75,264 drivers caught by Arrive Alive in N Wales in 2005
Discussion
Daily Post reports as per thread title here.
http://icnorthwales.icnetwork.co.uk/news/regionalnew
If link fails try main IC North Wales pages here http://icnorthwales.icnetwork.co.uk/news/regionalnew
then click on more news on page 3
Arrive Alive leader says he hopes to achieve "even better figures next year"
Does this mean he wants more people to break speed limits? How very odd if that is true. Should he not be aiming at zero convictions?
Just as well that breaking a speed limit is not even on the STATS 19 form for accident reporting.
When N Wales police submitted figures to the Transport Research Laboratory, they said excessive speed for the conditions ( not the same as breaking a limit, was a factor in just 8.3% of crashes.
http://icnorthwales.icnetwork.co.uk/news/regionalnew
If link fails try main IC North Wales pages here http://icnorthwales.icnetwork.co.uk/news/regionalnew
then click on more news on page 3
Arrive Alive leader says he hopes to achieve "even better figures next year"
Does this mean he wants more people to break speed limits? How very odd if that is true. Should he not be aiming at zero convictions?
Just as well that breaking a speed limit is not even on the STATS 19 form for accident reporting.
When N Wales police submitted figures to the Transport Research Laboratory, they said excessive speed for the conditions ( not the same as breaking a limit, was a factor in just 8.3% of crashes.
Well 75264 is a very interesting number. I'd like to see another two numbers too, they should be easily available from this big brother insurance database we're now on:
1. The average number of accidents over the past 5 years those with at least one speeding conviction on their licence have had.
2. The number those with no speeding convictions have had.
If the numbers are the same or as I suspect, 1 is a smaller number than 2, it would beg the obvious question wouldn't it?
Perhaps SS et al could try and canvass for this report to be produced.
After all, now that pretty much nobody still believes speed cameras are even remotely to do with safety, except the operators/sponsors, they would be delighted to have the opportunity to get proper evidence proving speeders=dangerous drivers wouldn't they?
I for one would certainly stop bleating about road safety being crucified by money grabbing speed nazis.
Andy
1. The average number of accidents over the past 5 years those with at least one speeding conviction on their licence have had.
2. The number those with no speeding convictions have had.
If the numbers are the same or as I suspect, 1 is a smaller number than 2, it would beg the obvious question wouldn't it?
Perhaps SS et al could try and canvass for this report to be produced.
After all, now that pretty much nobody still believes speed cameras are even remotely to do with safety, except the operators/sponsors, they would be delighted to have the opportunity to get proper evidence proving speeders=dangerous drivers wouldn't they?
I for one would certainly stop bleating about road safety being crucified by money grabbing speed nazis.
Andy
Idiots. 
(Or is it the revenue? Maybe the idiots are those who think it's for safety.)ewenm said:
They are claiming that the increase from the previous year (figures?) is down to stricter enforcement in 30 limits (35 rather than 38mph). If that is the case, I have no problem with it.
What? Even if their revenue-raising efforts had no downward effect of accident rates? (As is the case countrywide.)
james_j said:
They are claiming that the increase from the previous year (figures?) is down to stricter enforcement in 30 limits (35 rather than 38mph). If that is the case, I have no problem with it.
What? Even if their revenue-raising efforts had no downward effect of accident rates? (As is the case countrywide.)
I notice now that the article says there has been a 28% decrease in fatalities " at North Wales Blackspots".
In the past they have claimed a reduction at scamera sites, even if deaths overall were higher, as they were in 2004 under the same regime.
supermono said:
Well 75264 is a very interesting number. I'd like to see another two numbers too, they should be easily available from this big brother insurance database we're now on:
1. The average number of accidents over the past 5 years those with at least one speeding conviction on their licence have had.
2. The number those with no speeding convictions have had.
If the numbers are the same or as I suspect, 1 is a smaller number than 2, it would beg the obvious question wouldn't it?
Perhaps SS et al could try and canvass for this report to be produced.
After all, now that pretty much nobody still believes speed cameras are even remotely to do with safety, except the operators/sponsors, they would be delighted to have the opportunity to get proper evidence proving speeders=dangerous drivers wouldn't they?
I for one would certainly stop bleating about road safety being crucified by money grabbing speed nazis.
Andy
That is a really excellent point. A perfect test too.
Science through statistics is only proved in my opinion if you can also set out to disprove your theory and you cant.
If is fine the scamerati 'choosing' their best statistics to prove their point, but if all the other statistics disprove them it is not only very bad use of science and statistics, but it is in effect lying to the public. In other areas of business, the same tactics would have been investigated by the Office of Fair Trading years ago...
Does someone want to start a new thread, or I am sure if SS (Paul I think) contacted Ted and put a news article up and a dedicated email account to send the data to, he should have at least a thousand or so drivers which would make a good statistical and fair spread. If nothing else the findings could be used to justify a bigger survey.
After all, if it is true that drivers with 3-9 points on their licence have less crashes and are a better insurance risk, then surely their premiums would decrease from those with a clean licence.
If that happens it must surely show the government and the public what a farce all this speedspin is!
Tafia said:
They are claiming that the increase from the previous year (figures?) is down to stricter enforcement in 30 limits (35 rather than 38mph). If that is the case, I have no problem with it.
What? Even if their revenue-raising efforts had no downward effect of accident rates? (As is the case countrywide.)
I notice now that the article says there has been a 28% decrease in fatalities " at North Wales Blackspots".
In the past they have claimed a reduction at scamera sites, even if deaths overall were higher, as they were in 2004 under the same regime.
This is very true. It also depends on what their definition of 'blackspots' are. My guess is that these change year to year to prove their point.
As you say they chose deaths this year probably due to the fact that total accident statistics dont show any gain. The second factor is that thankfully because deaths is a much lower figure, unfortunately it is more prone to statistical anomalies. For example, if there were 10 deaths in total in that area in 2004, 5 of which were in the same car, then in 2005 the same amount of accidents with death happens, but in one of the accidents had 1 death instead of 5, there would have been only 6 deaths the following year, a drop of 40%.
james_j said:
They are claiming that the increase from the previous year (figures?) is down to stricter enforcement in 30 limits (35 rather than 38mph). If that is the case, I have no problem with it.
What? Even if their revenue-raising efforts had no downward effect of accident rates? (As is the case countrywide.)
Yes, given that speed cameras in N Wales are here to stay, I'd far rather they were in 30 limits than 50/60 limits.
As many have said in other threads, if you get caught be a fixed site camera it's your own fault. There are numerous resources available to let you know where they are. No, I don't think they contribute to road safety at the vast majority of sites, but putting them in 30 limits is the least wrong location IMO.
justinp1 said:
1. The average number of accidents over the past 5 years those with at least one speeding conviction on their licence have had.
2. The number those with no speeding convictions have had.
That is a really excellent point. A perfect test too.
i dont know, even if we soiled licence drivers have less crashes, they would spin it that 'once caught dangerous drivers slow down and are safer'. you can twist any statistic to suit
ewenm said:
As many have said in other threads, if you get caught be a fixed site camera it's your own fault. There are numerous resources available to let you know where they are. No, I don't think they contribute to road safety at the vast majority of sites, but putting them in 30 limits is the least wrong location IMO.
I think this figure includes the
Talivans because the article says "for North Wales that means 13 fixed speed cameras, nine mobile vans, and 12 full-time police officers". From my experience the vans are as well hidden as they can possibly make them and they pay scant attention to the ACPO 'guidelines' (as they call them) which state they are supposed to be visible from some distance away. 
Also taken from the article
I suspect a lot of the victims are tourists, many of whom probably wont go back there as a result. As a direct result of my ticket I'll be spending my tourist money somewhere else from now on and as far as I'm concerned the Welsh Tourist office can take their current TV ad and themselves with it
icnorthwales.icnetwork.co.uk said:
Paul Smith, founder of national organisation Safe Speed, said: "I am absolutely staggered that such a small community of North Wales has had so many tickets issued in one year."
I suspect a lot of the victims are tourists, many of whom probably wont go back there as a result. As a direct result of my ticket I'll be spending my tourist money somewhere else from now on and as far as I'm concerned the Welsh Tourist office can take their current TV ad and
themselves with itfrancisb said:
1. The average number of accidents over the past 5 years those with at least one speeding conviction on their licence have had.
2. The number those with no speeding convictions have had.
That is a really excellent point. A perfect test too.
i dont know, even if we soiled licence drivers have less crashes, they would spin it that 'once caught dangerous drivers slow down and are safer'. you can twist any statistic to suit
I think it was the RAC Foundation (and some newspaper reports) a while back (perhaps about a year) which showed figures that it was massively the accident-free driver who was getting caught by cameras - both Gatso and ad hoc traps. The was some talk on PH about it at the time - about the stupidity of a system which is supposed to promote safety, but which actually catches the wrong people.
njwc said:
I'll be spending my tourist money somewhere else from now on and as far as I'm concerned the Welsh Tourist office can take their current TV ad and
Are the Welsh Tourist Office members of the 'Arrive Deprived' partnership? - if not then they are as much victims as you, I suspect the average North Wales resident doesn't want the c
ts either.
I hope the Welsh Tourist Office will realise that the Arrive Deprived mob are bad for business, and the sooner they start applying pressure on them the better. Having said that, they may support them in which case I stand by my original comment 
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff