Speed camera trial results delayed
Discussion
Report in today's Daily Mail says the results of the third year of the failed camera trial in the eight areas has been delayed until after the June elections.
Hiding something? Probably.
They also say, under the banner, "Deaths rise in snap-happy county" that Essex has 90 cameras and tops the country for speeding fines at 213,861 in 2003.
Since the scheme started, deaths have risen by 25% to 116 in 2003.
Hiding something? Probably.
They also say, under the banner, "Deaths rise in snap-happy county" that Essex has 90 cameras and tops the country for speeding fines at 213,861 in 2003.
Since the scheme started, deaths have risen by 25% to 116 in 2003.
Tafia said:
The problem is, the answer to more deaths will be more speed cameras.
Aye; we are using the wrong medicine, let's double the dose.
Malfeasance in public office?
Can tell you that doubling doses of medicine can indeed be fatal!
Fatal at polling booth as Middle England revolts!
Fatal for driving licences!
Fatal for the economy!
Fatal for the job market!
Fatal for driving standards in this country as more and more Pavlov dogs will brake, become zombified by speed shown on dodgy inaccurate dashboard instrument, and more collisions could very well ensue as they will play spot the scam hazard instead of spot the real hazard!
The increased accident toll does seem to point this way however you wish to analyse and lay stress on certain aspects of those figures.
I don't know if this is the correct heading to mention it, but how are the deaths calculated? For example, our local evening paper reported the unfortunate death of a 75 year old driver a few months ago. No other car involved. Last week after a post mortem it reported that the old boy died of natural causes (heart attack) and died at the wheel before he crashed. So will this death be included in the statistics or not? And whilst we're at it, are drink/drug drive, stolen vehicle deaths etc included. How many deaths are caused by legal, honest, carefull people 'just having an accident'? A bit morbid I concede, but I do wonder.
No it won't. Accidents where a health cause - like the example of the heart attack, are not recorded as "road deaths" rather as "medical condition causing death".
Sorry to sound so blase about it but thats just the way it is day in day out.
Drink/drug driving, stolen cars - yes they will all go in to "road deaths". Mainly because driving error was involved rather than involuntary illness. I think involuntary is the key word...
I'll dig out the definition exactly at work tomorrow if you want the 100% version not just my memory.
>> Edited by Kurgis on Monday 17th May 20:36
Sorry to sound so blase about it but thats just the way it is day in day out.
Drink/drug driving, stolen cars - yes they will all go in to "road deaths". Mainly because driving error was involved rather than involuntary illness. I think involuntary is the key word...
I'll dig out the definition exactly at work tomorrow if you want the 100% version not just my memory.
>> Edited by Kurgis on Monday 17th May 20:36
Well..
Did a person drive drunk and hammered, hallucinate and run off the road,
or
Did he fall asleep at the wheel, and run off the road. Both scenarios the autopsy would show he died under the influence - thats all. Now what happened if he was over but driving carefully and a third party caused him/her to go off? You'd never know that either.
Its why there is a catch all "road deaths". It comes in for everything OTHER than medical condition IIRC.
To find out about the amount caused by criminal activity i.e. stolen cars, no license etc etc - only the Police have that full access for a good reason.
Did a person drive drunk and hammered, hallucinate and run off the road,
or
Did he fall asleep at the wheel, and run off the road. Both scenarios the autopsy would show he died under the influence - thats all. Now what happened if he was over but driving carefully and a third party caused him/her to go off? You'd never know that either.
Its why there is a catch all "road deaths". It comes in for everything OTHER than medical condition IIRC.
To find out about the amount caused by criminal activity i.e. stolen cars, no license etc etc - only the Police have that full access for a good reason.
Tabs said:
Thanks for the prompt reply, was just curious, but if the drink/drugs stolens etc were excluded, I wonder what the true figure would be. Perhaps there is no way of knowing (or 'they' don't want us to know)
They know all right, and it's sod all.
Regular column by Eric Dymock in Scotland on Sunday, 15/2/04, back page of the business section by Eric Dymock
The article contains this, quoting Paul Garvin,
"Having looked at the accident statistics in this area, we find that if you break down the 1,900 collisions we have each year, only 3% involve cars exceeding the speed limit. You then need to look at the causes of these 60 accidents. Speed may be a factor, but the actual cause is invariably drink-driving or drug-driving. We ought to be looking at these."
JA said:
"Having looked at the accident statistics in this area, we find that if you break down the 1,900 collisions we have each year, only 3% involve cars exceeding the speed limit.
Now is that the good ol excessive speed local authority code or not? If so that will involve a lot of excessive speed for conditions - not the speed limit the road is at..
If its Police evidence that will be different.
Kurgis said:
Now is that the good ol excessive speed local authority code or not? If so that will involve a lot of excessive speed for conditions - not the speed limit the road is at..
If its Police evidence that will be different.
The 3% ties in with the figure for excess speed outwith a speed limit which was attributed to CC Garvin in a quote in The Sunday Times last Autumn.
The crux of the quote, of course, is
said:
<...>but the actual cause is invariably drink-driving or drug-driving.
We don't have a figure for 'invariably', however, it must be pretty high in % terms. I know I wouldn't use that word 'til we were well into the 90%s. So let's be conservative, let's say 66%.
That would mean that only 1% of collisions involve excessive speed outwith a limit excluding drink-driving or drug-driving.
>> Edited by jeffreyarcher on Tuesday 18th May 00:26
>> Edited by jeffreyarcher on Tuesday 18th May 00:27
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff