Safe Speed Forums

I suppose it was too much to hope that they'd say anything other than the same recycled bullshit?

_________________
Smokebelching,CO2 making,child murdering planet raping,granny mugging,politically incorrect globally warming (or is it climate changing now it's getting colder?)thug.
That's what the government want you to believe of me. If they get back in I'm emigrating.

Yep. I just got that too.

Same old spin, same old numbers and not a reasonable argument in sight.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

And where did they get 26% from?

As for the rest of the reply it's becoming obvious this government just will not listen to the British people and, don't want to listen.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

Just removed my identical post from the 'Campaigning' Forum.

Same old, same old then huh!?!?!?

None so blind as those who refuse to see!!

At least they're consistent in their ignorance!!

_________________
If I have to explain you won't understand.

Twas to be expected.
They need to prop it up.
Just think how safe we'll all be when theres a scamera on every street!
Dickheads.

_________________
"Safety" Scamera Partnerships;
Profitting from death and misery since 1993.

Believe nothing- Question everything.

Safe Speed issued the following PR at 11:59:

PR518: Dodgy and discredited statistics in response to 'scrapcam' petition

news: for immediate release

Downing Street has trotted out some dodgy and discredited statistics in
response to the 28,000 signatories of the famous 'scrap speed cameras' petition
which closed on Tuesday.

The response from the Prime Minister's office in full with Safe Speed comments
inserted and marked with a '*'.

====================================================
Thank you for taking the time to register your views about safety cameras on
the Number 10 web site.

Speeding kills. It is a contributory factor in 26% of all fatal accidents in
Great Britain.

* No it isn't. According to Department for Transport figures exceeding a speed
limit it is a contributory factor in 12% of fatal crashes. We know that many of
those are caused by reckless and 'abnormal' driver behaviour.


The facts are stark. If a child pedestrian is hit at 30mph they stand an 80%
chance of surviving. But if they are hit at 40mph they stand an 80% chance of
dying. That is why the Government is committed to achieving appropriate vehicle
speeds on the roads as part of its integrated road safety strategy.

* The true facts are more encouraging. In 2005 in built up areas (20, 30 and 40
mph speed limits) 11,000 child pedestrians were injured out of which 47 were
killed. 0.42% were killed. So clearly we're not running into them at 'speed
limit' speeds because at 30mph we would have killed 2,200. The claim is grossly
misleading. [2]


We are succeeding in changing attitudes, and in making drivers realise that one
of their responsibilities is to comply with speed limits. The proportion of car
drivers who comply with the 30mph limit has greatly increased over the last few
years.

* Hardly greatly - and the means of gathering the information changed in the
year when the biggest fall was recorded - but that's NO HELP AT ALL when road
deaths aren't falling significantly. We don't need more compliance - it's a
false objective. We need safer roads. And we aren't getting them.


Safety cameras provide a valuable and cost-effective method of preventing,
detecting and enforcing speed and traffic light offences. Their use is based on
solid evidence. All reliable research from around the world clearly
demonstrates that cameras reduce speeds and save lives.

* Solid evidence? I'm afraid not. The 'evidence' is dominated by statistical
errors and a total failure to consider the side effects of the policy.


Independent research (new window), published in December 2005, shows that
safety cameras had saved around 1,745 people from being killed or seriously
injured, and had prevented around 4,230 personal injury collisions on Britain's
roads each year.

* That very same report reveals - buried in appendix h - that 'regression to
mean effect' accounts for a full three quarters of the benefit claimed. To make
the claim while ignoring the know error is nothing less than a FRAUD.


And while they are saving lives, safety cameras will remain a key part of our
road safety strategy.

* They aren't saving lives. That's why they must go. That's why 28,000 signed.
=================================================


Paul Smith, founder of SafeSpeed.org.uk, said: "I am ABSOLUTELY LIVID that 10
Downing Street has sent out inaccurate and grossly misleading to the 28,000
signatories of the 'Scrap Speed Cameras petition'. How dare they! Lives are at
stake. This is a matter of public safety and misleading statistics cause
resources to be miss-allocated and that means that the opportunity to save
lives is missed."

"Dodgy statistics won't save lives. The Prime Minister's office needs to do far
far better than this."

"I demand the right to communicate with the 28,000 signatories by email. Every
one agreed to receive up to two emails when they signed."

"I challenge 10 Downing Street to put up ANY of their experts for public debate
on the issue. We'll soon so just how dodgy their claims and statistics are."

<ends>

Notes for editors
=================

Official response: http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page12127.asp

[1]
http://www.dft.gov.uk/162259/162469/221 ... oadacc1802
See table 6.

[2] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SafeSpeedPR/message/227

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

Paul,

If I may just add my 2p's worth by way of a little constructive criticism?

It might be an idea to find a synonym for the word 'dodgy'. It sounds a little unprofessional in my opinion.

Good call nonetheless.

_________________
If I have to explain you won't understand.

The press love 'dodgy'. I promise. Think dodgy dossier.

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

Paul, you have my support on your campaign but its needless self promotion to say 'famous' when talking about your own work.

Let other people say its famous - only people like Paris Hilton big themselves up like this.

Sorry to be critical. I also think it would help if you removed the singular from some of your response, which generally is very good.

OK, I'm sure you know best and I'm sorry for the criticism.

_________________
If I have to explain you won't understand.

if we are doing constructive criticism:



before you press "send", take a minute to read it and if it doesn't make any sense, edit it first.

_________________
COAST Not just somewhere to keep a beach.

A young loner on a crusade to champion the cause of the innocent, the helpless, the powerless, in a world of criminals who operate above the law.

What and put the sub editors out of work? That's not nice is it?

I do my best. Incredible pressure here.

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

It's a fair point. Why not publish on the forum somewhere first, even if just for 10-15 minutes. There's enough people here recently to proof read, you could do it in the clubhouse if you wanted a modicum of confidentiality prior to going to the press.

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

Upton Sinclair

With 'breaking news' seconds frequently count. I agree the scrapcam response PR wasn't breaking news, but then I've been in breaking news mode all morning.

The bottom line is that the odd error is far less significant overall than 'being there' on time every time.

And I'm doing 'all this' from a campervan parked in central London.

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

Lying Beaurocrats in power wrote:

Speeding kills. It is a contributory factor in 26% of all fatal accidents in Great Britain.

The facts are stark. If a child pedestrian is hit at 30mph they stand an 80% chance of surviving. But if they are hit at 40mph they stand an 80% chance of dying. That is why the Government is committed to achieving appropriate vehicle speeds on the roads as part of its integrated road safety strategy.

We are succeeding in changing attitudes, and in making drivers realise that one of their responsibilities is to comply with speed limits. The proportion of car drivers who comply with the 30mph limit has greatly increased over the last few years.

Safety cameras provide a valuable and cost-effective method of preventing, detecting and enforcing speed and traffic light offences. Their use is based on solid evidence. All reliable research from around the world clearly demonstrates that cameras reduce speeds and save lives.

Independent research (new window), published in December 2005 (by who?), shows that safety cameras had saved around 1,745 people from being killed or seriously injured, and had prevented around 4,230 personal injury collisions on Britain's roads each year (How do they come up with these figures?).

And while they are saving lives, safety cameras will remain a key part of our road safety strategy.

The fact is that it is aproximately 7% of accidents that are directly attributable to speed not the tosh written above and that is the Governments own figures. However, I feel strongly that this should be tackled head on, not just with a shrug and as expected by lying politicians and beaurocrats. I am going to email the PM's office to pass on the facts and to ask why they have put wrong information up as a reply to a valid petition! I ask we all do the same and ask how can speed cameras catch car/motorbike thieves, help out at an accident, prevent and ease congestion, detect overladen lorries, detect speeding lorries who are going to fast for their limit but still within the car/motorbike limits etc. We must keep banging the message home to people who advise the government as they probably use Public Transport mostly and live conveniently in London. They do not have to put up with rubbish Transport Strategies, poor policing and poorly maintained roads!!
All this makes my blood boil. It is cynical the way this and other Governments tax the motorist/motorcyclist. Now here's one for you according to the Scottish Daily Mail this week Glasgow City Council has proposed to the Scottish Executive that all motorist/motorcyclists be charged for parking at their place of work and pretty much anywhere else for that matter (Glasgow has a pretty good Transport system). Can you see a theme here? I believe we are seeing the deliberate attempt by those elected by us and their lackeys to force us off the roads and should we stray onto them then we are to be taxed till the pips squeak!!!! Well rant over now taking deep breaths, however, being in the military I do wonder why I signed up these days as this country seems to losing the plot and any 'freedoms' fought for removed, quashed or taxed!!!!!

Murraymac59

Come on guys, did we really expect anything else than the party line from them? Did we really expect to see a shocked PM demanding answers about why millions were flowing into the treasury whilst road deaths were not falling?

To my mind the object of this petition was never to get an admission of failure in the response, but to highlight to the press, the public, and the government, the strength of feeling opposing scameras and their failure to make our roads safer. If Broon wants to be winning at his next 'stroking' election, then he's going to have to adress issues like this tout suite!

If the government gave a damn what Taxpaying, British voters thought, we would be living in a democracy.
We are not though.. I know this because I am a smoker. The list of infringments wrought against our basic right to exist in Britain is dark and medieval. This government will lie, cheat, and steal to enforce their third world attitude upon this once great nation. Ha ! a few thousand tax collecting devices strewn around the nation 'So What' who cares it's government policy backed by government figures, so it has to right does it not.

Yes Paul, but much as I applaud your diligence, the message is only diminished if it contains typos, spelling mistakes and grammatical errors - as sadly is all too often the case. Proofread it.

_________________
Brian

Labour long since ran out of constructive policies. So they resort to introducing pointless laws that have the effect of reducing personal liberty. However as an exception, I fully support the smoking ban. Sorry.

_________________
Brian

When they came for the smokers, I remained silent; I was not a smoker.