Safer Roads - Cameras Not Credited...
Discussion
Someone needs to check the scamera publicity when it comes out. Somehow I get the feeling they will attribute this to cameras, even though they've not done it yet.
Of course, the danger of attributing change to any one factor is that all others must remain unchanged, and we know that's not possible in real life. Hence, there is no proof that cameras achieve anything given that nobody tries to keep other factors constant (training, awareness, road design, weather, seasonal factors, traffic volume, traffic mix, etc, etc). In the absence of that, all you can say is that 2 things have changed together and draw possible conclusions.
There are some interesting points though. The scamera guy says that KSIs will never be zero. I wonder if he still has his job? And I note that the article covers Derby but the "cost of accidents" is for Derbyshire. Just a slight change but the difference is significant. It again raises the questions of how to cost an accident, where we've learnt before through PH that the majority of cost is notional around the "emotional cost" of the surviving relatives. It would be far more honest to include just the real costs -- after all, I don't hear these costs included in figures for deaths undergoing surgery, from MRSA, etc.
Finally, what's the point of the "Mum-of-two Liz Blackler" comment? Bland and predictable. I would expect the councillor to respond with "...but we're not complacent".
Of course, the danger of attributing change to any one factor is that all others must remain unchanged, and we know that's not possible in real life. Hence, there is no proof that cameras achieve anything given that nobody tries to keep other factors constant (training, awareness, road design, weather, seasonal factors, traffic volume, traffic mix, etc, etc). In the absence of that, all you can say is that 2 things have changed together and draw possible conclusions.
There are some interesting points though. The scamera guy says that KSIs will never be zero. I wonder if he still has his job? And I note that the article covers Derby but the "cost of accidents" is for Derbyshire. Just a slight change but the difference is significant. It again raises the questions of how to cost an accident, where we've learnt before through PH that the majority of cost is notional around the "emotional cost" of the surviving relatives. It would be far more honest to include just the real costs -- after all, I don't hear these costs included in figures for deaths undergoing surgery, from MRSA, etc.
Finally, what's the point of the "Mum-of-two Liz Blackler" comment? Bland and predictable. I would expect the councillor to respond with "...but we're not complacent".
I was going to say thats totally unlikely as the SCAM parnership would elbow their way into news like this in a shot...and behold:
Sergeant Ian Windmill, from the Derbyshire Safety Camera Partnership, said: "The reduction in casualties is very welcome.
"We still want to see the figure fall as low as possible. The human cost of accidents is impossible to calculate.
"You can't place a value on human life but, in 2003, the financial cost for accidents in Derbyshire was £270m.
"We have to continue to reduce these figures, I know they could never be zero, but we can cut them to well below 100."
Be good to know what reductions at the camera sites were.
Sergeant Ian Windmill, from the Derbyshire Safety Camera Partnership, said: "The reduction in casualties is very welcome.
"We still want to see the figure fall as low as possible. The human cost of accidents is impossible to calculate.
"You can't place a value on human life but, in 2003, the financial cost for accidents in Derbyshire was £270m.
"We have to continue to reduce these figures, I know they could never be zero, but we can cut them to well below 100."
Be good to know what reductions at the camera sites were.
mybrainhurts said:
Read it again....Scamerati are there.
This is bullshit....figures are killed and seriously injured.
Let's see the deaths figure, please...........
The article says that there were 4 deaths in 2002 and 4 deaths in 2003 - so no change at all there. The SIs were the only ones reduced. A good thing but I'd like to know the stats for the previous few years in order to be happier that it isn't just a random blip - 2002 may have been exceptionally high for all we know from this article.
I agree with Peter, (and you all incidentally) you can't take but ONE factor and assume that, on it's own,to be a reason for proving YOUR particular theory. And this is what they have done. ALL factors MUST be included, to make sense of any arguement. As Peter said; in Derby, as opposed to Derbyshire, it states: the accident figures fell in 2003. I have not visited Derby "centre" for some time, and so I DON'T know. But "pedestrianisation" of the city centre COULD account that.
Funkiamster, mentions the: "in 2003, the costs of accidents in "Derbyshire" was £270M" statement. This IS what it's ALL about isn't it! A Bib friend of mine ALWAYS says: "They are NOT interested in safety" what they ARE interested in, is COST to the Government purse.
Every move our Governments make (and I include them ALL), Their driving force is to make it so that THEY pay LESS, and YOU, pay more! Look for a money saving motive, in everything they do.
The cynical, lying and devious thing IS they try to sell it to us under the guise of: " We have only YOUR safety in mind". Utter BOLLOCKS!
Funkiamster, mentions the: "in 2003, the costs of accidents in "Derbyshire" was £270M" statement. This IS what it's ALL about isn't it! A Bib friend of mine ALWAYS says: "They are NOT interested in safety" what they ARE interested in, is COST to the Government purse.
Every move our Governments make (and I include them ALL), Their driving force is to make it so that THEY pay LESS, and YOU, pay more! Look for a money saving motive, in everything they do.
The cynical, lying and devious thing IS they try to sell it to us under the guise of: " We have only YOUR safety in mind". Utter BOLLOCKS!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff