere near you :roll: Make sure they are parked in a safe, legal and convenient place or send for the clampers :lol:

Bit of a problem though in future to make claims of "success" as they refuse to reveal where/when they have operated :roll:

As Paul said about BRAKE why waste "lifesaving :? " resources on locations with no accident history?


have you a link this intrests me, they cannot go anywhere they like, must , even though the netting off scheme has ended they have to follow whatever the DFT handbook says, and i cannot find the link :evil:


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 11, 2007 23:18 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 18:54
Posts: 4036
Location: Cumbria
I agree with Gopher - BRING IT ON Mr. C!

Of course, I wonder what they'll say about their massive reductions "at the camera sites" when the whole of Cumbria becomes a camera site?!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 29, 2007 12:33 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2004 08:57
Posts: 90
Location: South East England
fergl100 wrote:
He said: “Despite the unacceptably high level of fatalities last year, the total number of killed and serious injury casualties was just nine short of our 2010 target."


Spinning like a top this guy. He should get a job with new labour.


Stunning - just nine more lives saved and the figure would have moved from 'Unacceptably High' into 'Acceptable' then?

_________________
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 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 : 0.021s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]