Safe Speed Forums

Press Release: Speed camera survey "A pack of lies"

A motorists' pressure group has condemned the results of a survey into public attitudes towards speed cameras as one of the most bare-faced fabrications they have ever heard of.

Last week The Tayside Speed Camera Partnership published the results of a survey which they claimed showed that 89% of the public in Tayside supported the use of speed cameras.

This result is in direct conflict with many other, independent surveys, which show a very different picture. A poll conducted by Auto Express Magazine earlier this year registered 37,000 votes and showed 86% opposed to speed cameras. An RAC/Autocar survey last October found that 47% of drivers would condone the vandalising of speed cameras. And in March this year, Autonational Rescue, a breakdown services company found that 77% of drivers did not think that speed cameras saved lives or prevented accidents.

Eamon Scott, Tayside Coordinator of the Association of British Drivers, and organiser of the Tayside "Stand and Deliver" campaign said, ?The Tayside Police survey is a joke. Who did they ask ? their own staff and their families? The questions were loaded so as to only allow one answer, the survey was carried out by their own people and not by an independent polling organisation. At the end of the day, only 200 people responded - hardly a cross-section of the community!

Scott continued "People in Tayside are smarter than that. They know road deaths went up by 37% last year and are set to soar even further this year. They won't fall for this pack of lies.?

A full criticism of the survey has been posted on the new "Stand and deliver" website, on http://www.safetayside.com .
================================

Don't miss the website! Compare with the "official" website: http://www.safetayside.co.uk

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

ROTFLMAO - a wonderful parody

(their site of course, not your truthful one )

The most disturbing part is this (found in the spoof FAQ's):

_________________
Will

Will
I'm not deliberately being obtuse here, but is your concern that this statement is wrong and that there is accountability, or are you concerned that the lack of accountability may lead to abuse within the partnership?

My concern is that, if the spoof FAQs are correct, we have organisations without checks that can wreak havoc on this country. Those predatory organisations survive by preying on the motorist and will take extraordinary measures to ensure continued survival. From that FAQ, I infer that the only way to bring a pratnership to task would be to go after individuals in person (for example, for misfeasance in public office). However, if the public office doesn't exist...

_________________
Will

Thanks, Will. That is one of my (many) concerns too.

They've changed their css. Did Stand and deliver want to follow suit or waste of time?

http://www.safetayside.co.uk/