West Yorkshire Road Deaths up 14%
Discussion
Look North (BBC Local News) have just featured an article about a 14% increase in deaths in West Yorkshire.
Some scruffy freak (Steve Thornton) from the WY Scamera Partnership saying the deaths only happen on the roads not covered by speed cameras
The usual wittering from Brake about deaths.
ETA He's just claimed speed cameras bring deaths down by 40% in West Yorkshire.
Some scruffy freak (Steve Thornton) from the WY Scamera Partnership saying the deaths only happen on the roads not covered by speed cameras
The usual wittering from Brake about deaths.
ETA He's just claimed speed cameras bring deaths down by 40% in West Yorkshire.
Edited by markmullen on Wednesday 7th March 18:34
If you check WYSCP's website you'll find that on the majority of the sites where stats are available deaths are static or up over the years they have been there. In the longest established sites the Stats show the actual effect of a speed camera on accidents. That is no effect at all.
Direct from their own site: (with my comments in italics)
www.safetycameraswestyorkshire.co.uk/news-item.htm?news=139
ROAD DEATHS RISE … but total crashes and casualties continue to fall So that's good, is it?
The number of deaths and serious injuries on West Yorkshire roads has risen following record-breaking falls in 2005. So they'll be claiming 'regression to mean' then...?
Figures for 2006 just confirmed by West Yorkshire Road Safety Strategy Group show:
· Deaths = 113, up from 99 in 2005 So that's a 14% rise
· Serious = 1027, up from 986 in 2005 A 4% rise
· Non-serious injuries = 9474 down from 9718 in 2005. A 2.5% fall
Two factors are chiefly responsible for the rise: an unusually high number of crashes over Christmas and New Year period caused by what, exactly? and – especially significant – a spring-to-summer exceptional increase in the number of fatal smashes involving "tearaway teens" and their passengers.
There were several double and triple death crashes with 17-, 18- and 19-year-olds behind the wheel. The number of car driver fatalities in the 16-19 age bracket rose by 50%, from 4 to 6, and the number aged 20-29 by a similar amount, from 11 to 16. The number of equivalent age car passenger deaths doubled.
Almost every one of these deaths was the result of what the police are calling "extreme driver behaviour" - deliberately illegal and dangerous driving, being reckless for their own or their passengers’ safety or the safety or other road users. And speed cameras would have prevented these? Nope, didn't think so...
www.safetycameraswestyorkshire.co.uk/news-item.htm?news=140
2006 WEST YORKSHIRE ROADS INJURIES IN MORE DEPTH - Overall casualties continue to fall
· Overall trends are down – the average of fatalities over the past 5 years is 115, the 5-year average for serious is 1122 and the number of non-serious is 9474.
· The total number of collisions continued to fall, from 7277 to 7162. A 1.6% fall. Statistically insignificant
· The number of casualties was down, too, from 10,803 to 10,614. A 1.75% fall. Statistically insignificant
· The number of injuries among car users, both driver and passenger, fell from 7365 to 7342. A 0.3% fall. Totally statistically insignificant
· Child casualties are down from 1197 to 1090.A 9% fall. A statistically significant figure
· Fewer pedestrians were hurt – 1338 in 2006 compared with 1421 in 2005. A 6% fall. A statistically significant figure
· Pedal cyclist injuries were also down from 466 to 446, A 4.3% fall. and powered 2-wheeler rider injuries fell for the third year in a row, to 604 from 701. A huge 14% fall
Looks like the chickens are coming home to roost at the SCPs, and their Snake Oil Speed Cameras and "Speed Kills" mantra are starting to be really shown for the money making, casualty causing
that they really are.
Surely it's time for the SCPs to cue Frank Sinatra.....?
"And now, then end is near...."
www.safetycameraswestyorkshire.co.uk/news-item.htm?news=139
ROAD DEATHS RISE … but total crashes and casualties continue to fall So that's good, is it?
The number of deaths and serious injuries on West Yorkshire roads has risen following record-breaking falls in 2005. So they'll be claiming 'regression to mean' then...?
Figures for 2006 just confirmed by West Yorkshire Road Safety Strategy Group show:
· Deaths = 113, up from 99 in 2005 So that's a 14% rise
· Serious = 1027, up from 986 in 2005 A 4% rise
· Non-serious injuries = 9474 down from 9718 in 2005. A 2.5% fall
Two factors are chiefly responsible for the rise: an unusually high number of crashes over Christmas and New Year period caused by what, exactly? and – especially significant – a spring-to-summer exceptional increase in the number of fatal smashes involving "tearaway teens" and their passengers.
There were several double and triple death crashes with 17-, 18- and 19-year-olds behind the wheel. The number of car driver fatalities in the 16-19 age bracket rose by 50%, from 4 to 6, and the number aged 20-29 by a similar amount, from 11 to 16. The number of equivalent age car passenger deaths doubled.
Almost every one of these deaths was the result of what the police are calling "extreme driver behaviour" - deliberately illegal and dangerous driving, being reckless for their own or their passengers’ safety or the safety or other road users. And speed cameras would have prevented these? Nope, didn't think so...
www.safetycameraswestyorkshire.co.uk/news-item.htm?news=140
2006 WEST YORKSHIRE ROADS INJURIES IN MORE DEPTH - Overall casualties continue to fall
· Overall trends are down – the average of fatalities over the past 5 years is 115, the 5-year average for serious is 1122 and the number of non-serious is 9474.
· The total number of collisions continued to fall, from 7277 to 7162. A 1.6% fall. Statistically insignificant
· The number of casualties was down, too, from 10,803 to 10,614. A 1.75% fall. Statistically insignificant
· The number of injuries among car users, both driver and passenger, fell from 7365 to 7342. A 0.3% fall. Totally statistically insignificant
· Child casualties are down from 1197 to 1090.A 9% fall. A statistically significant figure
· Fewer pedestrians were hurt – 1338 in 2006 compared with 1421 in 2005. A 6% fall. A statistically significant figure
· Pedal cyclist injuries were also down from 466 to 446, A 4.3% fall. and powered 2-wheeler rider injuries fell for the third year in a row, to 604 from 701. A huge 14% fall
Looks like the chickens are coming home to roost at the SCPs, and their Snake Oil Speed Cameras and "Speed Kills" mantra are starting to be really shown for the money making, casualty causing
that they really are. Surely it's time for the SCPs to cue Frank Sinatra.....?
"And now, then end is near...."
johnFairfield said:
I wonder what happened in North Yorkshire which doesn't have any speed cameras (well not many)?
John
John
North Yorkshire:
www.yorkshiretoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=1084&ArticleID=1976134
"Road deaths fell from 85 in 2005 to 68, while fatalities among motorcyclists have been reduced by 38 per cent – 13 died last year, compared with 21 in the previous 12 months."
But to be fair the number of deaths in a county is really too small for safe or valid year-on-year comparison purposes.
However, See this: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SafeSpe from Feb 8th 2007.
"Provisional figures released by Department for Transport today reveal a very worrying trend in road deaths, showing a 1% rise from 3,177 to 3,210."
Edited by safespeed on Thursday 8th March 03:49
Alice Cupra said:
Direct from their own site: (with my comments in italics)
www.safetycameraswestyorkshire.co.uk/news-item.htm?news=139
ROAD DEATHS RISE … but total crashes and casualties continue to fall So that's good, is it?
The number of deaths and serious injuries on West Yorkshire roads has risen following record-breaking falls in 2005. So they'll be claiming 'regression to mean' then...?
Figures for 2006 just confirmed by West Yorkshire Road Safety Strategy Group show:
· Deaths = 113, up from 99 in 2005 So that's a 14% rise
· Serious = 1027, up from 986 in 2005 A 4% rise
· Non-serious injuries = 9474 down from 9718 in 2005. A 2.5% fall
Two factors are chiefly responsible for the rise: an unusually high number of crashes over Christmas and New Year period caused by what, exactly? and – especially significant – a spring-to-summer exceptional increase in the number of fatal smashes involving "tearaway teens" and their passengers.
There were several double and triple death crashes with 17-, 18- and 19-year-olds behind the wheel. The number of car driver fatalities in the 16-19 age bracket rose by 50%, from 4 to 6, and the number aged 20-29 by a similar amount, from 11 to 16. The number of equivalent age car passenger deaths doubled.
Almost every one of these deaths was the result of what the police are calling "extreme driver behaviour" - deliberately illegal and dangerous driving, being reckless for their own or their passengers’ safety or the safety or other road users. And speed cameras would have prevented these? Nope, didn't think so...
www.safetycameraswestyorkshire.co.uk/news-item.htm?news=140
2006 WEST YORKSHIRE ROADS INJURIES IN MORE DEPTH - Overall casualties continue to fall
· Overall trends are down – the average of fatalities over the past 5 years is 115, the 5-year average for serious is 1122 and the number of non-serious is 9474.
· The total number of collisions continued to fall, from 7277 to 7162. A 1.6% fall. Statistically insignificant
· The number of casualties was down, too, from 10,803 to 10,614. A 1.75% fall. Statistically insignificant
· The number of injuries among car users, both driver and passenger, fell from 7365 to 7342. A 0.3% fall. Totally statistically insignificant
· Child casualties are down from 1197 to 1090.A 9% fall. A statistically significant figure
· Fewer pedestrians were hurt – 1338 in 2006 compared with 1421 in 2005. A 6% fall. A statistically significant figure
· Pedal cyclist injuries were also down from 466 to 446, A 4.3% fall. and powered 2-wheeler rider injuries fell for the third year in a row, to 604 from 701. A huge 14% fall
Looks like the chickens are coming home to roost at the SCPs, and their Snake Oil Speed Cameras and "Speed Kills" mantra are starting to be really shown for the money making, casualty causing that they really are.
Surely it's time for the SCPs to cue Frank Sinatra.....?
"And now, then end is near...."
www.safetycameraswestyorkshire.co.uk/news-item.htm?news=139
ROAD DEATHS RISE … but total crashes and casualties continue to fall So that's good, is it?
The number of deaths and serious injuries on West Yorkshire roads has risen following record-breaking falls in 2005. So they'll be claiming 'regression to mean' then...?
Figures for 2006 just confirmed by West Yorkshire Road Safety Strategy Group show:
· Deaths = 113, up from 99 in 2005 So that's a 14% rise
· Serious = 1027, up from 986 in 2005 A 4% rise
· Non-serious injuries = 9474 down from 9718 in 2005. A 2.5% fall
Two factors are chiefly responsible for the rise: an unusually high number of crashes over Christmas and New Year period caused by what, exactly? and – especially significant – a spring-to-summer exceptional increase in the number of fatal smashes involving "tearaway teens" and their passengers.
There were several double and triple death crashes with 17-, 18- and 19-year-olds behind the wheel. The number of car driver fatalities in the 16-19 age bracket rose by 50%, from 4 to 6, and the number aged 20-29 by a similar amount, from 11 to 16. The number of equivalent age car passenger deaths doubled.
Almost every one of these deaths was the result of what the police are calling "extreme driver behaviour" - deliberately illegal and dangerous driving, being reckless for their own or their passengers’ safety or the safety or other road users. And speed cameras would have prevented these? Nope, didn't think so...
www.safetycameraswestyorkshire.co.uk/news-item.htm?news=140
2006 WEST YORKSHIRE ROADS INJURIES IN MORE DEPTH - Overall casualties continue to fall
· Overall trends are down – the average of fatalities over the past 5 years is 115, the 5-year average for serious is 1122 and the number of non-serious is 9474.
· The total number of collisions continued to fall, from 7277 to 7162. A 1.6% fall. Statistically insignificant
· The number of casualties was down, too, from 10,803 to 10,614. A 1.75% fall. Statistically insignificant
· The number of injuries among car users, both driver and passenger, fell from 7365 to 7342. A 0.3% fall. Totally statistically insignificant
· Child casualties are down from 1197 to 1090.A 9% fall. A statistically significant figure
· Fewer pedestrians were hurt – 1338 in 2006 compared with 1421 in 2005. A 6% fall. A statistically significant figure
· Pedal cyclist injuries were also down from 466 to 446, A 4.3% fall. and powered 2-wheeler rider injuries fell for the third year in a row, to 604 from 701. A huge 14% fall
Looks like the chickens are coming home to roost at the SCPs, and their Snake Oil Speed Cameras and "Speed Kills" mantra are starting to be really shown for the money making, casualty causing
that they really are. Surely it's time for the SCPs to cue Frank Sinatra.....?
"And now, then end is near...."
Is there a universally accepted value (+/-) when it comes to what is considered statistically insignificant?
jasandjules said:
The SCPs won't tell the truth, it will put them out of jobs.
That's why you'll never get an impartial view from them, it will take an intelligent government for them to be disbanded, willing to counter accusations of "child killer" or just "killer" / "irresponsible" and other such hysterical rantings.
ipsg.glf said:
Is there a universally accepted value (+/-) when it comes to what is considered statistically insignificant?
No, you need a test like 'chi square': www.georgetown.edu/faculty/ballc/webtools/web_chi_tut.html
I haven't got time to run it on the numbers here, but one does tend to 'get a feel for' what sorts of numbers and what sorts of variation are likely to be 'significant'. And the bigger the sample, the higher the confidence, with small numbers (like, say, under 100) leading to wide confidence intervals and large numbers (like 10,000) leading to much tighter confidence intervals.
jasandjules said:
Until the masses notice that lots of speed cameras on the roads, but still deaths increase means that speeding isn't the mass killer, then I think the money making machines will continue to be deployed.
The SCPs won't tell the truth, it will put them out of jobs.
The SCPs won't tell the truth, it will put them out of jobs.
But even if ‘Joe Public’ did begin to notice the rise in KSI with the increase in cameras the SCPs and ‘lentil brigade’ would simply claim that the increasing number of speeding prosecutions show that there are still lots of speeders out there which is why there are still lots of accidents ergo more cameras/speed monitoring is required!
There is too much invested in this for it to simply ‘go away’. I think that the best we can hope for is a re-focus of attention.
safespeed said:
johnFairfield said:
I wonder what happened in North Yorkshire which doesn't have any speed cameras (well not many)?
John
John
North Yorkshire:
www.yorkshiretoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=1084&ArticleID=1976134
"Road deaths fell from 85 in 2005 to 68, while fatalities among motorcyclists have been reduced by 38 per cent – 13 died last year, compared with 21 in the previous 12 months."
But to be fair the number of deaths in a county is really too small for safe or valid year-on-year comparison purposes.
However, See this: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SafeSpe from Feb 8th 2007.
"Provisional figures released by Department for Transport today reveal a very worrying trend in road deaths, showing a 1% rise from 3,177 to 3,210."
Edited by safespeed on Thursday 8th March 03:49
Mate of mine lives in a little village on the edge of the moors and the driver behaviour on the main road that runs through the center of said village is superb. All the drivers tend to "make progress" between the villages as the roads are totally
but when they reach the village borders they all, without exception, slow down to a very acceptable speed. In fact his house is the last one in the village before the road opens out and its great fun standing in his drive early on a Sunday morning with a cup of tea watching/listening to the bigger bikes and faster cars cracking open the throttle and "making progress" off in the direction of Scarborough The standard of driving/sense up there is so much better than down south, people drive very sensibly through the danger areas of towns and villages and even when they "enjoy" the roads there is still an air of restraint. And it absolutely works. the police in his area are present but they really only bother those being stupid and when they (very occationally) set up a speed trap (stand by thier car with the speed gun) they put signs up at each end of the village that everyone drivers through slowly anyway
I just love driving when I'm up there.
TripleS said:
Neil - which village, if you don't mind me asking?
Anyhow, I'm glad you enjoy your motoring when you're up here.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
Anyhow, I'm glad you enjoy your motoring when you're up here.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
One of the villages on the road between Pickering and Scarborough
Lovely place with a much photographed thatch cottage by the stream and a Chocolate factory (Which if your from the area should give it away with little searching
) ipsg.glf said:
Alice Cupra said:
Direct from their own site: (with my comments in italics)
www.safetycameraswestyorkshire.co.uk/news-item.htm?news=139
ROAD DEATHS RISE … but total crashes and casualties continue to fall So that's good, is it?
The number of deaths and serious injuries on West Yorkshire roads has risen following record-breaking falls in 2005. So they'll be claiming 'regression to mean' then...?
Figures for 2006 just confirmed by West Yorkshire Road Safety Strategy Group show:
· Deaths = 113, up from 99 in 2005 So that's a 14% rise
· Serious = 1027, up from 986 in 2005 A 4% rise
· Non-serious injuries = 9474 down from 9718 in 2005. A 2.5% fall
Two factors are chiefly responsible for the rise: an unusually high number of crashes over Christmas and New Year period caused by what, exactly? and – especially significant – a spring-to-summer exceptional increase in the number of fatal smashes involving "tearaway teens" and their passengers.
There were several double and triple death crashes with 17-, 18- and 19-year-olds behind the wheel. The number of car driver fatalities in the 16-19 age bracket rose by 50%, from 4 to 6, and the number aged 20-29 by a similar amount, from 11 to 16. The number of equivalent age car passenger deaths doubled.
Almost every one of these deaths was the result of what the police are calling "extreme driver behaviour" - deliberately illegal and dangerous driving, being reckless for their own or their passengers’ safety or the safety or other road users. And speed cameras would have prevented these? Nope, didn't think so...
www.safetycameraswestyorkshire.co.uk/news-item.htm?news=140
2006 WEST YORKSHIRE ROADS INJURIES IN MORE DEPTH - Overall casualties continue to fall
· Overall trends are down – the average of fatalities over the past 5 years is 115, the 5-year average for serious is 1122 and the number of non-serious is 9474.
· The total number of collisions continued to fall, from 7277 to 7162. A 1.6% fall. Statistically insignificant
· The number of casualties was down, too, from 10,803 to 10,614. A 1.75% fall. Statistically insignificant
· The number of injuries among car users, both driver and passenger, fell from 7365 to 7342. A 0.3% fall. Totally statistically insignificant
· Child casualties are down from 1197 to 1090.A 9% fall. A statistically significant figure
· Fewer pedestrians were hurt – 1338 in 2006 compared with 1421 in 2005. A 6% fall. A statistically significant figure
· Pedal cyclist injuries were also down from 466 to 446, A 4.3% fall. and powered 2-wheeler rider injuries fell for the third year in a row, to 604 from 701. A huge 14% fall
Looks like the chickens are coming home to roost at the SCPs, and their Snake Oil Speed Cameras and "Speed Kills" mantra are starting to be really shown for the money making, casualty causing that they really are.
Surely it's time for the SCPs to cue Frank Sinatra.....?
"And now, then end is near...."
www.safetycameraswestyorkshire.co.uk/news-item.htm?news=139
ROAD DEATHS RISE … but total crashes and casualties continue to fall So that's good, is it?
The number of deaths and serious injuries on West Yorkshire roads has risen following record-breaking falls in 2005. So they'll be claiming 'regression to mean' then...?
Figures for 2006 just confirmed by West Yorkshire Road Safety Strategy Group show:
· Deaths = 113, up from 99 in 2005 So that's a 14% rise
· Serious = 1027, up from 986 in 2005 A 4% rise
· Non-serious injuries = 9474 down from 9718 in 2005. A 2.5% fall
Two factors are chiefly responsible for the rise: an unusually high number of crashes over Christmas and New Year period caused by what, exactly? and – especially significant – a spring-to-summer exceptional increase in the number of fatal smashes involving "tearaway teens" and their passengers.
There were several double and triple death crashes with 17-, 18- and 19-year-olds behind the wheel. The number of car driver fatalities in the 16-19 age bracket rose by 50%, from 4 to 6, and the number aged 20-29 by a similar amount, from 11 to 16. The number of equivalent age car passenger deaths doubled.
Almost every one of these deaths was the result of what the police are calling "extreme driver behaviour" - deliberately illegal and dangerous driving, being reckless for their own or their passengers’ safety or the safety or other road users. And speed cameras would have prevented these? Nope, didn't think so...
www.safetycameraswestyorkshire.co.uk/news-item.htm?news=140
2006 WEST YORKSHIRE ROADS INJURIES IN MORE DEPTH - Overall casualties continue to fall
· Overall trends are down – the average of fatalities over the past 5 years is 115, the 5-year average for serious is 1122 and the number of non-serious is 9474.
· The total number of collisions continued to fall, from 7277 to 7162. A 1.6% fall. Statistically insignificant
· The number of casualties was down, too, from 10,803 to 10,614. A 1.75% fall. Statistically insignificant
· The number of injuries among car users, both driver and passenger, fell from 7365 to 7342. A 0.3% fall. Totally statistically insignificant
· Child casualties are down from 1197 to 1090.A 9% fall. A statistically significant figure
· Fewer pedestrians were hurt – 1338 in 2006 compared with 1421 in 2005. A 6% fall. A statistically significant figure
· Pedal cyclist injuries were also down from 466 to 446, A 4.3% fall. and powered 2-wheeler rider injuries fell for the third year in a row, to 604 from 701. A huge 14% fall
Looks like the chickens are coming home to roost at the SCPs, and their Snake Oil Speed Cameras and "Speed Kills" mantra are starting to be really shown for the money making, casualty causing
that they really are. Surely it's time for the SCPs to cue Frank Sinatra.....?
"And now, then end is near...."
Is there a universally accepted value (+/-) when it comes to what is considered statistically insignificant?
Ja.. because these teeny differences are not proving that any improvement has truly occurred. Let us put it this way.. if the data collated on one of my trial drugs resulted in numbers more or less countable on fingers as "improvement to a condition" .. then it would not get any further on its way to licence und prescription without a helluva lot more hard work of further research - nd more thaan likely .. would be ditched as non-workable nor viable.
Und the deaths being up by a large 14% more than undermines the "research" carried out by the Edinburgh professor .. which has yet to be "peer reviewed" properly
as I understand civpilot said:
TripleS said:
Neil - which village, if you don't mind me asking?
Anyhow, I'm glad you enjoy your motoring when you're up here.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
Anyhow, I'm glad you enjoy your motoring when you're up here.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
One of the villages on the road between Pickering and Scarborough
Lovely place with a much photographed thatch cottage by the stream and a Chocolate factory (Which if your from the area should give it away with little searching
) Thank you for that. Yes, I know the very one, there's quite a few attractive properties in that village - and some extremely attractive roads in the area too, especially a bit to the north.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
Ok, so they've followed this up with another press release. Again, my comments in bold:
“BOY RACERS” BLAMED FOR ROAD DEATHS RISE
You feel immortal, like you’re right in a computer game." The words of a reformed joyrider on BBC Look North, explaining the buzz of what it’s like to drive reckless though our streets.
But it’s young men who drive that way who are being blamed for an increase in fatalities on our roads, the first rise for years. Well, only 3 years actually. They rose from 102 in 2003, to 116 in 2004
For years now, the numbers of deaths on West Yorkshire’s roads has been going down. Officials say as more speed cameras have gone in, the line on the graph has gone slowly but surely downhill. What they should have said was "as more speed cameras have gone in, the line on the graph has gone ever more slowly downhill. It was doing just fine without them, thanks very much."
But figures just compiled by West Yorkshire Road Safety Strategy Group show the number of deaths and serious injuries on West Yorkshire roads has risen following record-breaking falls in 2005.
· Deaths = 113, up from 99 in 2005
· Serious = 1027, up from 986 in 2005
Danne Ferrerira from BRAKE road safety charity, says: "Two in five deaths on the road involving a driver aged between 15 and 25. And speed cameras will catch those 15 and 16 year olds driving illegally, will they?
And the other side of the problem is, when we do see a tragedy with a young driver behind the wheel, quite often, it’s not just the driver that’s lost their lives."
The hunt’s now on for a solution but so far, officials admit there are few ideas. Would these 'few' ideas include speed cameras, speed cameras and speed cameras by any chance?
Steve Thornton from the West Yorkshire Casualty Reduction told Look North the upturn has nothing to do with speed control safety cameras. Hmmm, so when deaths and casualties come down by a tiny amount they crow about how effective speed cameras are, but when they go up its "nothing to do with us, guv"
"Cameras are on less than one half of one per cent of the roads in West Yorkshire and it’s how people behave on the other 99.5 per cent that will make the difference." Thereby, in a few words, he destroys his own argument about how effective speed cameras have been claimed to be over these last few years. Casualties go down despite the fact that cameras are on less than 0.5% of roads? Oooh, they're so effective, aren't they?
He said that there were lots of studies being done about young drivers and their involvement in road injuries to try and find out: is it wilful and reckless behaviour or is it inexperience and some lack of maturity which is causing this. "I think, in truth, it’s a combination of both. And speed cameras will catch these drivers how?
The big problem is when either of these are combined with speed and with real speed that causes death."
He added that where speed cameras have been installed, they’ve brought injuries down by some 40 per cent and West Yorkshire is actually leading the country in bringing injuries down by the use of cameras. Erm, so what about North Yorkshire's reductions in casualties in 2006 without a single fixed camera? Oh, sorry. it wasn't "by the use of cameras" was it. Weasel words.....
We need a combination. They can only be used on certain roads. We need to look at the rest of West Yorkshire and what’s happening there." Oh dear. He probably means "We need to look at the other 99.5% and stick cameras there, too....."
---------------------
I think they're running out of excuses as to reasons for their abject failure to create safer roads by their total reliance on Cameras.......
“BOY RACERS” BLAMED FOR ROAD DEATHS RISE
You feel immortal, like you’re right in a computer game." The words of a reformed joyrider on BBC Look North, explaining the buzz of what it’s like to drive reckless though our streets.
But it’s young men who drive that way who are being blamed for an increase in fatalities on our roads, the first rise for years. Well, only 3 years actually. They rose from 102 in 2003, to 116 in 2004
For years now, the numbers of deaths on West Yorkshire’s roads has been going down. Officials say as more speed cameras have gone in, the line on the graph has gone slowly but surely downhill. What they should have said was "as more speed cameras have gone in, the line on the graph has gone ever more slowly downhill. It was doing just fine without them, thanks very much."
But figures just compiled by West Yorkshire Road Safety Strategy Group show the number of deaths and serious injuries on West Yorkshire roads has risen following record-breaking falls in 2005.
· Deaths = 113, up from 99 in 2005
· Serious = 1027, up from 986 in 2005
Danne Ferrerira from BRAKE road safety charity, says: "Two in five deaths on the road involving a driver aged between 15 and 25. And speed cameras will catch those 15 and 16 year olds driving illegally, will they?
And the other side of the problem is, when we do see a tragedy with a young driver behind the wheel, quite often, it’s not just the driver that’s lost their lives."
The hunt’s now on for a solution but so far, officials admit there are few ideas. Would these 'few' ideas include speed cameras, speed cameras and speed cameras by any chance?
Steve Thornton from the West Yorkshire Casualty Reduction told Look North the upturn has nothing to do with speed control safety cameras. Hmmm, so when deaths and casualties come down by a tiny amount they crow about how effective speed cameras are, but when they go up its "nothing to do with us, guv"
"Cameras are on less than one half of one per cent of the roads in West Yorkshire and it’s how people behave on the other 99.5 per cent that will make the difference." Thereby, in a few words, he destroys his own argument about how effective speed cameras have been claimed to be over these last few years. Casualties go down despite the fact that cameras are on less than 0.5% of roads? Oooh, they're so effective, aren't they?
He said that there were lots of studies being done about young drivers and their involvement in road injuries to try and find out: is it wilful and reckless behaviour or is it inexperience and some lack of maturity which is causing this. "I think, in truth, it’s a combination of both. And speed cameras will catch these drivers how?
The big problem is when either of these are combined with speed and with real speed that causes death."
He added that where speed cameras have been installed, they’ve brought injuries down by some 40 per cent and West Yorkshire is actually leading the country in bringing injuries down by the use of cameras. Erm, so what about North Yorkshire's reductions in casualties in 2006 without a single fixed camera? Oh, sorry. it wasn't "by the use of cameras" was it. Weasel words.....
We need a combination. They can only be used on certain roads. We need to look at the rest of West Yorkshire and what’s happening there." Oh dear. He probably means "We need to look at the other 99.5% and stick cameras there, too....."
---------------------
I think they're running out of excuses as to reasons for their abject failure to create safer roads by their total reliance on Cameras.......
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff