The Investigation, Radio 4
Discussion
I guess you folks don't listen to Radio 4 much... 
But last night's programme was a strong step in the right direction. You can 'listen again' at: www.bbc.co.uk/go/radio4/rhnav/choice/wed/t1/-/radio/aod/radio4_aod.shtml?radio4/theinvestigation
But last night's programme was a strong step in the right direction. You can 'listen again' at: www.bbc.co.uk/go/radio4/rhnav/choice/wed/t1/-/radio/aod/radio4_aod.shtml?radio4/theinvestigation
Listened to it on the radio in the car last night (quite appropriatley). Really rather good. You came across extremely well as did the retired police officer. Captain Gatso sounded relatively normal compared to A Bloke Called Merredydd (that has got to be a hard start in life) and the spokescreature for the London SCP. Loved the nutters'response to the regression-to-the-mean query, "we do not believe road safety should be left to chance" ... there is an irony in there that seemed to escape them.
You might want to point out to the BBC that they have put the link up to your site as 'Speed Safe'.
Kind of makes the wrong impression.
link to BBC page
Kind of makes the wrong impression.
link to BBC page
Very interesting to see that every respondee on the bbc article is against speed cameras in some way, and in favour of higher standards or more policing or both.
Normally the bbc will publish both sides to the argument. Could it be no-one who is pro-camera managed to put a lucid sentence together to argue 'for' them without frothing at the mouth?
Refreshing article, I'll be listening to the feature this evening, I hope this is a sign that the tide is starting to turn.
Suspect the last people to come around to this way of thinking will be our leaders though. Statistics? Data? Evidence? Nah. Soundbites from misguided bereaved campaigners hold much more sway in modern politics
Normally the bbc will publish both sides to the argument. Could it be no-one who is pro-camera managed to put a lucid sentence together to argue 'for' them without frothing at the mouth?
Refreshing article, I'll be listening to the feature this evening, I hope this is a sign that the tide is starting to turn.
Suspect the last people to come around to this way of thinking will be our leaders though. Statistics? Data? Evidence? Nah. Soundbites from misguided bereaved campaigners hold much more sway in modern politics
Great program Paul, well done. Was nice to hear that TfL are still spouting complete rubbish that even a numptie could see through.
I was very angry at the thought of 1000's of children being brainwashed into believing that scameras save lives, that really did piss me off but it demonstrates the lengths that these morons have to go to to try to convince people that they are right - nobody else believes them other than a bunch of 8 year olds
I was very angry at the thought of 1000's of children being brainwashed into believing that scameras save lives, that really did piss me off but it demonstrates the lengths that these morons have to go to to try to convince people that they are right - nobody else believes them other than a bunch of 8 year olds
busa_rush said:
I was very angry at the thought of 1000's of children being brainwashed into believing that scameras save lives, that really did piss me off but it demonstrates the lengths that these morons have to go to to try to convince people that they are right - nobody else believes them other than a bunch of 8 year olds
That bit made me sick to the pit of my stomach.
Good job Paul.
Just to keep my piss simmering, I have a calendar on my desk that a colleague kindly gave me.
It's a 2006 calendar that features posters, designed by primary school kids, about road safety.
As you might imagine, the vast majority (11 out of 12 I believe) carry the message "speed kills". The other one highlights the dangers of children using headphones and walking out into traffic.
It's clear to see which message the Scamera Pratnerships, in going round all the primary schools in London in 2005 brainwashing our children, put most emphasis on.
A more despicable waste of money and more outrageous example of indoctrination of such young kids, who let's face it are almost terminally receptive to messages from authority at that age, I don't think I can imagine.
In fact just thinking about it makes me
That's the depths these scumbags have plumbed to try to justify their continued existence. I hope they're
ing proud.
edditid for bluddy speeling, agian
It's a 2006 calendar that features posters, designed by primary school kids, about road safety.
As you might imagine, the vast majority (11 out of 12 I believe) carry the message "speed kills". The other one highlights the dangers of children using headphones and walking out into traffic.
It's clear to see which message the Scamera Pratnerships, in going round all the primary schools in London in 2005 brainwashing our children, put most emphasis on.
A more despicable waste of money and more outrageous example of indoctrination of such young kids, who let's face it are almost terminally receptive to messages from authority at that age, I don't think I can imagine.
In fact just thinking about it makes me
That's the depths these scumbags have plumbed to try to justify their continued existence. I hope they're
ing proud. edditid for bluddy speeling, agian
Edited by FNG on Friday 20th April 13:47
Big Rod said:
busa_rush said:
I was very angry at the thought of 1000's of children being brainwashed into believing that scameras save lives, that really did piss me off but it demonstrates the lengths that these morons have to go to to try to convince people that they are right - nobody else believes them other than a bunch of 8 year olds
That bit made me sick to the pit of my stomach.
Good job Paul.
Me too. I would be seriously pissed off if they had done that using my daughter.
I found the most ironic bit was when they mentioned that the police are not reporting serious injuries in order (presumably) to keep the accident figures down and hence show that cameras are working. If this is the case then the person(s) responsible for this (whether they be the decision makers that ask the police to fudge such figures, or if the officer is doing it off his own bat) should be made to pay. Like the lady towards the end said, they should be charged with manslaughter if they are going to go down that route because they are lying to cover up injuries and deaths in order to maintain future deaths/injuries by using a system that isn't working. Outrageous.
Why doesn't this country have a Bullshit Ambassador who has the power to say 'Hang on, you've claimed X but the reality is Y. Explain yourself succesfully or you're fired.' I'd do it.....
jasandjules said:
FNG said:
Very interesting to see that every respondee on the bbc article is against speed cameras in some way, and in favour of higher standards or more policing or both.
More likely because the BBC "edit" the posts, so those who disagree with the cash cow will be ignored.
Not what the posts are saying though.
Those who disagree with the cash cow are being published, not ignored.
I expected the BBC to err towards [baaah] speed kills and cameras save lives [/baaah] but their report and the comments attached to it are almost entirely in the opposite direction.
Or have we misunderstood each other?
jasandjules said:
FNG said:
Very interesting to see that every respondee on the bbc article is against speed cameras in some way, and in favour of higher standards or more policing or both.
More likely because the BBC "edit" the posts, so those who disagree with the cash cow will be ignored.
I don't think you read what FNG posted.
A really good programme, with strong messages against the current policies. For the BBC that was incendiary (although I do detect the BBC being much more willing to criticise the government now than they were 10 years ago when Mr Blur was newly hatched).
It won't have any direct effect, of course, but it must contribute to the public's growing feelings of dissatisfaction.
It won't have any direct effect, of course, but it must contribute to the public's growing feelings of dissatisfaction.
Great movement in the right direction, as said it's the polar opposite of what I was expecting from our 'unbiased' national broadcaster.
Radio 4 is a good start but until this issue gets taken up by your super soaraway Sun, I'm not convinced we'll see much tangible effect.
Though I live in hope.
Radio 4 is a good start but until this issue gets taken up by your super soaraway Sun, I'm not convinced we'll see much tangible effect.
Though I live in hope.
Defo a step in the right direction, nice one Paul, points well made again.
I'm not sure the captain came across well though, the problems the policy is causing were people like him and I didn't think he justified his actions very well.
In conclusion, I thought the programme was saying that scams are doing their job, perhaps not quite as well as is claimed but were successful and important none the less. Further traffic policing was also required to stop the Captain Gatso types escaping the penalties (aswell as the uninsured etc etc of course).
Perhaps I was expecting a bit more of an attack but like I say a step in the right direction.
I'm not sure the captain came across well though, the problems the policy is causing were people like him and I didn't think he justified his actions very well.
In conclusion, I thought the programme was saying that scams are doing their job, perhaps not quite as well as is claimed but were successful and important none the less. Further traffic policing was also required to stop the Captain Gatso types escaping the penalties (aswell as the uninsured etc etc of course).
Perhaps I was expecting a bit more of an attack but like I say a step in the right direction.
FNG said:
It's clear to see which message the Scamera Pratnerships, in going round all the primary schools in London in 2005 brainwashing our children, put most emphasis on.
Was listening to Radio Five on the drive home this afternoon, and the talk moved onto the subject of a new WHO report on road casualties. As part of this discussion they had some pre-recorded comments from UK teenagers, and one which stood out was (almost certainly not word-perfect, but close enough to make the point):
"I just walk across the road 'cause I expect the cars to stop for me"
A quite shameful indication of just how biased road safety education has been over the last decade or so, and sadly entirely in keeping with my (and I suspect most of us) experience of watching youngsters (and even young adults - presumably from the first few generations to lose the valuable and even-handed road safety messages that mine and older generations were fortunate enough to receive) treating road safety in a totally cavalier fashion and taking absolutely no personal responsibility for their, or anyone elses, safety.
But hey, that's OK, because the SCPs and their chums at TfL, Brake et al, are quite happy to continue filling their heads with all manner of nonsense, whilst simultaneously berating (in language which spans the whole gamut of puke-inducing claptrap) motorists for causing the roads to be dangerous places for these poor innocent lambs who couldn't possibly be expected to have any part to play in reducing the level of danger.
Here's a suggestion for what we could do with some of the revenue from speeding tickets - install a bunch of TVs along the corridors of every school in the country, hooked up to DVD players running the Charley Says DVDs on permanent loop. In amongst the other classic, and mostly still quite relevant, public service messages on those discs are all (or at least, pretty much all) of the road safety ads I remember from my childhood. If we're going to brainwash the little dears, at least let's brainwash them with some genuinely useful stuff...
A very restrained response.
I'm sorry to say that if I was expected to emergency brake for some arrogant little twunt who's far too aware of his 'rights, innit' it's not public information films I'd wanting to beat him over the head with.
But they know which side their bread's buttered on, and as a motorist so do I, so wishing I could exert extreme prejudice on them is about the limit of it isn't it?
It's going to take the best part of a generation to reverse this mess, if it's reversible that is
Still haven't listened to the Radio 4 article. I'll do that instead of ranting on here again, I think.
I'm sorry to say that if I was expected to emergency brake for some arrogant little twunt who's far too aware of his 'rights, innit' it's not public information films I'd wanting to beat him over the head with.
But they know which side their bread's buttered on, and as a motorist so do I, so wishing I could exert extreme prejudice on them is about the limit of it isn't it?
It's going to take the best part of a generation to reverse this mess, if it's reversible that is
Still haven't listened to the Radio 4 article. I'll do that instead of ranting on here again, I think.
FNG said:
Radio 4 is a good start but until this issue gets taken up by your super soaraway Sun, I'm not convinced we'll see much tangible effect.
We're getting there:
www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2007180297,00.html
The Sun said:
Speeding cop gets chop suey
By SEBASTIAN LANDER
April 19, 2007
A COP who was let off a speeding fine by arguing he was on an emergency call despite collecting a Chinese takeaway has been axed from traffic duties.
PC Stephen Akrill was caught driving a police Land Rover through a speed camera in Rotherham, South Yorkshire, at 48mph when the speed limit was 40mph.
He appeared in court late last year but magistrates let the 41-year-old
off a fine and three points on his licence after he said had been on his
way to a road accident.
But a witness who saw the camera flash told magistrates he then watched the officer go into a Chinese takeaway and emerge with bags of food.
PC Akrill told the court how he decided to help at the accident but when he heard other units had responded, he aborted his journey and went to the takeaway instead.
Magistrates in Rotherham were told the takeaway had been ordered in advance.
At the time, South Yorkshire Police chief Meredydd Hughes, said it was “very regrettable that an officer should apparently have disregarded a speed camera under these circumstances.”
Today, a spokesman for South Yorkshire Police said the officer had received a personal reprimand from the Chief Constable.
He added: “Such reprimands are normally dealt with by an officer of the rank of superintendent, but the Chief Constable wanted PC Akrill to understand how his conduct had directly led to a lowering in public confidence in the police.
"PC Akrill has been permanently removed from roads policing duties.”
Paul Smith, founder of the anti-camera group Safe Speed, said: “Meredydd Hughes should be ashamed of himself. He’s sacrificed a valuable traffic officer to support a failed road safety policy."
By SEBASTIAN LANDER
April 19, 2007
A COP who was let off a speeding fine by arguing he was on an emergency call despite collecting a Chinese takeaway has been axed from traffic duties.
PC Stephen Akrill was caught driving a police Land Rover through a speed camera in Rotherham, South Yorkshire, at 48mph when the speed limit was 40mph.
He appeared in court late last year but magistrates let the 41-year-old
off a fine and three points on his licence after he said had been on his
way to a road accident.
But a witness who saw the camera flash told magistrates he then watched the officer go into a Chinese takeaway and emerge with bags of food.
PC Akrill told the court how he decided to help at the accident but when he heard other units had responded, he aborted his journey and went to the takeaway instead.
Magistrates in Rotherham were told the takeaway had been ordered in advance.
At the time, South Yorkshire Police chief Meredydd Hughes, said it was “very regrettable that an officer should apparently have disregarded a speed camera under these circumstances.”
Today, a spokesman for South Yorkshire Police said the officer had received a personal reprimand from the Chief Constable.
He added: “Such reprimands are normally dealt with by an officer of the rank of superintendent, but the Chief Constable wanted PC Akrill to understand how his conduct had directly led to a lowering in public confidence in the police.
"PC Akrill has been permanently removed from roads policing duties.”
Paul Smith, founder of the anti-camera group Safe Speed, said: “Meredydd Hughes should be ashamed of himself. He’s sacrificed a valuable traffic officer to support a failed road safety policy."
Edited by safespeed on Friday 20th April 20:47
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff