Dorset scameras reply...sort of!

[deltaf]

I sent them this a few days ago, and thus they have replied........


(original mail to them as follows)
Hi, ive just been browsing through your site and have
noticed the following anomalies.

Home page:"
Speed is the major cause of collisions on our roads."

Here you state that its "the major cause".
How is that possible? TRL323 reports speed as a causal
factor at 7%, that means that 93% of accidents are'nt
caused by speed.
West midlands accident review (compiled by the police
authority) states 4% of accidents speed related (not
caused) from years 1999 thru 2002....
Thats hardly a majority, IS IT?
How do you explain the anomaly? Please dont refer to
your disclaimer for faulty info, as if you do it will
show you to be the alternative part of my heading, and
in any case, id expect you to at least verify info
before posting it on your site.

Also on the home page:" Statistics show lives are
saved by cameras"

Really? Hows about this for a statistic: "the total
number of road accidents across the county has
actually risen from 4,665 to 4,721, with seven more
lives lost."(source Daily Echo)

So speed cameras save lives do they? Proof, based on
the above would seem somewhat lacking, wouldnt you
say?
In fact its your "safety" cameras and your failed
policies that have claimed the lives of the extra
seven people!
Hows it feel to be responsible for seven extra deaths
because of your incompetent stance on road safety?

Also taken from your site:

Fundamental principles
Honesty and openness - Partnership aims and objectives
will be communicated openly with all internal and
external audiences. The geographical focus of our
efforts will be communicated in a variety of media
including radio, internet technology, the press, and
by our attending events.

In the event of NO coherent responses from yourselves
on the poits ive raised, i shall disclose all
correspondence to the press and the public will then
pass their own judgements on you. I shall wait 7
calendar days from today before doing so in order to
give you time to respond.

Kindest regards

and their reply to me:------->

: ".DSCP" Add to Address Book
To: >
Subject: RE: Anomalies or just lies?
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 15:43:42 -0000




Dear

My name is Pat Garrett I'm the Project Manager for the Dorset Safety
Camera
Partnership. When I know who you are I will respond to your questions.

Regards

Pat Garrett
Project Manager
DSCP

-----Original Message-----
From:
Sent: 08 December 2003 15:11
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Anomalies or just lies?

And my final to date:------>

I see that you attempt to divert from answering any of my points by raising a dubious one of your own.

What function would my identification serve?
Maybe youll put me on some "hitlist" perchance? Or possibly some list of denial of information?
I reserve the right to keep my anonymity, as you do not state on your site that anonymous enquiries will not be answered.

I refer you to this, which IS on your site:
Fundamental principles
Honesty and openness - Partnership aims and objectives
will be communicated openly with all internal and
external audiences.

So, how bout it?
Will you communicate openly and honestly with me on the points i raised?

Kindest Regards.

Think theyll go for it? Nah neither do i!

[james_j]

Sounds like a stalling tactic to me - almost as if they have no answer!.

Perhaps you should make up a name - John Smith sound OK?

[deltaf]

How bout Charles U. Farley? (chuck U farley).

[buckshee]

alternatively, Hugh Janus, or even Mike Hunt?

[dontlift]

How about "A Member of the public whos Taxes pay your wages you jumped up little w*nker now anser the questions"

I would seriously look at forwarding his response to perfectly reasonable questions to your MP or at the very least to the tory party


>> Edited by dontlift on Friday 12th December 21:38

[puggit]

Ask him if he's caught Billy the Kid yet?