Letter sent to Charities Commision re: BRAKE...
Discussion
**Cheers for the alteration to the title mods** 
Dear Sirs,
I never believed that I would have to "complain" about a charity before.
Mary Williams of the road charity "BRAKE" has digusted many people with her strange and obssesive views on road safety but this has now gone too far.
I heard on the radio today that she is backing a scheme to take youngsters to the morgue in order to see "horrific accidents caused by speeding". Let me tell you right now that if my children were ever told to go along to a morgue for anything like this then Mary would be in front of the judges in no time at all.
This is sick and despicable and a gross violation of whomevers loved ones may have died. I know I wouldn't like a bunch of school children led by a sadistic scaremongering woman poking around my family, especially after such a violent death.
I am calling for her to have her charity registration removed and her policies to be looked by someone in authority. She is using the front of a charity to impose her own warped (and thankfully rare) view onto people and this is simply not on.
Yours,
Gh0st
>>> Edited by gh0st on Thursday 6th May 14:06
>>> Edited by gh0st on Thursday 6th May 14:45
Dear Sirs,
I never believed that I would have to "complain" about a charity before.
Mary Williams of the road charity "BRAKE" has digusted many people with her strange and obssesive views on road safety but this has now gone too far.
I heard on the radio today that she is backing a scheme to take youngsters to the morgue in order to see "horrific accidents caused by speeding". Let me tell you right now that if my children were ever told to go along to a morgue for anything like this then Mary would be in front of the judges in no time at all.
This is sick and despicable and a gross violation of whomevers loved ones may have died. I know I wouldn't like a bunch of school children led by a sadistic scaremongering woman poking around my family, especially after such a violent death.
I am calling for her to have her charity registration removed and her policies to be looked by someone in authority. She is using the front of a charity to impose her own warped (and thankfully rare) view onto people and this is simply not on.
Yours,
Gh0st
>>> Edited by gh0st on Thursday 6th May 14:06
>>> Edited by gh0st on Thursday 6th May 14:45
Whilst your points are valid, calling her 'a sadistic warmongering woman' might just detract their attention from the very valid arguement that you put forward.
Making it seem like a personal attack might just lose some of the validity and, no doubt at some stage, attract a response of we are having a go at her rather than the obscene images of showing children mangled or badly damaged corpses.
Otherwise - well done and respect!
Making it seem like a personal attack might just lose some of the validity and, no doubt at some stage, attract a response of we are having a go at her rather than the obscene images of showing children mangled or badly damaged corpses.
Otherwise - well done and respect!
Davel said:
Whilst your points are valid, calling her 'a sadistic warmongering woman' might just detract their attention from the very valid arguement that you put forward.
Making it seem like a personal attack might just lose some of the validity and, no doubt at some stage, attract a response of we are having a go at her rather than the obscene images of showing children mangled or badly damaged corpses.
Otherwise - well done and respect!
Yeah upon reading it again I agree. Will have to be more careful next time. Still true through
gh0st said:
**Cheers for the alteration to the title mods**
Dear Sirs,
I never believed that I would have to "complain" about a charity before.
Mary Williams of the road charity "BRAKE" has digusted many people with her strange and obssesive views on road safety but this has now gone too far.
I heard on the radio today that she is backing a scheme to take youngsters to the morgue in order to see "horrific accidents caused by speeding". Let me tell you right now that if my children were ever told to go along to a morgue for anything like this then Mary would be in front of the judges in no time at all.
This is sick and despicable and a gross violation of whomevers loved ones may have died. I know I wouldn't like a bunch of school children led by a sadistic scaremongering woman poking around my family, especially after such a violent death.
I am calling for her to have her charity registration removed and her policies to be looked by someone in authority. She is using the front of a charity to impose her own warped (and thankfully rare) view onto people and this is simply not on.
Yours,
Gh0st
>>> Edited by gh0st on Thursday 6th May 14:06
>>> Edited by gh0st on Thursday 6th May 14:45
Well done Sir,
Brake website is inviting comments on their work.
www.brake.org.uk/
I fear that you'll be banging your head against a wall on this one. Just had a look at the BRAKE website and take this for example:
"Survey of 11-14 year olds
A Brake survey of young people in schools in inner cities, released in Road Safety Week, found extensive proof of risk taking when crossing roads.
Of the 4,000 inner-city kids questioned, shockingly, [B]25% of children admitted to having been pushed into the road by a friend, 49% say they cross the road while texting[/B] and yet only 13% of children always wear reflectors and 15% wear cycle helmets.
These findings demonstrate the fact that more concerted effort needs to be made by the government through money for local authorities to educate children when they go to secondary school that road safety is not ‘just for babies’ but for older children too. Deaths and injuries of children peak in this older age range.
These findings also send a clear message to drivers: slow down. Drivers cannot be complacent as children do make mistakes when crossing the road but no child deserves to die. Cutting drivers speeds will increase reaction times and reduce the force of the impact if a child does get knocked down."
Right on
So when a driver 'makes a mistake' when driving they deserve a fine and points on their licence, or a ban?
Perhaps there should be pedestrian licences that could be endorsed and carry hefty penalties for 'Walking without due care and attention'?
I'm not endorsing driving fast in a built up areas especially when kids are about (usually scutter ones who think playing football in the street is fine and dandy), but this is another example of how the stats are used to distort the speed issue.
"Survey of 11-14 year olds
A Brake survey of young people in schools in inner cities, released in Road Safety Week, found extensive proof of risk taking when crossing roads.
Of the 4,000 inner-city kids questioned, shockingly, [B]25% of children admitted to having been pushed into the road by a friend, 49% say they cross the road while texting[/B] and yet only 13% of children always wear reflectors and 15% wear cycle helmets.
These findings demonstrate the fact that more concerted effort needs to be made by the government through money for local authorities to educate children when they go to secondary school that road safety is not ‘just for babies’ but for older children too. Deaths and injuries of children peak in this older age range.
These findings also send a clear message to drivers: slow down. Drivers cannot be complacent as children do make mistakes when crossing the road but no child deserves to die. Cutting drivers speeds will increase reaction times and reduce the force of the impact if a child does get knocked down."
Right on
So when a driver 'makes a mistake' when driving they deserve a fine and points on their licence, or a ban?
Perhaps there should be pedestrian licences that could be endorsed and carry hefty penalties for 'Walking without due care and attention'?
I'm not endorsing driving fast in a built up areas especially when kids are about (usually scutter ones who think playing football in the street is fine and dandy), but this is another example of how the stats are used to distort the speed issue.
Tafia said:
Well done Sir,
Brake website is inviting comments on their work.
www.brake.org.uk/
mmmm Greenflag a supporter... oh well i'll not be using them then...
I do however think as an organisation Brake probably do have some good ideas, just ruined by the insanity of their figurehead... who has to resort to personal attacks rather than debate issues...
BRAKE said:Couldn't agree more, educate the kids that cars drive on roads and if they're in the middle of a road, they could get hurt. Definitely needs to be done more.
Of the 4,000 inner-city kids questioned, shockingly, [B]25% of children admitted to having been pushed into the road by a friend, 49% say they cross the road while texting[/B] and yet only 13% of children always wear reflectors and 15% wear cycle helmets.
These findings demonstrate the fact that more concerted effort needs to be made by the government through money for local authorities to educate children when they go to secondary school that road safety is not ‘just for babies’ but for older children too. Deaths and injuries of children peak in this older age range.These findings also send a clear message to drivers: slow down. Drivers cannot be complacent as children do make mistakes when crossing the road but no child deserves to die. Cutting drivers speeds will increase reaction times and reduce the force of the impact if a child does get knocked down.
BRAKE also said:OK, so if a kid wanders into the middle of the road staring into space, it's the drivers fault that thelittle darling gets hurt? If I did 90 down a city centre sidewalk and knocked someone over, is it their fault that my sweet innocent car is now all dented because they didn't get out of the way in time? They obviously weren't paying attention...
These findings also send a clear message to drivers: slow down. Drivers cannot be complacent as children do make mistakes when crossing the road but no child deserves to die. Cutting drivers speeds will increase reaction times and reduce the force of the impact if a child does get knocked down.
Roads are for cars, pavements are for pedestrians. Doesn't sound that complicated to me.This sort of tactic (taking children to mortuaries) has been used (quite successfully, I believe) in the USA, particularly in California.
As I understand it though, over there, it is done with the permission of next of kin of the deceased person, who has been killed in a collision where alcohol was the primary causation.
Additionally, the people taken to the mortuary are people convicted of drink driving/DUI offences. It is part of a programme aimed at reducing alcohol related road deaths, and attendance on this programme can reduce an offender's sentence/ban. There is a similar thing in England and Wales, where successful particpants receive a quarter reduction in their period of disqualification.
Just to play Devil's advocate, BRAKE help provide us (BiB) with very useful information packs for next of kin of people killed in road collisions. You'll be pleased to know that the info contained therein doesn't have any sort of secret agenda, it's more general information on the investigation, Courts and inquests.
Haven't heard/seen the full details of the BRAKE morgue plan, so wouldn't really like to comment on that.
As I understand it though, over there, it is done with the permission of next of kin of the deceased person, who has been killed in a collision where alcohol was the primary causation.
Additionally, the people taken to the mortuary are people convicted of drink driving/DUI offences. It is part of a programme aimed at reducing alcohol related road deaths, and attendance on this programme can reduce an offender's sentence/ban. There is a similar thing in England and Wales, where successful particpants receive a quarter reduction in their period of disqualification.
Just to play Devil's advocate, BRAKE help provide us (BiB) with very useful information packs for next of kin of people killed in road collisions. You'll be pleased to know that the info contained therein doesn't have any sort of secret agenda, it's more general information on the investigation, Courts and inquests.
Haven't heard/seen the full details of the BRAKE morgue plan, so wouldn't really like to comment on that.
BRAKE said:It was all going so well up until that point, I feel. I was nodding in agreement up to that point.
These findings also send a clear message to drivers: slow down. Drivers cannot be complacent as children do make mistakes when crossing the road but no child deserves to die. Cutting drivers speeds will increase reaction times and reduce the force of the impact if a child does get knocked down.
However, I don't agree that the findings "send a clear message to drivers: slow down". I feel that the findings send a clear message to pedestrians to LOOK OUT FOR CARS when crossing the road because they could kill you if they hit you
What ever happened to the Green Cross Code, road safety, Cycling Proficiency, etc.?
Yes, drivers do need to watch out for pedestrians. Of course they do. But pedestrians also need to look out for cars.
The sooner we have a specific offense for Jay Walking the better.
Did you know that in Singapore it is illegal to cross the road unless it is at a designated crossing place and the "Walk" sign is illuminated? Even if there is no traffic in either direction? Ok, a bit extreme, but they certainly have the right idea about segregating traffic and pedestrians.
WMHV70 said:
This sort of tactic (taking children to mortuaries) has been used (quite successfully, I believe) in the USA, particularly in California.
As I understand it though, over there, it is done with the permission of next of kin of the deceased person, who has been killed in a collision where alcohol was the primary causation.
Additionally, the people taken to the mortuary are people convicted of drink driving/DUI offences. It is part of a programme aimed at reducing alcohol related road deaths, and attendance on this programme can reduce an offender's sentence/ban. There is a similar thing in England and Wales, where successful particpants receive a quarter reduction in their period of disqualification.
Just to play Devil's advocate, BRAKE help provide us (BiB) with very useful information packs for next of kin of people killed in road collisions. You'll be pleased to know that the info contained therein doesn't have any sort of secret agenda, it's more general information on the investigation, Courts and inquests.
Haven't heard/seen the full details of the BRAKE morgue plan, so wouldn't really like to comment on that.
There is difference between taking guilty people to visit a morgue to see consequences of their dangerous action and adding to their guilty consciences and taking youngsters to a morgue as voyeurs on pretext of "educating them to see the so-called light!"
Personally - I would not wish anyone other than family to see my scars - and I was very lucky - only visible in the bathroom and bedroom!
Voyeuristic permission certainly would not be granted by this family. BRAKE does do a lot of constructive work in road safety promotion - but it keep to that: campaigning for better education, vehicle maintenance and stricter control of repair services - as it did very well initially. It should stop the highly emotive, unhelpful, attention seeking drivel it is currently spouting, and focus on decent Green Cross and driver education campaigns. That promotes road safety, and not headline grabbing garbage!
Germany (muesli munching Pfalz) has just introduced system using the actual CCTV footage of the speeding car on the A/bahn. The speeder does get fined and penalised - but he gets to play the "what if" game using footage of his own car speeding along the offending stretch!
They have put lots of nasty visual effects as possible outcomes! Only introduced in March - but quite naturally they claim "it works". As if they have sufficient data to prove this yet! But this is a more logical approach than Aunty Mary's bid for yet more limelight! Given that my message on the other BRAKE thread (which has now been closed) got removed (I really don't know why), (the nanny state getting a grip?) I will be even more careful...
The woman from BRAKE seems to be getting a lot of air time for her somewhat extreme and emotive views for what is, in fact, a minority killer in this country. Perhaps she should divert her attentions to smoking, cardio vascular events, alcohol...and so on, all of which are preventable for the want of education, pre-screening etc and which kill far more people.
Perhaps the woman from BRAKE is unwittingly being used / allowed to carry on by those in power for their own ends....
The woman from BRAKE seems to be getting a lot of air time for her somewhat extreme and emotive views for what is, in fact, a minority killer in this country. Perhaps she should divert her attentions to smoking, cardio vascular events, alcohol...and so on, all of which are preventable for the want of education, pre-screening etc and which kill far more people.
Perhaps the woman from BRAKE is unwittingly being used / allowed to carry on by those in power for their own ends....
James,
I have a particular nervousness regarding comments about Mary Williams. There was a thread on here before Christmas in which some comments were made which were seized upon to gain publicity in the Times, Scotsman, The Spectator, the BBC, GMTV and elsewhere.
Whilst PH enjoyed plenty of extra traffic thanks to the publicity, it's the sort of headache I could do without.
Hence my nervousness regarding anything that Brake's PR dept might choose to pounce on again.
Ta,
Ted
I have a particular nervousness regarding comments about Mary Williams. There was a thread on here before Christmas in which some comments were made which were seized upon to gain publicity in the Times, Scotsman, The Spectator, the BBC, GMTV and elsewhere.
Whilst PH enjoyed plenty of extra traffic thanks to the publicity, it's the sort of headache I could do without.
Hence my nervousness regarding anything that Brake's PR dept might choose to pounce on again.
Ta,
Ted
comments towards her instead.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff