AXE ATTACK on Speed Camera Operator and van!
Discussion
Leaving aside Spindrifts obscene trampling on the late Paul Smith's grave in a vain attempt to convince us of the merits of speed cameras, in the real world there is no evidence of a causal link between camera usage and casualty reduction.
The last papers of which I'm aware were in the BMJ a few years ago written by an academic called Paul Pilkington. His assertions were heavily criticised at the time and the BMJ editor criticised for printing such poor quality work.
The last papers of which I'm aware were in the BMJ a few years ago written by an academic called Paul Pilkington. His assertions were heavily criticised at the time and the BMJ editor criticised for printing such poor quality work.
Paul Dishman said:
Leaving aside Spindrifts obscene trampling on the late Paul Smith's grave in a vain attempt to convince us of the merits of speed cameras, in the real world there is no evidence of a causal link between camera usage and casualty reduction.
The last papers of which I'm aware were in the BMJ a few years ago written by an academic called Paul Pilkington. His assertions were heavily criticised at the time and the BMJ editor criticised for printing such poor quality work.
It can't be proven one way or the other, it is no easy task with so many factors & variables involved.The last papers of which I'm aware were in the BMJ a few years ago written by an academic called Paul Pilkington. His assertions were heavily criticised at the time and the BMJ editor criticised for printing such poor quality work.
Individuals with interpret the data differently & theorise about it, but it's not proven.
What is fact though, is that the combination of policies we currently have still see deaths falling with 2007 resulting in the lowest number of deaths on our roads ever.
vonhosen said:
What is fact though, is that the combination of policies we currently have still see deaths falling with 2007 resulting in the lowest number of deaths on our roads ever.
Slightly misleading, considering our improvement rate has fallen off dramatically, and no longer leads Europe.Edited by VortexRing on Saturday 28th June 13:32
VortexRing said:
vonhosen said:
What is fact though, is that the combination of policies we currently have still see deaths falling with 2007 resulting in the lowest number of deaths on our roads ever.
Slightly misleading, considering our improvement rate has fallen off dramatically, and no longer leads Europe.Edited by VortexRing on Saturday 28th June 13:32
Your statement does not undermine what I stated as fact.
Why the rate of decline has slowed is another debate, of course some will say it's because of cameras whilst others will say it's because of other factors. Again though, each is interpreting the data & theorising, not absolutely proving the case.
vonhosen said:
Paul Dishman said:
Leaving aside Spindrifts obscene trampling on the late Paul Smith's grave in a vain attempt to convince us of the merits of speed cameras, in the real world there is no evidence of a causal link between camera usage and casualty reduction.
The last papers of which I'm aware were in the BMJ a few years ago written by an academic called Paul Pilkington. His assertions were heavily criticised at the time and the BMJ editor criticised for printing such poor quality work.
It can't be proven one way or the other, it is no easy task with so many factors & variables involved.The last papers of which I'm aware were in the BMJ a few years ago written by an academic called Paul Pilkington. His assertions were heavily criticised at the time and the BMJ editor criticised for printing such poor quality work.
Individuals with interpret the data differently & theorise about it, but it's not proven.
What is fact though, is that the combination of policies we currently have still see deaths falling with 2007 resulting in the lowest number of deaths on our roads ever.
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/330/7487/331?m...
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7346/1153/...
You need to read the Rapid Responses as well
Having read all the posting of Cheryl i have reached the conclusion that I am wrong.
Wrong to just sit here reading these posts.
Wrong to sit idly by while this unacceptable situation exists on our roads.
So I am going to take positive action, spurred on by the messages from cheryl and friends.
i am going to torch a gatso!
Wrong to just sit here reading these posts.
Wrong to sit idly by while this unacceptable situation exists on our roads.
So I am going to take positive action, spurred on by the messages from cheryl and friends.
i am going to torch a gatso!
vonhosen said:
Paul Dishman said:
Leaving aside Spindrifts obscene trampling on the late Paul Smith's grave in a vain attempt to convince us of the merits of speed cameras, in the real world there is no evidence of a causal link between camera usage and casualty reduction.
The last papers of which I'm aware were in the BMJ a few years ago written by an academic called Paul Pilkington. His assertions were heavily criticised at the time and the BMJ editor criticised for printing such poor quality work.
It can't be proven one way or the other, it is no easy task with so many factors & variables involved.The last papers of which I'm aware were in the BMJ a few years ago written by an academic called Paul Pilkington. His assertions were heavily criticised at the time and the BMJ editor criticised for printing such poor quality work.
Individuals with interpret the data differently & theorise about it, but it's not proven.
What is fact though, is that the combination of policies we currently have still see deaths falling with 2007 resulting in the lowest number of deaths on our roads ever.
By the way the research from the UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD has been PEER REVIEWED und judged to be sound in collation und conclusions drawn from its study into A&E stats.
We also have a situation whereby SI increase. SI can be fate worse than death for some survivors und their families too. Lives in limbo...
We also have a big problem in way the data collated from the speed scam sites. One SCP in 2003-2005 claimed that they had a mobile scam on one road because 400 folk died at that spot on that day in the 5 years prior. Neither A&E hospitals had a red alert situation similar to two jumbo jets crashing nearby.. because the accidents claimed simply did not occur. There was the odd shunt up a rear with minor injury at most ... because folk slammed on anchors when they saw the van - even if legal
Another piece of research complained that there was no standardisation in any stats collated at the "scam sites" with one, identified by Kev Delaney - as supporing a 100% success rate.. but it was set up because 4 people died at scene.... in the same accident. Only car involved. The driver was aged 15 years. The car was stolen.
The succcess rate varied from claims of 17% to 71% success rate in accident prevention.. but the researcher stated in conclusions that the way the evidence was produced suggested the scameras were effective.. but that this same evidence was not overly reliable By the way.. France lead the pop charts with the "lowest" reductions und KSI. They doubled the number of trafpol. They do have 1000 scams.. but if you look closely.. these seem to be trying to nab Johnny Foreigner und them Swiss folk near the borders
odyssey2200 said:
Having read all the posting of Cheryl i have reached the conclusion that I am wrong.
Wrong to just sit here reading these posts.
Wrong to sit idly by while this unacceptable situation exists on our roads.
So I am going to take positive action, spurred on by the messages from cheryl and friends.
i am going to torch a gatso!
certainly brings positive inspiration doesn't it.Wrong to just sit here reading these posts.
Wrong to sit idly by while this unacceptable situation exists on our roads.
So I am going to take positive action, spurred on by the messages from cheryl and friends.
i am going to torch a gatso!
also makes me happy knowing i splashed 6 cyclists in one single albeit rather deep puddle only yesterday, they can hardly complain though, riding round in the rain they should expect to get a bit wet!
ahh im only joking, didnt really waste any of my bandwith reading the brainwashed, ill informed drivel that i'm guessing was posted.
why are they here exactly?
Edited by DucatiGary on Saturday 28th June 14:26
CherylPetersen said:
I make that twenty four evasions. Twenty four examples in the last few pages of people refusing to engage with the debate or respond to the points and rather simply post ad hominem or pointlss dribbling bum gravy.
CherylPetersen said:
For tyhe third time, tell me what freaking question I'm supposed to have ignored and I'm happy to answer it.
You can hardly accuse me of answeering questions if you keep refusing to say what the Greek buggery question is.
FOR THE FOURTH TIME, WERE YOU BANNED FROM THE CYCLING PLUS WEBSITE?!!You can hardly accuse me of answeering questions if you keep refusing to say what the Greek buggery question is.
Now you can see why this trog has been booted off of most all forums he's ever visited.
He must cut a really pathetic figure as he cycles along on a lone voyage of self importance, ocassionally growling through his beard at kiddies whilst simultaneously getting a cheap thrill off his seat post as it jams into his loose sphincter.
Sprindrift....rhymes with t
t.
He must cut a really pathetic figure as he cycles along on a lone voyage of self importance, ocassionally growling through his beard at kiddies whilst simultaneously getting a cheap thrill off his seat post as it jams into his loose sphincter.
Sprindrift....rhymes with t
t.
Deltaf01 said:
Now you can see why this trog has been booted off of most all forums he's ever visited.
He must cut a really pathetic figure as he cycles along on a lone voyage of self importance, ocassionally growling through his beard at kiddies whilst simultaneously getting a cheap thrill off his seat post as it jams into his loose sphincter.
Sprindrift....rhymes with tt.
You mean twazak Liebchen He must cut a really pathetic figure as he cycles along on a lone voyage of self importance, ocassionally growling through his beard at kiddies whilst simultaneously getting a cheap thrill off his seat post as it jams into his loose sphincter.
Sprindrift....rhymes with t
t.You owe me yet another laptop. You rascal you!.
I would same it rhyme more with s
twf!I will let you fill in the missing letters as it most rudey und I am supposed to be a lady.
10 Pence Short said:
ianrauk said:
4x4 on the A21 going south tonight. Just because you have a "Baby On Board" sign in the back of your car doesn't give you the right to overtake and do a left turn on a roundabout near knocking me off, causing me to lock my brakes and hit the kerb. And when I caught up with you and asked why, you chose to ignore me. So sorry for the scratch/ dent in your door I accidently left with my shoe....NOT!!! YOU IGNORANT C***
Sh4rkyBloke said:
You should have smashed her window, dragged her from her vehicle (remembering to leave the seatbelt fastened and tightening around her throat) and ripped her still beating heart from her chest via her airway, and with liberal use of your tyre levers.
Scratched her car. Pffft, what sort of warning is that???
Scratched her car. Pffft, what sort of warning is that???
CatrikeUK said:
She waved you off? There would not have been a straight panel or intact light left on the car if that had been me, well done for the restraint.
http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p...Things would develop rather quickly if someone like that scratched any car of mine
I get cut up and made to slam on my brakes almost every day in the truck and some of the cyclists I come across have the brains of a rocking horse, but the odd beep of the horn and some choice words are usually enough to get the point across if required (and if i can be bothered)
Edited by Digby on Saturday 28th June 19:30
WildCat said:
You mean twazak Liebchen
WildCat said:
You owe me yet another laptop. You rascal you!.
You really musnt type with your mouth full, ive told you this before.....
WildCat said:
I would same it rhyme more with stwf!
I will let you fill in the missing letters as it most rudey und I am supposed to be a lady.
Hmm...it may take me a while to do so Liebchen, there are so many i could make fit.twf!I will let you fill in the missing letters as it most rudey und I am supposed to be a lady.
Apache said:
CherylPetersen said:
I make that twenty four evasions. Twenty four examples in the last few pages of people refusing to engage with the debate or respond to the points and rather simply post ad hominem or pointlss dribbling bum gravy.
CherylPetersen said:
For tyhe third time, tell me what freaking question I'm supposed to have ignored and I'm happy to answer it.
You can hardly accuse me of answeering questions if you keep refusing to say what the Greek buggery question is.
FOR THE FOURTH TIME, WERE YOU BANNED FROM THE CYCLING PLUS WEBSITE?!!You can hardly accuse me of answeering questions if you keep refusing to say what the Greek buggery question is.
|Yep, banned for being sweary, mea culpa. Although, when you come to think of it, being booted off an interweb site for calling people names pales into insignificance compared with the misguided gullible fools here who place their faith in a proven charlatan, snake oil salesman, liar and fraud who pretends other peoples' work as his own.
I think that's why, once you've been shown your hero had feet of clay, a heart of gold, and a knob of butter, you have nothing to say other than that.
Smith lied and lied and lied, you asked for evidence, you got it, you had a chance to offer a mounted defence.
You blew it.
odyssey2200 said:
Excuse me Cheryl.
But whats is your problem?
What is it that you are trying to achieve her?
To counter the lies told about me by your more unbalanced memeber Odyssey (thanks for the courtesy by the way).But whats is your problem?
What is it that you are trying to achieve her?
Smith mounted a deeply unpleasant campaign of abuse against me and refused the right of reply I enjoy here. So he was not only a coward, but a bully, too. He allowed posts on his nodding dog forum that levelled the vilest accusations by acolytes you can think of, the swiss cocksuckers being the most shrill and hysterical among them, you can see it here to a lesser degree.
Plus, I was asked for evidence of Smith's dishonesty, the fact that nobody's been able to refute a single word should show you the type of character the mans' supporters have.
odyssey2200 said:
OK you were obviously offended by Mr Smith at some point but what is your aim?
What are you seeking?
When will it be over for you?
You will never get even with Mr Smith.
Time to move on.
As I've said ( as you'd know had you read the thread) , my aim is to expose smith's lies and incompetence because he preached an extremly dangerous message to those gullible enough to place their faith in him.What are you seeking?
When will it be over for you?
You will never get even with Mr Smith.
Time to move on.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff