Speed Awareness Courses - Do they work?

[TooMany2cvs]

The Surveyor said:

PhilboSE said:

Out of the 24 attendees, only 48% could say what the correct national speed limit was in urban areas.

More importantly, how do you get 48% of 24 people?

This thread is so much more interesting without statistics

11 of 24 got it right, while one got it half-right.

[PhilboSE]

The Surveyor said:

More importantly, how do you get 48% of 24 people?

This thread is so much more interesting without statistics

I did wonder! It was a handset based voting system and I suspect it timed out or stopped when it had collected "enough" responses. So there was probably an abstainer and the score was 11/23 rounded up to 48%.

[Mill Wheel]

PhilboSE said:

The Surveyor said:

More importantly, how do you get 48% of 24 people?

This thread is so much more interesting without statistics

I did wonder! It was a handset based voting system and I suspect it timed out or stopped when it had collected "enough" responses. So there was probably an abstainer and the score was 11/23 rounded up to 48%.

It was the course providers that gave you the 48% figure?

Why do they not just give you the numbers instead of trying to turn everything into percentages?

[Devil2575]

Mill Wheel said:

It was the course providers that gave you the 48% figure?

Why do they not just give you the numbers instead of trying to turn everything into percentages?

Because a percentage is more useful.

[TooMany2cvs]

Mill Wheel said:

It was the course providers that gave you the 48% figure?

Why do they not just give you the numbers instead of trying to turn everything into percentages?

10 people did this!

Well, great, but is that 10 out of 10, 10 out of 20, 10 out of 100, 10 out of 1m?

[gareth_r]

Red Devil said:

The endless to and fro about enforcement is pretty pointless.
I agree with VH: there is little point in bg about it, especially as there is some leeway incorporated.
Those with more than one brain cell know this and should be able to take into account.

The real issue is the apparently arbitrary choice of limits. Where is the rationale for these?

50 rather than NSL - https://goo.gl/maps/9U4RskC4MRE2
40 rather than 50/NSL - https://goo.gl/maps/ReCXUdoCQY62
40 rather than NSL - https://goo.gl/maps/G14yXFNdao62

Just three random examples, but similar nonsense can be found across the network.
It does nothing to engender respect for limits by those who use the roads.
The upshot is to defeat the whole point of having them in the first place.

It was a foreseeable result of the government allowing those in town and city halls free rein.
Unfortunately MPs are all too often oblivious to the consequences of their actions.

Oh no they're not! A major goal of politics is to make it somebody else's problem.

Campaigner to MP: "Something must be done!"
MP to campaigner: "Nothing to do with me. We've given responsibility to your local council. Local knowledge, best people... blah, blah. Contact your local councillor. Vote for me!"

Campaigners to local councillor: "Something must be done!"
LC to campaigners: "OK, OK, I'll do something."
LC to other LCs: "What can we do that's cheap, preferably self-funding, and makes it appear that we have done something?"
Other LCs (chorus): "Reduce the speed limits and tell the Safety Camera Partnership! Reduce the speed limits and tell the Safety Camera Partnership! Reduce the speed limits and tell the Safety Camera Partnership! Speed kills! Speed kills! Speed kills!"

LC to campaigners: "Look! Look! I've done something! Vote for me!"

[Mill Wheel]

Devil2575 said:

Mill Wheel said:

It was the course providers that gave you the 48% figure?

Why do they not just give you the numbers instead of trying to turn everything into percentages?

Because a percentage is more useful.

We had a representative from the police turn up at our Town Council meeting and tell us that anti social behaviour offences had gone up 100% since our last meeting.

Turns out that there had been TWO incidents instead of ONE, so what makes a percentage more useful, especially when it is not accurate, when you can use the actual data to produce a percentage figure if it is absolutely necessary?

[Mill Wheel]

Devil2575 said:

£1 million is fk all in the big scheme of things.

North Yorkshire's pothole budget is £2.35 million, with £53 allocated per pothole, so the £1 million would fix a further 18,867 potholes.

Or it could provide 22,222 Speed Awareness Courses to drivers who haven't yet been caught, thus providing a boost to road safety... if they actually work.

[Devil2575]

Mill Wheel said:

We had a representative from the police turn up at our Town Council meeting and tell us that anti social behaviour offences had gone up 100% since our last meeting.

Turns out that there had been TWO incidents instead of ONE, so what makes a percentage more useful, especially when it is not accurate, when you can use the actual data to produce a percentage figure if it is absolutely necessary?

That's a very specific example. Just because it was of no value in that case doesn't mean percentages are never useful.

[Mill Wheel]

Devil2575 said:

Mill Wheel said:

We had a representative from the police turn up at our Town Council meeting and tell us that anti social behaviour offences had gone up 100% since our last meeting.

Turns out that there had been TWO incidents instead of ONE, so what makes a percentage more useful, especially when it is not accurate, when you can use the actual data to produce a percentage figure if it is absolutely necessary?

That's a very specific example. Just because it was of no value in that case doesn't mean percentages are never useful.

They ARE useful sometimes, but my comment arose because on a course of just 24 people, the SAC organisers decided to relate the answers in percentage terms, which couldn't relate to the numbers on the course without further explanation, which was not given.
When I asked why use that format, you suggested that percentages were useful... I'm still trying to figure out how in that context.

[768]

Devil2575 said:

That's a very specific example. Just because it was of no value in that case doesn't mean percentages are never useful.

You said more useful than the actual data.

I can't see that they're ever that.

[Mill Wheel]

768 said:

Devil2575 said:

That's a very specific example. Just because it was of no value in that case doesn't mean percentages are never useful.

You said more useful than the actual data.

I can't see that they're ever that.

Yes, if you have actual data, then you can derive the percentages should they be required, but not the other way around.
For example.
In North Yorkshire, fatality figures for elderly RTA victims show that from 2014 to 2015, they increased by 300%.
Unless I give you the original figure - TWO, you have no way of knowing if the 2015 figure warrants further investigation.
Had I told you that in 2014 it was 2 and in 2015 it was 6, you could derive the percentage yourself - if it were somehow more useful.

Another way in which figures are misrepresented is KSI.
North Yorkshire forecast 49 KSIs for a given stretch of road, and in fact ended with 47 KSIs.
In fact there were NO fatal victims, only 47 serious injury victims... but the term KILLED when placed in front of the Serious Injuries, misleads the public as to the seriousness of some figures.

[Devil2575]

768 said:

Devil2575 said:

That's a very specific example. Just because it was of no value in that case doesn't mean percentages are never useful.

You said more useful than the actual data.

I can't see that they're ever that.

They frequenty are but it depends on the audience. Some people want to see all the data, some people don't.

[Devil2575]

Mill Wheel said:

Another way in which figures are misrepresented is KSI.
North Yorkshire forecast 49 KSIs for a given stretch of road, and in fact ended with 47 KSIs.
In fact there were NO fatal victims, only 47 serious injury victims... but the term KILLED when placed in front of the Serious Injuries, misleads the public as to the seriousness of some figures.

I think you're wrong on this.

No one is being mislead.

Also you should consider that the main factor that influences whether someobne is killed or seriously injured is luck.

The fact is there wee sufficient crashes to seriously injur 47 people. But for the role of a dice some could just as easily have been killed.

[Mill Wheel]

Devil2575 said:

I think you're wrong on this.

No one is being mislead.

Also you should consider that the main factor that influences whether someobne is killed or seriously injured is luck.

The fact is there wee sufficient crashes to seriously injur 47 people. But for the role of a dice some could just as easily have been killed.

But the Safety Camera Partnerships don't see it as luck if any of the figures go down... they claim the success as theirs!
In fact North Yorkshire Police website says they AIM to reduce crashes and victims, but North Yorkshire Council are not so shy, and claim their "95 Alive" campaign was responsible for saving 126 lives between 2005 and March 2011.
How so? They provide no proof of this.

[vonhosen]

Mill Wheel said:

Devil2575 said:

I think you're wrong on this.

No one is being mislead.

Also you should consider that the main factor that influences whether someobne is killed or seriously injured is luck.

The fact is there wee sufficient crashes to seriously injur 47 people. But for the role of a dice some could just as easily have been killed.

But the Safety Camera Partnerships don't see it as luck if any of the figures go down... they claim the success as theirs!
In fact North Yorkshire Police website says they AIM to reduce crashes and victims, but North Yorkshire Council are not so shy, and claim their "95 Alive" campaign was responsible for saving 126 lives between 2005 and March 2011.
How so? They provide no proof of this.

They set a target & they exceeded that target?
They set that target knowing that there would be a lot of variables over which they had little control & some over which they had some control.
Presumably the target was set with that all in mind/considered & they reached their target.
Is that not to be celebrated?

[cmaguire]

vonhosen said:

They set a target & they exceeded that target?
They set that target knowing that there would be a lot of variables over which they had little control & some over which they had some control.
Presumably the target was set with that all in mind/considered & they reached their target.
Is that not to be celebrated?

That's waffle.
As Devil2575 always says, "Where's the evidence?". There's no reason I would be inclined to accept what any SCP etc claim at face value as they are pushing an agenda for their own personal gain. Partisan.

And using KSI's as a measure without differentiating between the K's and the SI's is absolutely misleading.It's a stupid measure anyway, what exactly qualifies at the better (for the recipient) end of an SI?

[vonhosen]

cmaguire said:

vonhosen said:

They set a target & they exceeded that target?
They set that target knowing that there would be a lot of variables over which they had little control & some over which they had some control.
Presumably the target was set with that all in mind/considered & they reached their target.
Is that not to be celebrated?

That's waffle.
As Devil2575 always says, "Where's the evidence?". There's no reason I would be inclined to accept what any SCP etc claim at face value as they are pushing an agenda for their own personal gain. Partisan.

And using KSI's as a measure without differentiating between the K's and the SI's is absolutely misleading.It's a stupid measure anyway, what exactly qualifies at the better (for the recipient) end of an SI?

It's not waffle.
They aimed for a reduction with everything considered & in play (some of which they have no control over) & they ended up with the reduction they were looking for.
The reduction either happened or it didn't.

[Mill Wheel]

TooMany2cvs said:

Mill Wheel said:

It was the course providers that gave you the 48% figure?

Why do they not just give you the numbers instead of trying to turn everything into percentages?

10 people did this!

Well, great, but is that 10 out of 10, 10 out of 20, 10 out of 100, 10 out of 1m?

There were 24 people on the course... it said so in the post I was referring to, which you either did not read or chose to deliberately misunderstand.

[Mill Wheel]

vonhosen said:

They set a target & they exceeded that target?
They set that target knowing that there would be a lot of variables over which they had little control & some over which they had some control.
Presumably the target was set with that all in mind/considered & they reached their target.
Is that not to be celebrated?

They should not be claiming the credit for it, unless they can show a link between their actions and the results.

There have been less fatalities along my commute to work since I started cycling to work in Hi Viz.
I suppose I could claim that the drop in fatalities was a result of my cycling the route.
The evidence shows that when the speed cameras were installed on the same route, serious injuries rose at the camera site, and fatals remained unabated until I started cycling the route.
I rest my case, which is more tangible than North Yorkshire Councils evidence (They provide none).