Liar liar, pants on fire!
Liar liar, pants on fire!
Author
Discussion

cmsapms

Original Poster:

708 posts

274 months

Monday 30th January 2006
quotequote all


Never let the truth get in the way of blatant self promotion: here

SScameraCock said:
Drivers travelling at excess or inappropriate speed is the single biggest cause of death and injury on local roads."


Grammatical incompetence is the least of this fool's shortcomings

I despair.....

Paul

MilnerR

8,273 posts

288 months

Monday 30th January 2006
quotequote all
lowest road deaths since 1974 due to speed cameras!? Wouldn't be due to safer car design, seat belts, ABS, traction control etc etc etc.... The cretins who write this drivel take a 1 dimensional view of cause and effect.

Reminds me of the spider experiment: Spiders detect sound through their legs. To prove this put a wild type spider on a table and bang your hand next to it and it will run off. However if you rip its legs of first and then bang on the table it will stay still. QED, spiders detect sound through their legs! Infallible logic and about as convincing as the SCPs!

jamesson

3,709 posts

251 months

Monday 30th January 2006
quotequote all
Where do these idiots come from? I'm sure the official figures show the most likely cause of an accident is pedestrians. Something like 70%? Safespeed? Perhaps you can confirm.

bmw114

676 posts

267 months

Monday 30th January 2006
quotequote all
jamesson said:
Where do these idiots come from? I'm sure the official figures show the most likely cause of an accident is pedestrians. Something like 70%? Safespeed? Perhaps you can confirm.




What about accidents on Motorways?

Einion Yrth

19,575 posts

274 months

Monday 30th January 2006
quotequote all
bmw114 said:
jamesson said:
Where do these idiots come from? I'm sure the official figures show the most likely cause of an accident is pedestrians. Something like 70%? Safespeed? Perhaps you can confirm.




What about accidents on Motorways?

At least one accident that they use to justify speed enforcement on the M6 in Cumbria, was a drunk, walking on the carriageway - so it's not unknown.

bmw114

676 posts

267 months

Monday 30th January 2006
quotequote all
Einion Yrth said:
bmw114 said:
jamesson said:
Where do these idiots come from? I'm sure the official figures show the most likely cause of an accident is pedestrians. Something like 70%? Safespeed? Perhaps you can confirm.




What about accidents on Motorways?

At least one accident that they use to justify speed enforcement on the M6 in Cumbria, was a drunk, walking on the carriageway - so it's not unknown.




I was north bound on the M1 last year and there was a car stopped on the hard shoulder, 2 people were making their way back from either the other side of the M way or from the central barrier.

The female stopped in the slow lane and made like a belly dancer, she must have been pi55ed and i was about 150 yards away, her male companion grabbed her and through her past his parked car.

I got this churning in the pit of my stomach because if she had been determined to die i would have some how got the blame.

Yes these things do happen.

james_j

3,996 posts

285 months

Monday 30th January 2006
quotequote all
cmsapms said:


Never let the truth get in the way of blatant self promotion: here

SScameraCock said:
Drivers travelling at excess or inappropriate speed is the single biggest cause of death and injury on local roads."


Grammatical incompetence is the least of this fool's shortcomings

I despair.....

Paul


It's hysteria. They don't really know.

jamesson

3,709 posts

251 months

Monday 30th January 2006
quotequote all
bmw114 - I think you just answered your own question!

smeggy

3,241 posts

269 months

Tuesday 31st January 2006
quotequote all
SScameraCock said:
Drivers travelling at excess or inappropriate speed is the single biggest cause of death and injury on local roads."

Funny how they always lump excess and inappropriate together.

Which do you think is more dangerous: excess speed or inappropriate speed?
Which of those two do you think the SCPs target?

Mr Whippy

32,453 posts

271 months

Tuesday 31st January 2006
quotequote all
Good point Smeggy.

Clearly excessive speed causes all accidents for the conditions, just before impact an accident is 100% likely to happen unless that speed is then 0, so by deduction at the instant before an impact, excessive speed is theoretically causing 100% of accidents, as it's above 0!

Then they just bundle over the limit speeds in because thats what they focus on

Very clever in an evil calculated way! Sadistic though since the single mindedness is costing lives where alternative safety measures would be more effective!

Sick people.

Dave

Yugguy

10,728 posts

265 months

Tuesday 31st January 2006
quotequote all
Exactly. Excess and inappropriate are not the same thing.

Peter Ward

2,097 posts

286 months

Tuesday 31st January 2006
quotequote all
Newspaper article said:
The partnership installs road safety improvement measures at the worst casualty hotspots in the county.

"road safety improvement measures" = cameras?

Anything else?

havoc

33,456 posts

265 months

Tuesday 31st January 2006
quotequote all
What I fail to understand is why the journalists just roll-over and automatically print anything a government or police official says...because we all know that politicians and senior police officers never lie, don't we?!?

Free press?!?

smeggy

3,241 posts

269 months

Tuesday 31st January 2006
quotequote all
Peter Ward said:
Newspaper article said:
The partnership installs road safety improvement measures at the worst casualty hotspots in the county.

"road safety improvement measures" = cameras?

Anything else?
Other safety measures will sometimes be installed in conjunction with a speed camera. You could be forgiven for thinking that’s a good thing, but the statistical manipulation continues.
I can think of several speed camera sites where such a ‘range of improvements’ have been applied, but only the speed cameras get credit for any perceived KSI reduction –
it's always "KSI reduction at speed camera sites"
but never "KSI reduction due to speed cameras".

When was the last time you saw figures relating to KSI reductions due to zebra crossings, pedestrian lights/barriers/under or overpasses, improved lighting or junction improvements, especially those at speed camera sites?

njwc

168 posts

253 months

Tuesday 31st January 2006
quotequote all
Further to that, I bet that if the KSI figures went up they'd just say "we need more cameras"

>> Edited by njwc on Tuesday 31st January 16:05

catso

16,491 posts

297 months

Tuesday 31st January 2006
quotequote all
Peter Ward said:
"road safety improvement measures" = cameras?

Anything else?


Yes, lower speed limits.......

cmsapms

Original Poster:

708 posts

274 months

Wednesday 1st February 2006
quotequote all
Peter Ward said:
Newspaper article said:
The partnership installs road safety improvement measures at the worst casualty hotspots in the county.

"road safety improvement measures" = cameras?

Anything else?


Well, actually......

The local council (Huddersfield) have finally got round to removing the bushes from the central reservation of Wakefield Road at Shorehead roundabout (for those that know it). These are the bushes that the students used to hide in prior to leaping out in front of cars! This has improved safety without a doubt. But then SPLINK/Tufty Club/Green X Code Bloke would have had the same effect outside Polyversitys across the land

However, I doubt the pratnership had anything to do with it, as it will have cost money to get the parks department involved; and, to be pedantic, nothing was actually installed.

The most likely cause of this sensible bit of road engineering was either to make the approach to town look tidier, or to remove another haven for rattus rattus!

Paul