Death by Camera
Discussion
www.expressandstar.com/artman/publish/article_58209.php
Driver, 16, dies as car hits speed camera
May 8, 2004, 11:25
A 16-year-old died when he lost control of his high-powered car and hit a speed camera in Great Barr today. Police say the car was not stolen.
The BMW first struck a lamp post on the central reservation in Newton Road before hitting the camera. No other vehicle was involved.
Firefighters were called to rescue the trapped victim while paramedics tried to revive him but he was pronounced dead at the scene.
Police have not yet said how the victim, who has not been named but was from Great Barr, came to be driving the vehicle.
The accident happened just before 2.40am.
A reconstruction has been carried out and the vehicle taken away for forensic tests. Police press officer Sarah Astbury said officers would examine CCTV foot-age from the speed camera.
The victim was driving towards Scott Arms when the accident happened near Grove Vale Avenue, waking residents who today spoke of their shock.
Householder Bridget Bor-gazzi said: "There are al-ways accidents here. The traffic gets up to a very high speed. It is a very bad road."
Another resident, who did not wish to be named, said: "I couldn't believe what had happened."
Councillor Martyn Smith, who lives nearby, said: "This is a great shame. People do drive too fast along the road, it is a well known fact."
=======================
And if the camera had not been there?
Best Regards,
Paul Smith
Safe Speed
www.safespeed.org.uk
Driver, 16, dies as car hits speed camera
May 8, 2004, 11:25
A 16-year-old died when he lost control of his high-powered car and hit a speed camera in Great Barr today. Police say the car was not stolen.
The BMW first struck a lamp post on the central reservation in Newton Road before hitting the camera. No other vehicle was involved.
Firefighters were called to rescue the trapped victim while paramedics tried to revive him but he was pronounced dead at the scene.
Police have not yet said how the victim, who has not been named but was from Great Barr, came to be driving the vehicle.
The accident happened just before 2.40am.
A reconstruction has been carried out and the vehicle taken away for forensic tests. Police press officer Sarah Astbury said officers would examine CCTV foot-age from the speed camera.
The victim was driving towards Scott Arms when the accident happened near Grove Vale Avenue, waking residents who today spoke of their shock.
Householder Bridget Bor-gazzi said: "There are al-ways accidents here. The traffic gets up to a very high speed. It is a very bad road."
Another resident, who did not wish to be named, said: "I couldn't believe what had happened."
Councillor Martyn Smith, who lives nearby, said: "This is a great shame. People do drive too fast along the road, it is a well known fact."
=======================
And if the camera had not been there?
Best Regards,
Paul Smith
Safe Speed
www.safespeed.org.uk
>>Councillor Martyn Smith, who lives nearby, said: "This is a great shame. People do drive too fast along the road, it is a well known fact." <<
Obviously the Safety Camera was not safe and didn't do the job it was intended to do.
I bet the lad was joyriding in his dads/mums motor.
I suppose the local PLOD will be lining up local school children to view the poor lads body down at the morque!
Obviously the Safety Camera was not safe and didn't do the job it was intended to do.
I bet the lad was joyriding in his dads/mums motor.
I suppose the local PLOD will be lining up local school children to view the poor lads body down at the morque!
victormeldrew said:
Steady on, slightly bad taste there. Someone has died, and they had family. Show some respect please.
Ok it's a tradegy and I'm sorry. However it's the Police and BRAKE et al who need to show respect to the victims of RTA's And not make them a sideshow for school kids.
I'll shut up now.
>> Edited by volvod5_dude on Saturday 8th May 12:54
victormeldrew said:
Paul - a cheap shot, not in anyones best interests.
Me? I'm just the messenger. Don't shoot me.
Anyway, I believe that the unintended consequences of speed cameras are killing thousands. It isn't common to be able to point the finger directly, but when we can we must. Lives depend on it.
Best Regards,
Paul Smith
Safe Speed
www.safespeed.org.uk
Whoa....slow down folks.
The accident has just happened and under investigation that will take some time to determine the actual cause (if possible). We could say, like Mr Smith, if he has been travelling slower, if the owner had locked the car, if the lad had gone to bed early it would not have happened.
Lets wait shall we, bad enough a young lad has lost his life.....
DVD
The accident has just happened and under investigation that will take some time to determine the actual cause (if possible). We could say, like Mr Smith, if he has been travelling slower, if the owner had locked the car, if the lad had gone to bed early it would not have happened.
Lets wait shall we, bad enough a young lad has lost his life.....
DVD
I'd also call in to question the use of the speed camera in the first place.
2 accounts speak of
(A) a very bad road
(b) high speed drivers
Would it not have been better to apply traffic calming and road improvements to reduce the speed, instead of cashing in on it instead?
as Ted pointed out too, 16 years old and hoofing round in a beemer, when in posession of the FULL facts, i'd love to be able to lay some of the blame at the feet of the parents!
2 accounts speak of
(A) a very bad road
(b) high speed drivers
Would it not have been better to apply traffic calming and road improvements to reduce the speed, instead of cashing in on it instead?
as Ted pointed out too, 16 years old and hoofing round in a beemer, when in posession of the FULL facts, i'd love to be able to lay some of the blame at the feet of the parents!
victormeldrew said:
volvod5_dude - Steady on, slightly bad taste there. Someone has died, and they had family. Show some respect please.
Paul - a cheap shot, not in anyones best interests.
>> Edited by victormeldrew on Saturday 8th May 12:52
I'll 2nd that, and add:
And if the camera had not been there?
What has that got to do with anything? to suggest that if it wasnt there he wouldnt have hit it is stupid in the extreme.
Underage driver and its a tragedy, but it has nowt to do with speed cameras in any way or form, the fact he actually hit a camera is coincidental only and not relevant to anything. Very poor and typical 'media think of a link' journalism. Why not mention the cars top speed and some other un-connected facts about previous tragedies in the family too for extra effect.
>> Edited by Balmoral Green on Saturday 8th May 17:27
I think we should take down all the road signs, dangerous things they are,
and the traffic lights,
bridges - people keep crashing into them too,
and safety barriers... kill loads of people a year, they do,
lamp posts,
walls, fences, trees...
sorry but I don't see the relevance that it happened to be a speed camera this time.
and the traffic lights,
bridges - people keep crashing into them too,
and safety barriers... kill loads of people a year, they do,
lamp posts,
walls, fences, trees...
sorry but I don't see the relevance that it happened to be a speed camera this time.
tvrgit said:
I think we should take down all the road signs, dangerous things they are,
and the traffic lights,
bridges - people keep crashing into them too,
and safety barriers... kill loads of people a year, they do,
lamp posts,
walls, fences, trees...
sorry but I don't see the relevance that it happened to be a speed camera this time.
Disagree. The more of this roadside crap that gets put up, the higher the incidence of hitting one of them.
Go flying along a tree lined boulevard and lose it and youll see what i mean.
Theres far too much in the way of roadside junk as it is, we dont need more we need less.
And yes, if the camera wasnt there, he wouldnt have hit it, but it was and he did.
Sorry, disagree again 
None of the stuff I mentioned is "crap" - it's all there for a good reason. I agree there is a load of other roadside crap though, as well. Fair point.
Nevertheless, without knowing the circumstances of the accident, I think it's a "cheap shot" to say the camera in this case, cost a life. I don't think it advances the cause against them any more than "think of the children"ism does for them.
Just my opinion.
None of the stuff I mentioned is "crap" - it's all there for a good reason. I agree there is a load of other roadside crap though, as well. Fair point.
Nevertheless, without knowing the circumstances of the accident, I think it's a "cheap shot" to say the camera in this case, cost a life. I don't think it advances the cause against them any more than "think of the children"ism does for them.
Just my opinion.
I agree with tvrgit. Although it is true that the more cameras erected at the roadside, the more chance you have of hitting one, I think this is a bit of a bad time to criticize the exact positioning of a particular speed camera.
It could have been anything that the car hit.
Anyway, a young man has died, and that is the most important issue here, speed camera or no speed camera.
It could have been anything that the car hit.
Anyway, a young man has died, and that is the most important issue here, speed camera or no speed camera.
Deltaf - the kid hit a lamppost first if you read the article. For all you or I know he was killed by the first impact, and its completely tasteless to suggest to hijack a death, whatever the cause, to score at best minimal points in the speed camera argument. I can't see it being much consolation to his parents.
Its pretty disgusting that there's an orderly queue to post condolances when a PH'er meets a sticky end behind the wheel, but all this particular human life warrants is use as a pawn in, well
it, what amounts to a pretty selfish and self serving argument at times - and believe me this is one of those times.
Get some perspective on the speed camera issue, please. And as I asked before, show some respect.
Its pretty disgusting that there's an orderly queue to post condolances when a PH'er meets a sticky end behind the wheel, but all this particular human life warrants is use as a pawn in, well
it, what amounts to a pretty selfish and self serving argument at times - and believe me this is one of those times. Get some perspective on the speed camera issue, please. And as I asked before, show some respect.
The issue of unncessary road furniture, or unprotected road furniture, is quite serious, and this would appear to be another sad case. In this case it was a camera, which makes it rather ironic.
On the A68, famous for its completely overdone cameras, you do have an additional observational clue - every camera has a short length of armco before/beside it. Where you do need fixed roadside furniture, this approach can at least prevent turning a minor accident into a major one - and not just for cameras.
You do see other examples the other way round though - lamp posts installed on the wrong side of the armco, etc.
Hitting roadside furniture is serious for a car, but worse for bikers too.
On the A68, famous for its completely overdone cameras, you do have an additional observational clue - every camera has a short length of armco before/beside it. Where you do need fixed roadside furniture, this approach can at least prevent turning a minor accident into a major one - and not just for cameras.
You do see other examples the other way round though - lamp posts installed on the wrong side of the armco, etc.
Hitting roadside furniture is serious for a car, but worse for bikers too.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff