Safe Speed Forums

Telegraph

Tricky one, although to be fair, we'd need to subtract from that, the number that would have been killed had the police NOT bothered chasing the miscreants.

which, of course, is impossible!

That is one dilemma where I do have rare sympathy with the politicians. Putting in place a measure which save 100 children's lives at the expense of two deaths which would not otherwise have occurred is obviously a good thing. But the two dead are real people with mothers to go on television to mourn them whereas the hundred saved are mere statistics with no advocates. That was why the very sensible all year summertime was dropped

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

I didn't know that. Can you prove a link please? (only for reading, not debating)

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Did you know a man gets run over four times a day in England on average? He’s getting really fed up of it! (I hope you can't get banned here for bad jokes? )

Seriously.. When I see these police chases I often wonder if it wouldn’t be better to just take the details and back right off as soon as it becomes obvious they have no intention of stopping. I know they sort-of do that already but not until a considerable distance has been covered during which the criminal speeds up and takes greater risks. Had the cops not given chase then maybe the crim would have gone slower and arrived at their destination all equating to less speed and time on the road?

I am also reminded of how it is always reported and misrepresented. I think it was a member here who once said the chase always goes along the lines of “Look at that insane homicidal driver reaching speeds of 110mph while the brave cop pursues him”

Yes, it is brave of him and it’s not something I would want to do, but now you have two cars doing 110mph both driving dangerously.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

The 1970 experiment is referenced here http://www.lighterlater.org/history.html#british_standard_time. The idea that politically known deaths are not offset by greater numbers of anonymous lives saved has been discussed in several newspaper science columns but, I understand that my presenting newspaper articles as evidence is no longer acceptable.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Might as well not waste our time getting the details just let them get away with it as if you dont make an attempt to detain them then the result will be just the same if you take there details and try and follow it up at a later stage.they purely and simply will get off with it,as there will be no evidence to put them behind the wheel.

Even worst it could be stolen so what we have to do is just shut up shop and let them get away with it ,thats what you are basically saying,in any police tactic there is always going to be risk involved some more than others,however when vehicles are involved the person behind the wheel dictates the outcome,rather that blame the people who are trying to protect the public,hows about a law that has some balls about it and says that if you are challenged to stop by a police officer,whilst behind the wheel of a motor vehicle,and you fail to stop and engage in a manner which causes death or injury to any person other than the driver of that vehicle.

You will be held responsible that way we might see a lot fewer incidents involving high speed pursuits as they wont want to go to prison,but no no one will have any balls to introduce something like this,they will just be happy to blame and criticise the people who want to bring people to justice,if you have never been involved in a situation like this then dont criticise,it beacause you are not in a position to from experience.

Police vehicles kill or seriously injure very few people there are more people injured or killed through direct contact with the subject vehicle than actual police vehicles,the media would have you believe differently due to the fact the way in which the stats are collected and recorded,pursuits could be very nearly wiped out overnight,if the manufacturers would install the technology into the engine management system that would give the police the power to switch off the vehicles engine management system when reported stolen.

The technology is there it was tested over 15 to 20 yrs ago but stated that it interfered with pace makers and things like that,so why cant it be introduced now there can not be many people who would be in range for the short time the equipment was being activated for,I know people will say that if that happens criminals will get the same devices and start to knock out others car,well this can be legislated for and action taken if anyone found in possession of an article which might be used in connection with any theft etc.

As is happening now there are legislation to deal with the very iscolated incidents where there are in fact evidence to support that a police officer has committed an offence but we want to prosecute them more than the actual villians who run riot in our towna and citys day after day night after night stealing and breaking into our property to take what a lot of us work hard for. there feel better now got it out I suppose everyone will oppose such draconian methods and ideas.
Stephen

You can remotely disable cars now. It's called Thatcham Q but it isn't legal in the UK I think for H & S you have to disable the car while it is stationery so the criminals don't hurt themselves.

All round summertime would be quite good but the problem remains for Scotland where it would be too dark. Different north/south timezones might be better. I still think actively switching an hour is detrimental to safety as with gradually reducing light levels you get used to it rather than being plunged into darkness on the way home all of a sudden.

Bottom line is there are only so many hours of day light in the winter. You can't increase them only move them around.

Yeah, the "pacemaker" thing is bunkum. cars (and pacemakers) have to go through pretty stringent "Electromagnetic Compatibility" tests before they can be sold. There are lots of things on cars (ABS, ESC, throttle by wire, etc) that could kill people if they were susceptible to electrical interference (within reason)! As Teabelly says, the technology exists. It won't be impregnable, nothing is, and you'll just get people "chipping" their cars to remove that feature. There will then, presumably, be the introduction of a check on its operation at each MOT - which means MOT stations will be equipped with the remote "kill" devices, and then, as you say, the scrotes will get their paws on them. (Presumably police cars will be exempt from having them fitted)?

Anyway, the technology is there. You can even do it via a mobile phone if you want - to your own car, but it's only as good as any other immobiliser.