Reduction in speed may not reduce crashes! Kent Scameraship
Discussion
From their website and the board meetings notes: www.kentandmedwaysafetycameras.org.uk/downloads/Board_Minutes_21_02_06.pdf
"Camera thresholds were briefly discussed: CR said that if thresholds were lowered, the
number of tickets would increase, and the Partnership may be unable to cope with the increase in processing. It might also have a negative impact on public perception if the numbers of tickets increase. IP said that casualty reduction is the main issue:
the thresholds could be reduced, but it might not have an effect on crashes. 
However, this is unclear, which is why it needs investigating."
So reducing the threashold, increases the number of motorists caught speeding, will not reduce the number of crashes.
This there not basic research mssing here into what causes an accident then? Cos this statement suggests that accidents dont happen only by a speeding motorist.
Would it not be a shock to find that reducing the threshold on the cameras showed an increase in tickets, but no reduction in accidents.
Now what could that possibily conclude?
"Camera thresholds were briefly discussed: CR said that if thresholds were lowered, the
number of tickets would increase, and the Partnership may be unable to cope with the increase in processing. It might also have a negative impact on public perception if the numbers of tickets increase. IP said that casualty reduction is the main issue:
the thresholds could be reduced, but it might not have an effect on crashes. However, this is unclear, which is why it needs investigating." So reducing the threashold, increases the number of motorists caught speeding, will not reduce the number of crashes.
This there not basic research mssing here into what causes an accident then? Cos this statement suggests that accidents dont happen only by a speeding motorist.
Would it not be a shock to find that reducing the threshold on the cameras showed an increase in tickets, but no reduction in accidents.
Now what could that possibily conclude?
Interesting to see who was and was not at this meeting:
Attending members:
Two Council members (that is to say, politicians)
One SCP 'Project Manager'
One guy from Highways Agency
Two 'communications' people
Absent:
Two police officers
One person from the court system
In other words, amongst the six who were there and in a position to affect drivers' lives, were two politicians, an SCP manager whose very job depends on generating penalty income, someone for the HA (which IINM has jurisdiction over a small % of controversial camera sites), and two communications flunkies whose job is to spin a story.
Amongst the three absentees were two police who might actually be expected (or at least hoped) to have more balanced, insightful and unpoliticised views than the above six, and finally the one person from the court system who understands what really happens to the innocent motorist after a camera has gone off.
Not exactly a confidence-inspiring group of people in attendance to set policy and procedure, whilst the people with real jobs were presumably off doing them.
Attending members:
Two Council members (that is to say, politicians)
One SCP 'Project Manager'
One guy from Highways Agency
Two 'communications' people
Absent:
Two police officers
One person from the court system
In other words, amongst the six who were there and in a position to affect drivers' lives, were two politicians
, an SCP manager whose very job depends on generating penalty income, someone for the HA (which IINM has jurisdiction over a small % of controversial camera sites), and two communications flunkies whose job is to spin a story. Amongst the three absentees were two police who might actually be expected (or at least hoped) to have more balanced, insightful and unpoliticised views than the above six, and finally the one person from the court system who understands what really happens to the innocent motorist after a camera has gone off.
Not exactly a confidence-inspiring group of people in attendance to set policy and procedure, whilst the people with real jobs were presumably off doing them.
Nice post Rodney.
Flemke, yeah it's funny why the two police representatives didn't turn up, almost as if they don't take the SCP seriously. I mean these meetings are arranged well in advance.
Check out the 'Operational Case 2006/7' where they have decided to downsize the amount of tickets issued by a little, in veiw of the forth coming 'new era'!! That has absoultely nothing to do with their supposed road safety policy and everything to do with budget!! Safety cameras my arse!! They decide how many they're going to issue at the start of the financial year!!
I know a speeding motorist is an easy picking because 99% of us do it, but doesn't this just highlight what a money raker it really is.
Also check out 'Myth Busting/Success Campaign'. "IP said the overall perception of cameras is good", My god what planet are they on?!!
No wonder the police people couldn't make the meeting, they've probably been to one before, the smell of bullsh*t must be some what over whelming.
Flemke, yeah it's funny why the two police representatives didn't turn up, almost as if they don't take the SCP seriously. I mean these meetings are arranged well in advance.
Check out the 'Operational Case 2006/7' where they have decided to downsize the amount of tickets issued by a little, in veiw of the forth coming 'new era'!! That has absoultely nothing to do with their supposed road safety policy and everything to do with budget!! Safety cameras my arse!! They decide how many they're going to issue at the start of the financial year!!
I know a speeding motorist is an easy picking because 99% of us do it, but doesn't this just highlight what a money raker it really is.
Also check out 'Myth Busting/Success Campaign'. "IP said the overall perception of cameras is good", My god what planet are they on?!!
No wonder the police people couldn't make the meeting, they've probably been to one before, the smell of bullsh*t must be some what over whelming.
deeps said:Presumably the politicos flew there on an aircarft of the "Queen's Flight", whilst the police were booked for exceeding 80mph in a built-up area - Streaky
Flemke, yeah it's funny why the two police representatives didn't turn up, almost as if they don't take the SCP seriously. I mean these meetings are arranged well in advance.
[ ... ]
No wonder the police people couldn't make the meeting, they've probably been to one before, the smell of bullsh*t must be some what over whelming.
If you scan this thread, you'll see why the BiB are less bothered about this
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=10&t=259710
apache said:
If you scan this thread, you'll see why the BiB are less bothered about this
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=10&t=259710
Nope, I ain't trawling through that lot
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff