Idiotic Claim from Warwickshire SCP

[GregE240]

In short, the Chair of the above was in our local rag bleating on about how they have the support of the "majority" of the residents of Warwickshire. I use quotes because they were his words, not mine.

I attach a link to our local paper a week later, with a letter from a suitably intelligent resident who took umbrage to this pack of whoppers .

First time I've had a letter published, apart from the school magazine asking for the then-new "King Size" varieties of chocolate bar to be stocked by the tuck shop

Link: http://80.194.82.59/observerstandard/
"Most People Regard Speed Cameras as Another Tax"

Greg
(Available for Weddings and Bar Mitzvahs)

EDITED to correct link - thanks!

Edited by GregE240 on Tuesday 22 August 09:23

[xiphias]

Link no worky (I even removed the space).

[BO55 VXR]

Try this

Edited by BO55 VXR on Monday 21st August 20:14

[deeps]

Well done Greg, although you're not the only one to respond, take a look at this form Peter Ward...

www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=296975&f=10&h=0

[Peter Ward]

You can't perform a survey of the complete population, because unless it's mandatory some will fail to respond. You therefore have to take a subset. Of about 1000 sent out, 247 responded and that's not a bad response rate.

The survey itself seemed to have a reasonable set of questions. They weren't of the "would you prefer to kill a child or reduce your speed?" variety. The partnership happliy provided the raw results to me (see my comments in my referenced thread).

I do feel that those surveyed and/or responding may not have been representative of the population. But I don't think it's fair to blame the partnership for not collecting 500,000 responses.

On the wider picture, of course, it's obvious that the government is getting its "speed kills, cameras are the answer" message to at least a large minority of the population. This is scary. The challenge is to keep the minority as small as possible until a more enlightened view prevails in government and truth is victorious. That could be some time.....

[cliffe_mafia]

Peter Ward said:

On the wider picture, of course, it's obvious that the government is getting its "speed kills, cameras are the answer" message to at least a large minority of the population.

I get the impression that the majority of the minority you mention are non-drivers who see a car zooming passed at 40 when it is really tootling along at 25 or those holier than though (sp) drivers who think they don't speed but will be converted once a ticket hits the mat.

Edited by cliffe_mafia on Tuesday 22 August 09:14

[dave_sw1]

good news on the new chiropractor though eh?

[puggit]

, I haven't made a will!

[negative creep]

I'd also imagine that thesetype of forms aremoreliekly to be filled in by nimbys

[who me ?]

From another Warks paper - Questionaires posted -1002 - returned 247 - 37% of respondants "said the increase in speed cameras had made them less likely to speed" - 17% said they slowed down for cameras, (Now when i was at school , 37+17= 54% ) , nothing in this article to say people backed cameras, or is that part of the Grimm tale of road safety?


More figures - 75% (approx) of people did not reply - of those replying - 54% either did not say that cameras were a good thing - only that they slowed down for them/slowed down.

Pity that Warks only give out the bits that make their case ---the prize example of their greed is the cameras on the A45 - Still at Ryton , after extensive/expensive work to make the junction safer --something that the cameras failed to do.
Another site - Redgate ---Warks CC and Leics CC are now co-operating to make this junction safer - so what did the cameras do (apart from creating large skid marks on the road)