Accidents now rising. What's going on?
Discussion
I think that graph shows conclusive proof of the argument against speed cameras
If it wasn't for the introduction of fixed speed cameras in the 90s, the death rate would have fallen significantly quicker and further, so much so that by now it looks like we would be into negative territory, the roads would actually be bring several hundred people back to life each year
If it wasn't for the introduction of fixed speed cameras in the 90s, the death rate would have fallen significantly quicker and further, so much so that by now it looks like we would be into negative territory, the roads would actually be bring several hundred people back to life each year
How can accident rates themselves be accurately collated? The Police certainly don't know how many accidents occur on the roads. Insurers will have a clearer picture- do they collate and publicise their data?
And finally, rises and drops on an isolated basis are nothing to get excited about. Trends are what's important.
And finally, rises and drops on an isolated basis are nothing to get excited about. Trends are what's important.
jith said:
The post is about accidents increasing, not KSIs. The decrease in those in the period you have shown is almost exclusively down to the development in vehicle technology. In otherwords, the engineers are the ones who should be taking the credit, not the deluded, politically-motivated parasites in the camera partnerships.
J
So, when do you get your licence back then?J
R
ging84 said:
I think that graph shows conclusive proof of the argument against speed cameras
If it wasn't for the introduction of fixed speed cameras in the 90s, the death rate would have fallen significantly quicker and further, so much so that by now it looks like we would be into negative territory, the roads would actually be bring several hundred people back to life each year
Please tell me that you don't work in data analysis and/or research If it wasn't for the introduction of fixed speed cameras in the 90s, the death rate would have fallen significantly quicker and further, so much so that by now it looks like we would be into negative territory, the roads would actually be bring several hundred people back to life each year
Devil2575 said:
jith said:
The post is about accidents increasing, not KSIs. The decrease in those in the period you have shown is almost exclusively down to the development in vehicle technology. In otherwords, the engineers are the ones who should be taking the credit, not the deluded, politically-motivated parasites in the camera partnerships.
J
It is very likely that vehicle development has had an impact on KSI stats. However to make the claim that the trend is almost exclusively donw to this requires evidence. Do you have any?J
Accidents are increasing?
Err, the subject of the OP was about the KSI stats, not accidents in general.
The insurance industry in the UK seems to think that accidents are actually falling...
There are many more accidents than those reported to insurance companies. The fall in KSIs is not related to a fall in actual accident figures: it is about survival rates in actual accidents. Most of this survival is down to vehicle technology. This is particularly relevant when consideration is made to the appalling present and ever degrading state of the roads. There is of course a limit to how much vehicle technology can compensate for all the other shortcomings in road safety policies.
I have worked on vehicles, including police vehicles, for over 40 years and was immersed in the philosophies fuelling the quest for safer roads. In this time I have watched the shift in policies go from proper road policing using skilled and trained traffic officers to what we have now. I have seen the road systems denigrate to what we have now. The condition of the majority of A and B class roads is totally unacceptable, as is the inferrence that you can solve all these problems addressing speed as the primary source of accidents.
We have been trying this since the motor car was invented and it simply does not work. The only solution to a problem of permitting literally millions of people to operate highly complex machinery in a close environment safely is education, not automated prosecution.
J
jith said:
We have been trying this since the motor car was invented and it simply does not work. The only solution to a problem of permitting literally millions of people to operate highly complex machinery in a close environment safely is education, not automated prosecution.
J
So as long as people are taught not to drive too fast, they won't?J
What have you been smoking?
R
Devil2575 said:
Please tell me that you don't work in data analysis and/or research
The trick with really advances maths, the sort you deal with in cryptography, is that only a handful of people actually understand it, you just need to avoid them and you can make up what every you likejith said:
That is incorrect. The title of the OPs thread is "Accidents now rising. What's going on?"
The link in the OP, that was removed, was all about KSI stats, not accidents.jith said:
There are many more accidents than those reported to insurance companies. The fall in KSIs is not related to a fall in actual accident figures: it is about survival rates in actual accidents. Most of this survival is down to vehicle technology. This is particularly relevant when consideration is made to the appalling present and ever degrading state of the roads. There is of course a limit to how much vehicle technology can compensate for all the other shortcomings in road safety policies.
But how do you know this?If they're not even reported to insurers then I'm sure they are not collated at all, in which case no data exists.
I'd suggest that the majority of none trivial crashes do go through insurers due to the cost of even small repairs to cars.
Either way KSI stats have been falling and the insurance industry says accidents in general are falling, so it's quite a leap of faith to say that these are not related to accident rates because a number that isn't availible will be rising.
jith said:
I have worked on vehicles, including police vehicles, for over 40 years and was immersed in the philosophies fuelling the quest for safer roads. In this time I have watched the shift in policies go from proper road policing using skilled and trained traffic officers to what we have now. I have seen the road systems denigrate to what we have now. The condition of the majority of A and B class roads is totally unacceptable, as is the inferrence that you can solve all these problems addressing speed as the primary source of accidents.
But this is just personal experience and anecdotal evidence. You can argue about what the data says till the cows come home because isn't conclusive, so there is room to argue. However what there is no debate about is the value of peronal experiences and anecdotes. It is universally accepted that they do not make good evidence for reasons that I have discussed at length in other threads. The science is completely clear on this, not just in relation to seed cameras, but in relation to any situation where evidence is analysed and conclusions made. In the same way that it's not valid to say that "I was diagnosed with cancer and took a homeopathic remedy and then got better therefore homeopathy works" it's not valid to say "I've been involved for 40 years and seen X therefore this is true"
jith said:
We have been trying this since the motor car was invented and it simply does not work. The only solution to a problem of permitting literally millions of people to operate highly complex machinery in a close environment safely is education, not automated prosecution.
Have we? I thought we'd been trying automated prosection for a couple of decades? ging84 said:
The trick with really advances maths, the sort you deal with in cryptography, is that only a handful of people actually understand it, you just need to avoid them and you can make up what every you like
I think I may have taken your post the opposite way to which it was intended.A very quick scan of this: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/publications/re-referenc... (mortality causes in the UK for 2013) shows how very few - relatively - deaths in this country stem from any form of transport-related incident, irrespective of whether unlawful speed was a contributing factor.
Is the idea to reduce the number of road deaths per annum to zero? If not, what's the "right" number, because if it is not zero, there has to be one.
Is the idea to reduce the number of road deaths per annum to zero? If not, what's the "right" number, because if it is not zero, there has to be one.
cptsideways said:
Mobile phones I think you'll find is the current root cause of the rise in statistics
There was a story in the mail to that effect.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2773028/Cr...
It amazes me how anyone can consider that talking on a phone while driving is safe.
Edited by Devil2575 on Monday 2nd February 13:44
Devil2575 said:
cptsideways said:
Mobile phones I think you'll find is the current root cause of the rise in statistics
There was a story in the mail to that effect although that doesn't make it true.singlecoil said:
Devil2575 said:
cptsideways said:
Mobile phones I think you'll find is the current root cause of the rise in statistics
There was a story in the mail to that effect although that doesn't make it true.I'm not saying that it isn't the case, just that a newspaper report isn't always the best source of evidence, especialy not the Daily Mail.
Dr Jekyll said:
Improvement in car design have a lot to do with it.
There was a crash up the road from me recently where 2 people where killed. The were doing at least 70 MPH and not wearing seat belts when they had a head on collision. But the inquest suggested that if they had been in a more recent car they might have survived.
If something was to ever go very wrong and I was to have an accident with an impact speed at over 30mph and can assure you that (given the choice!) I'd sure as hell rather be in the 2008 VW Golf than the 1993 Porsche 968!There was a crash up the road from me recently where 2 people where killed. The were doing at least 70 MPH and not wearing seat belts when they had a head on collision. But the inquest suggested that if they had been in a more recent car they might have survived.
ging84 said:
Devil2575 said:
Please tell me that you don't work in data analysis and/or research
The trick with really advances maths, the sort you deal with in cryptography, is that only a handful of people actually understand it, you just need to avoid them and you can make up what every you likeUsually these things are fairly macro. The economy is doing a bit better and fuel is cheap. Winter. More mobile phones.
Against that you have ever-increasing technology which stops drivers from crashing even when there are more of them and from dying or being hurt when they do crash.
From the multi-decade graph, I'd think you are looking at the post-war boom, and increase in vehicle capability meeting the widespread use of seatbelts and abs, and then the oil crisis, followed by continuing improvements in traction control and cabin safety.
Devil2575 said:
singlecoil said:
Devil2575 said:
cptsideways said:
Mobile phones I think you'll find is the current root cause of the rise in statistics
There was a story in the mail to that effect although that doesn't make it true.I'm not saying that it isn't the case, just that a newspaper report isn't always the best source of evidence, especialy not the Daily Mail.
Dr Jekyll said:
Improvement in car design have a lot to do with it.
There was a crash up the road from me recently where 2 people where killed. The were doing at least 70 MPH and not wearing seat belts when they had a head on collision. But the inquest suggested that if they had been in a more recent car they might have survived.
Beaconsfield?There was a crash up the road from me recently where 2 people where killed. The were doing at least 70 MPH and not wearing seat belts when they had a head on collision. But the inquest suggested that if they had been in a more recent car they might have survived.
singlecoil said:
Devil2575 said:
cptsideways said:
Mobile phones I think you'll find is the current root cause of the rise in statistics
There was a story in the mail to that effect although that doesn't make it true.I drive a reasonable distance each year and am constantly amazed that it seems most on teh road are all but asleep at the wheel, they are 10MPH under the limit so totally safe exactly as they have been told. The only time they wake up is when the phone rings or they get a text and then, as texting or being on the phone is not police able by camera, they are happy to take said call or answer the text knowing full well that they are mostly safe from prosecution and driving well below the speed limit so it must be safe.
Yes I do blame speed cameras, they are responsible for the lack of police on teh roads today and BRAKE and the other organisations that have driven the speed agenda should hang their heads in shame at what they have done.
Oh yes just to let you know I do not speed, I get enough of that on track and yes I have a clean license. Cars kill in teh wrong hands it is time people treated them with the same respect they would show a gun and not drive on auto pilot, then the accident rate would drop again.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff