RE: Road deaths rise despite cameras
Friday 1st April 2005
GatsoFigures just released by the Scottish Executive show a rise in speeding fines handed to drivers in Scotland of over 61 per cent in a single year.
Road deaths rise despite cameras
Enough is enough, says safety campaign
Gatso
According to safety campaigner Safe Speed, if anyone ever needed proof that speed enforcement is not saving lives, this is it. Despite an increase in the number of speeding fines issued between 2002 and 2003, road deaths also rose over the same period from 304 to 331, a rise of nine per cent, said Safe Speed founder Paul Smith.
Smith said, "Enough is enough. Clearly the massive increase in speed enforcement has not driven down road deaths. And if it doesn't save lives what good is it? The greedy camera partnerships must be disbanded and we must get back to the principles that gave us the safest roads in the world in the first place."
"Driving safety is not about 'sticking to the speed limit'", explains Smith, "It's about far more sophisticated driver behaviours based on skills, attitudes and responsibilities. The over-emphasis on speed limit compliance is a road safety red herring, and a serious distraction from the things that really matter."
Discussion
So....more cameras and yet there's still more road deaths? Why am I not surprised by that?
If I was trying to be flippant, I'd say it was because people are spending more time looking out for scameras and staring at their speedo than looking at the road, 'cos they're so s**t scared of getting done for a pathetic speed infringment.
Sadly, I get the feeling there may be a shred of reality in it.
However, what I've always maintained is that speed in itself doesn't kill.....lack of appropriate observation for current speed/current driving conditions and the application of common sense is what causes accidents, and the greater the lack of these, the more serious it's likely to be.
That surely is an issue for driver training and education??? No amount of cameras will ever create a more sensible and aware driver, and the more drivers are treated like children who have to be watched and guided every step of the way, the more the responsibility is shifted away from the driver and onto reliance of external controls to do all the 'thinking' for them.
Maybe I'm off the mark, but that's just my 2p.
If I was trying to be flippant, I'd say it was because people are spending more time looking out for scameras and staring at their speedo than looking at the road, 'cos they're so s**t scared of getting done for a pathetic speed infringment.
Sadly, I get the feeling there may be a shred of reality in it.
However, what I've always maintained is that speed in itself doesn't kill.....lack of appropriate observation for current speed/current driving conditions and the application of common sense is what causes accidents, and the greater the lack of these, the more serious it's likely to be.
That surely is an issue for driver training and education??? No amount of cameras will ever create a more sensible and aware driver, and the more drivers are treated like children who have to be watched and guided every step of the way, the more the responsibility is shifted away from the driver and onto reliance of external controls to do all the 'thinking' for them.
Maybe I'm off the mark, but that's just my 2p.
I agree...
My theory is fairly simple...
What causes accidents and ultimately deaths is BAD DRIVING.. which includes Inappopriate use of speed, tailgating, driving reading a newspaper, driving when extremely tired, driving aggressively etc etc etc..
The only reason speed is targetted is its EASY for the politicians to make money from penalising people for it whilst using the 'Speed Kills!' motive to jusify it.
I drive every day in Rush hour and id be lucky to get within 20 mph of the speed limit (dual carriageway) and i see shocking driving.. And funnily enough alot of accidents...
I feel very strongly about this, the only way to make roads safer is for there to be a greater presence of Police on the roads inline with the far greater number of cars on the road and for Police to take how a vehicle is being driven in the circumstances where it is being driven..And not been driven by prosecution targets etc.
And if Speed is soo dangerous and the motorist such a criminal why are people in Authority (who should be setting an example...as we are taught from an early age!!) being shown leniency..
Take a motorway for example.. On a deserted well maintained motorway on a clear night 90mph would be perfectly safe in a modern family car..
The same stretch on a busy foggy day with torrential rain would not be safe at 40mph and if the car behind is trying to undertake and is tailgating you etc, to be honest NO speed would be safe..
A speed camera is only interested in one statistic not driving as a whole..
Why do you hear of dangerous driving, no insurance etc cases being dropped??? because it takes Police resources and Propper Policing to prosecute..
I pay my car tax income tax etc for real Policing that keeps a degree of safety on the roads whilst being fair and democratic..
I dont pay them for the provision of Roadside 'Cash Registers' and being told its for my own safety!
regards,
Nick
My theory is fairly simple...
What causes accidents and ultimately deaths is BAD DRIVING.. which includes Inappopriate use of speed, tailgating, driving reading a newspaper, driving when extremely tired, driving aggressively etc etc etc..
The only reason speed is targetted is its EASY for the politicians to make money from penalising people for it whilst using the 'Speed Kills!' motive to jusify it.
I drive every day in Rush hour and id be lucky to get within 20 mph of the speed limit (dual carriageway) and i see shocking driving.. And funnily enough alot of accidents...
I feel very strongly about this, the only way to make roads safer is for there to be a greater presence of Police on the roads inline with the far greater number of cars on the road and for Police to take how a vehicle is being driven in the circumstances where it is being driven..And not been driven by prosecution targets etc.
And if Speed is soo dangerous and the motorist such a criminal why are people in Authority (who should be setting an example...as we are taught from an early age!!) being shown leniency..
Take a motorway for example.. On a deserted well maintained motorway on a clear night 90mph would be perfectly safe in a modern family car..
The same stretch on a busy foggy day with torrential rain would not be safe at 40mph and if the car behind is trying to undertake and is tailgating you etc, to be honest NO speed would be safe..
A speed camera is only interested in one statistic not driving as a whole..
Why do you hear of dangerous driving, no insurance etc cases being dropped??? because it takes Police resources and Propper Policing to prosecute..
I pay my car tax income tax etc for real Policing that keeps a degree of safety on the roads whilst being fair and democratic..
I dont pay them for the provision of Roadside 'Cash Registers' and being told its for my own safety!
regards,
Nick
I agree with all that's been added so far. Teaching drivers to use their brains while driving would pay better dividends (in human life/values if not in immediate cash for the authorities). In Scotland we are seeing more TV advertising addressing health issues, so why not have short commercials showing how intelligent driving can be rewarding?
Shorts on the common ills such as tail-gating, lane-hogging, no-signal lane changing, dithering at junctions, (add your own), could only do good?
Shorts on the common ills such as tail-gating, lane-hogging, no-signal lane changing, dithering at junctions, (add your own), could only do good?
grahambell said:
Just a pity that Paul Smith of Safespeed isn't a 'celebrity' with his own TV series, as that seems to be the only way anybody in this toss pot country takes any notice of you.
What we need is a celebrity who feels passionately about and will take on the issue...!!
And would be willing to 'lock-horns' with a few people and not be desparately popular with certain people..
The obvious candidate at the moment would be Mr Clarkson but im not certain that these days he's not bowing a little to the pollitically correct!!
Hopefully something will be done about the strategies used to try and increase road safety! There's no question that a higher speed will be more dangerous if you have an accident however as has been said it isn't speed that causes accidents, it’s the lack of awareness of what the real dangers are and the lack of skill.
A stricter driving test surly couldn’t hurt, with more emphasis on common sense and driving skill. I also think that if they made cars less comfortable or at least if they gave you the realisation that you are travelling at the speed you are then this would make drivers more cautious and alert. With modern cars you can travel along the road at high speeds and feel like you are hardly moving. However in an old 205 you can be going 60 mph and feel like you are making good progress. Surly where speed is dangerous is where people are driving to get some where in less time rather than those wanting to go out a have a blast down their favourite country road. At least those driving fast for fun are generally doing it where it is quiet and when they are concentrating 100% on their driving.
Well this is just what I think. The way speeding has been targeted is just something that annoys me.
A stricter driving test surly couldn’t hurt, with more emphasis on common sense and driving skill. I also think that if they made cars less comfortable or at least if they gave you the realisation that you are travelling at the speed you are then this would make drivers more cautious and alert. With modern cars you can travel along the road at high speeds and feel like you are hardly moving. However in an old 205 you can be going 60 mph and feel like you are making good progress. Surly where speed is dangerous is where people are driving to get some where in less time rather than those wanting to go out a have a blast down their favourite country road. At least those driving fast for fun are generally doing it where it is quiet and when they are concentrating 100% on their driving.
Well this is just what I think. The way speeding has been targeted is just something that annoys me.
Fire99 said:
What we need is a celebrity who feels passionately about and will take on the issue...!!
And would be willing to 'lock-horns' with a few people and not be desparately popular with certain people..
The obvious candidate at the moment would be Mr Clarkson but im not certain that these days he's not bowing a little to the pollitically correct!!
Rowan Atkinson...are you listening?
Fire99 said:
The obvious candidate at the moment would be Mr Clarkson but im not certain that these days he's not bowing a little to the pollitically correct!!
Well, he's got his own show funded by the BBC...who are quite clearly at the beck and call of the current government - when did you last see/hear a balanced debate on this subject on the BBC??? I can only assume they've been given orders from on-high. So Mr C has to keep schtum or lose his lovely high-profile job!!!
Fire99 said:
The obvious candidate at the moment would be Mr Clarkson but im not certain that these days he's not bowing a little to the pollitically correct!!
From Auto Express' Website - it seems Clarkson IS interested.
At Full Chat
I bumped into Jeremy Clarkson, a former member of the Auto Express parish, at an awards bash for journalists the other night. Last time he was at a posh, strictly black tie, industry ceremony like this, he punched my ex-boss, former Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan, in the throat! Needless to say, when I heard that he wanted to talk to me, I was a bit nervous - especially as it was about my column in issue 847, which mentioned him.
If you remember, I sang the praises of Jamie Oliver for managing to get the clueless local and national politicians to listen up to the fact that our kids are getting fed rubbish at school. If a celebrity chef can massively raise the profile of an important, but relatively marginal, issue such as why kids should be eating green veg and not chips through a TV programme, I wondered what Jeremy could do with transport.
Luckily, rather than being mad, Clarkson said he would like to do such a show. What's more, his right-hand man, best friend and producer, Andy Wilman - yet another former Auto Express writer, incidentally - is keen to sell the idea to the BBC.
At this early stage of the game, Clarkson's initial idea is to go to a British town and sort out its roads, traffic, pedestrians, cyclists and parking. No, this is not an excuse for the UK's most famous, knowledgeable and outspoken motoring expert to steam in and do to non-car users what he did to Piers Morgan. Far from it. He, Wilman and me are all agreed that one of the first things we'd push for is variable speed limits. We'd also like speed cameras outside all schools. During class hours, they should adopt a zero tolerance approach, but have much more relaxed enforcement at night.
We'd like buses monitored and reduced in frequency if too polluting or empty. And we're keen to see money-motivated parking regulations removed and check out whether allowing drivers to turn left at red lights could help ease congestion. It would be Clarkson's job to make the suggestions, listen to the responses from planners, engineers and politicians, and fight his corner in a symbolic and entertaining battle on behalf of Britain's 50 million beleaguered car drivers and passengers.
Would your town be willing and able to open its doors to Clarkson and allow him to publicly express his forthright but expert views, and perhaps even implement a radical but safe traffic experiment or three? If so, write to me at the usual Auto Express address, explaining why your town is the right place for the show. We'll let you know if you are to receive a visit and enjoy nationwide - or even worldwide - attention by being publicly Clarksonised. Think of it as little more than a valuable, but totally free, consultation from somebody who's been around the world several times and seen first-hand just about every type of traffic management scheme on offer.
Mike Rutherford
not being funny about it, but the Safe Speed founder Paul Smith needs to comment to a much wider audience than PH, which as far as i can tell is the only 'organ' to actually ask him to comment.
as far as i can tell he's doing a pretty good job, as i'm sure the ABD etc. etc. are as well, but they never get mentioned, or are seen on TV, or in the papers do they?
what could be done to actually get this stuff across to Joe Bloggs - who clearly couldn't give a to55 if his 70 year old dad who's driven for 65 years without a conviction now faces a ban under totting up?
i don't have any solutions ( and i'm really not having a go! )- just asking the question.
it's time drivers ( who are a massive number in this country ) were no longer treated like ginger step-children and somebody actually spoke up for us, and for common sense.
lord knows that the RAC/AA now just bend over for the politically correct line to be inserted where the sun doesn't shine these days
as far as i can tell he's doing a pretty good job, as i'm sure the ABD etc. etc. are as well, but they never get mentioned, or are seen on TV, or in the papers do they?
what could be done to actually get this stuff across to Joe Bloggs - who clearly couldn't give a to55 if his 70 year old dad who's driven for 65 years without a conviction now faces a ban under totting up?
i don't have any solutions ( and i'm really not having a go! )- just asking the question.
it's time drivers ( who are a massive number in this country ) were no longer treated like ginger step-children and somebody actually spoke up for us, and for common sense.
lord knows that the RAC/AA now just bend over for the politically correct line to be inserted where the sun doesn't shine these days
Paul Smith was quoted in the Herald article about speeding today, quite a good report actually. Balance between nonsense quotes from some (see my rant in one for the Scot PH'rs) and the bit from Paul Smith and Neil Greg from the AA.
The Headline said it all "Police blitz on speeding fails to curb death toll on the roads"
The Headline said it all "Police blitz on speeding fails to curb death toll on the roads"
chimburt said:
not being funny about it, but the Safe Speed founder Paul Smith needs to comment to a much wider audience than PH, which as far as i can tell is the only 'organ' to actually ask him to comment.
as far as i can tell he's doing a pretty good job, as i'm sure the ABD etc. etc. are as well, but they never get mentioned, or are seen on TV, or in the papers do they?
what could be done to actually get this stuff across to Joe Bloggs - who clearly couldn't give a to55 if his 70 year old dad who's driven for 65 years without a conviction now faces a ban under totting up?
i don't have any solutions ( and i'm really not having a go! )- just asking the question.
it's time drivers ( who are a massive number in this country ) were no longer treated like ginger step-children and somebody actually spoke up for us, and for common sense.
lord knows that the RAC/AA now just bend over for the politically correct line to be inserted where the sun doesn't shine these days
Paul's not doing a bad job by himself, but it is obviously very difficult trying to get heard above all the funded pro camera (pro new labia) organisations. See here :- www.safespeed.org.uk/forum/viewforum.php?f=16
Cheers
Paul
I think that the biggest shame of the whole scamera thing is that the brain dead dangerous drivers are left alone to cause mayhem and death through their pig ignorant driving attitude and lack of driving consideration or conception of safety.
I recall as pimply 'yoof' I had a citroen visa gti, no slouch in its day and certainly capable of blatting speed limits and causing mayhem. What stopped me from entering an early grave was not an obsessive adherence to speed limits but the presence of the bib, which seemed to be on hand to witness my most extravagant driving manoeuvres.
It wasn't 3 points, or a fine that was really scary, it was the thought of having my driving ripped to shreds by (and I still believe its true today) the best drivers on the road.
On the occasions (and there were a few) when I was pulled and 'spoken to' by the bib they were generally very polite, not ott at all and above all, offered advice, criticism on what I was doing and the likely outcome of my actions if I continued. Don’t get me wrong, it was a bollocking, but to date I've not killed anyone, not had an accident and I have 3 points on my licence for...you guessed it! 36miles an hour in a 30 limit at 0800 on a Sunday morning on a deserted road!
I don't want to sound all 'in the good old days', because they weren't that long ago but if there is anyone out there in a decision making position or a position to influence please let the bib enforce the law, there is more to road safety than speed, in much the same way that there is more to Government than spin, a cheesy grin and a point blank refusal to admit when one is wrong!
I would guess that more could be done for road traffic safety, congestion and the environment if the Government scrapped the cameras, got a shed load more traffic bib and addressed the issue of the school run traffic jams that clog the arteries of every town every school day of the year
Apologies, rant over! Back to chill mode now...
I recall as pimply 'yoof' I had a citroen visa gti, no slouch in its day and certainly capable of blatting speed limits and causing mayhem. What stopped me from entering an early grave was not an obsessive adherence to speed limits but the presence of the bib, which seemed to be on hand to witness my most extravagant driving manoeuvres.
It wasn't 3 points, or a fine that was really scary, it was the thought of having my driving ripped to shreds by (and I still believe its true today) the best drivers on the road.
On the occasions (and there were a few) when I was pulled and 'spoken to' by the bib they were generally very polite, not ott at all and above all, offered advice, criticism on what I was doing and the likely outcome of my actions if I continued. Don’t get me wrong, it was a bollocking, but to date I've not killed anyone, not had an accident and I have 3 points on my licence for...you guessed it! 36miles an hour in a 30 limit at 0800 on a Sunday morning on a deserted road!
I don't want to sound all 'in the good old days', because they weren't that long ago but if there is anyone out there in a decision making position or a position to influence please let the bib enforce the law, there is more to road safety than speed, in much the same way that there is more to Government than spin, a cheesy grin and a point blank refusal to admit when one is wrong!
I would guess that more could be done for road traffic safety, congestion and the environment if the Government scrapped the cameras, got a shed load more traffic bib and addressed the issue of the school run traffic jams that clog the arteries of every town every school day of the year
Apologies, rant over! Back to chill mode now...
I Absolutely, wholeheartedly agree with the views expressed in this thread...
When are the Politicians and Police going to realise how much the respect and goodwill of the majority of the law-abiding UK public has been eroded by the totally myopic, draconian and imbalanced approach to road safety employed over the last few years by so-called 'Camera Safety Partnerships', and those driving the cash-cow that is speed-camera policy.
I have been stung doing 36 in a 30 limit and now find myself a considerably more nervous and ponderous driver as I am continually diverting my eyes from the road to keep watch on the speedo. That is not to say this is excusable; outside a school at 8.30am it would be irresponsible to exceed the posted limits, however using the skills and experience that I have developed as a responsible and safe driver I can deploy my judgement to determine if 36 mph on a wide open straight section of road at 7.30am is safe... The issue is APPROPRIATE use of speed and not using a blanket policy to define speed as the crucial factor in safe, responsible driving. What is needed is an independent body, unconnected with Gordon Brown/ Police/ CPS to audit the policies currently in place and to develop a policy of driver education that has no roots in the raising of revenue - which is after all the only purpose speed cameras actually serve... as witnessed by the figures which show road deaths rising as the scameras proliferate...
When the UK has the safest roads in Europe; why are we regressing and treating motorists like mass-murderers, the only thing being achieved is a rise in deaths and more money in Mr Browns coffers... someone needs to champion this cause - and quickly.
When are the Politicians and Police going to realise how much the respect and goodwill of the majority of the law-abiding UK public has been eroded by the totally myopic, draconian and imbalanced approach to road safety employed over the last few years by so-called 'Camera Safety Partnerships', and those driving the cash-cow that is speed-camera policy.
I have been stung doing 36 in a 30 limit and now find myself a considerably more nervous and ponderous driver as I am continually diverting my eyes from the road to keep watch on the speedo. That is not to say this is excusable; outside a school at 8.30am it would be irresponsible to exceed the posted limits, however using the skills and experience that I have developed as a responsible and safe driver I can deploy my judgement to determine if 36 mph on a wide open straight section of road at 7.30am is safe... The issue is APPROPRIATE use of speed and not using a blanket policy to define speed as the crucial factor in safe, responsible driving. What is needed is an independent body, unconnected with Gordon Brown/ Police/ CPS to audit the policies currently in place and to develop a policy of driver education that has no roots in the raising of revenue - which is after all the only purpose speed cameras actually serve... as witnessed by the figures which show road deaths rising as the scameras proliferate...
When the UK has the safest roads in Europe; why are we regressing and treating motorists like mass-murderers, the only thing being achieved is a rise in deaths and more money in Mr Browns coffers... someone needs to champion this cause - and quickly.
ROAD CASUALTIES GREAT BRITAIN 2003: MAIN RESULTS
The Department of Transport National Statistics on road casualties in Great Britain in 2003, which relate to casualties in accidents reported to the police.
Key results include:
• The number of deaths rose, by 2 per cent
from 3,431 in 2002 to 3,508 in 2003. 37,215 people were killed or seriously injured in 2003, 6 per cent fewer
than in 2002. There were 290,607 road casualties in Great Britain in 2003, 4 per cent fewer
than in 2002.
• Road traffic levels were 1 per cent higher than in 2002 and consequently the overall casualty rate per 100 million vehicle kilometres was 5 per cent lower
than in 2002.
• Child casualties fell by 8 per cent
. The number of children killed or seriously injured in 2003 was 4,100 (down 11 per cent
on 2002). Of those, 2,381 were pedestrians, 16 per cent down
on 2002. There were 171 child fatalities, 4 per cent fewer
than in 2002.
• Pedestrian casualties were 36,405 in 2003, 6 per cent lower
than 2002. There were 774 pedestrian deaths, about the same level
as 2002. Serious injuriesfell by 9 per cent
to 7,159.
• The number of pedal cyclists killed fell by 12 per cent
to 114. Total casualties among pedal cyclists fell marginally
in 2003 to 17,033.
• There were 28,411 two-wheeled motor vehicle user casualties in 2003, 58 more
than in 2002. The number of seriously injured increased by 1 per cent
to 6,959 but the number killed increased by 14 per cent
to 693.
• The number of deaths among car users in 2003 was 1,769, 1 per cent more
than in the previous year. The number of seriously injured fell by 9 per cent
to 15,522. Total casualties among car users were 188,342, 5 per cent lower
than 2002. Provisional traffic estimates show a 1 per cent rise in car and taxi traffic.
• There were 214,030 road accidents involving personal injury in 2003, 3 per cent less
than in 2002. Of these, 32,160 accidents involved death or serious injury
The Department of Transport National Statistics on road casualties in Great Britain in 2003, which relate to casualties in accidents reported to the police.
Key results include:
• The number of deaths rose, by 2 per cent
from 3,431 in 2002 to 3,508 in 2003. 37,215 people were killed or seriously injured in 2003, 6 per cent fewer
than in 2002. There were 290,607 road casualties in Great Britain in 2003, 4 per cent fewer
than in 2002.
• Road traffic levels were 1 per cent higher than in 2002 and consequently the overall casualty rate per 100 million vehicle kilometres was 5 per cent lower
than in 2002.
• Child casualties fell by 8 per cent
. The number of children killed or seriously injured in 2003 was 4,100 (down 11 per cent
on 2002). Of those, 2,381 were pedestrians, 16 per cent down
on 2002. There were 171 child fatalities, 4 per cent fewer
than in 2002.
• Pedestrian casualties were 36,405 in 2003, 6 per cent lower
than 2002. There were 774 pedestrian deaths, about the same level
as 2002. Serious injuriesfell by 9 per cent
to 7,159.
• The number of pedal cyclists killed fell by 12 per cent
to 114. Total casualties among pedal cyclists fell marginally
in 2003 to 17,033.
• There were 28,411 two-wheeled motor vehicle user casualties in 2003, 58 more
than in 2002. The number of seriously injured increased by 1 per cent
to 6,959 but the number killed increased by 14 per cent
to 693.
• The number of deaths among car users in 2003 was 1,769, 1 per cent more
than in the previous year. The number of seriously injured fell by 9 per cent
to 15,522. Total casualties among car users were 188,342, 5 per cent lower
than 2002. Provisional traffic estimates show a 1 per cent rise in car and taxi traffic.
• There were 214,030 road accidents involving personal injury in 2003, 3 per cent less
than in 2002. Of these, 32,160 accidents involved death or serious injury
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff