Lincs Road Safety Partnership - don't they understand!!??
Discussion
Bit of a long rant here, sorry!
Another free 'council news' paper dropped through the door yesterday. Emblazoned across the front is the tragic story of an early twenties lad who was killed by a speeding taxi. The story mentions the fact that he was crossing the road on a corner and the taxi, which was doing a minimum 62mph in a 50mph limit struck him and killed him.
Very tragic, we would all agree with that. But why doesn't it mention the circumstances in more detail?
However, what really gets me going is the fact that some looney from LRSP is in the paper saying - blah blah blah, again another case of speed related killing, blah blah blah speed this, speed that. He then goes on to present the KSI figures for 2007 which has seen an INCREASE in deaths on the road in Lincolnshire. However this is all ok as they are on the way to meet their targets and the actual amount of collisions (KSI's) are down!
He then goes on to say that the majority of these deaths (21 I think out of around 79) are due to 'excess or inappropriate speed'. Ok then, which of the 21 is which? Why group them together as there can be a lot of difference between an excess and an inappropriate speed. Other causes of the deaths include lack of attention and drink/drug driving etc which account for nearly 20 of the 70 odd apparently. Worrying!
I also notice that on their website they still haven't posted the stats for 2007. Why the delay? Is it because the amount of fatalities has increased and its a smear on their stupid campaign, which actually presents posters like these:
http://microsites.lincolnshire.gov.uk/lrsp/section...
http://microsites.lincolnshire.gov.uk/lrsp/section...
These posters and visuals are completely ill thought and present nothing educational at all. Even their red routes (a campaign where they put red signs on a 'dangerous' road) are a pathetic idea as it is simply a sign saying the amount of deaths on the road this year compared to last. This has actually back-fired because 2007 has a higher figure than 2006!
The worrying thing is that they are stuck in their ways, and with the way the government feels about speeding I don't think that there is anything we can do to change this. We all know that speed is not the only cause of death on the roads, why the hell can't these idiots just appreciate these facts!!
What about education related to driving whilst tired, tailgating, lack of observation, driving to the conditions, drink and drug driving???
I was going to take the time and write them a nice long email (with or without my personal details attached) but will it really get anywhere? Will it make the slightest bit of difference to this extremely dangerous single track thinking of theirs? I doubt it.
Rant over, thanks!
Another free 'council news' paper dropped through the door yesterday. Emblazoned across the front is the tragic story of an early twenties lad who was killed by a speeding taxi. The story mentions the fact that he was crossing the road on a corner and the taxi, which was doing a minimum 62mph in a 50mph limit struck him and killed him.
Very tragic, we would all agree with that. But why doesn't it mention the circumstances in more detail?
However, what really gets me going is the fact that some looney from LRSP is in the paper saying - blah blah blah, again another case of speed related killing, blah blah blah speed this, speed that. He then goes on to present the KSI figures for 2007 which has seen an INCREASE in deaths on the road in Lincolnshire. However this is all ok as they are on the way to meet their targets and the actual amount of collisions (KSI's) are down!
He then goes on to say that the majority of these deaths (21 I think out of around 79) are due to 'excess or inappropriate speed'. Ok then, which of the 21 is which? Why group them together as there can be a lot of difference between an excess and an inappropriate speed. Other causes of the deaths include lack of attention and drink/drug driving etc which account for nearly 20 of the 70 odd apparently. Worrying!
I also notice that on their website they still haven't posted the stats for 2007. Why the delay? Is it because the amount of fatalities has increased and its a smear on their stupid campaign, which actually presents posters like these:
http://microsites.lincolnshire.gov.uk/lrsp/section...
http://microsites.lincolnshire.gov.uk/lrsp/section...
These posters and visuals are completely ill thought and present nothing educational at all. Even their red routes (a campaign where they put red signs on a 'dangerous' road) are a pathetic idea as it is simply a sign saying the amount of deaths on the road this year compared to last. This has actually back-fired because 2007 has a higher figure than 2006!
The worrying thing is that they are stuck in their ways, and with the way the government feels about speeding I don't think that there is anything we can do to change this. We all know that speed is not the only cause of death on the roads, why the hell can't these idiots just appreciate these facts!!
What about education related to driving whilst tired, tailgating, lack of observation, driving to the conditions, drink and drug driving???
I was going to take the time and write them a nice long email (with or without my personal details attached) but will it really get anywhere? Will it make the slightest bit of difference to this extremely dangerous single track thinking of theirs? I doubt it.
Rant over, thanks!
http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/gassing/topic.asp?h=0...
It's starting - I guarentee you that there will be a proposal to make the NSL 50mph on SC roads coming out before thend of the year, justified by the cost of changing signage.
It's starting - I guarentee you that there will be a proposal to make the NSL 50mph on SC roads coming out before thend of the year, justified by the cost of changing signage.
Bing o said:
http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/gassing/topic.asp?h=0...
It's starting - I guarentee you that there will be a proposal to make the NSL 50mph on SC roads coming out before thend of the year, justified by the cost of changing signage.
Yep, I noticed the other similar thread about the roads staying at 60mph and cast my vote.It's starting - I guarentee you that there will be a proposal to make the NSL 50mph on SC roads coming out before thend of the year, justified by the cost of changing signage.
It seems to me that whatever we do the government and councils don't want to listen. Just look at the petition against road charging last year. They open the votes and polls up so that people can vote, then when its over they comment on how they 'opened it up for public consultation' but do not actually listen to the results. Or, as in most cases, they skew the results and make up statistics that suite their wants and needs!
Vipers said:
So had it struck him at 50 he would have survived then?
This is another thought of mine. If it was a 50mph limit and the taxi wasn't speeding would it have made a difference? It is tragic but its not like the taxi was doing 100mph.Also, what were the circumstances? Did the lad run out into the road? Did he cross without looking? If the taxi driver was so at fault why doesn't it mention anything about he/she being prosecuted for death by dangerous driving or something similar?
They really should start a campaign aimed at the pedestrians, they amble across the roads, phone stuck on their ear, MP3 ear phones in ear.
How often are you stopped at lights (2 lanes of traffic) pedestrians step out without a glance down the road, or between the two lanes, or worse when there is only one lane occupied, blindly walk past the bus in front, assuming nothing is coming in the other lane................ that frightens me a lot.
If nothing esle, remember cyclist are hard to see, and dont stop very quickly either, and are notorious for ignoring lights as well. (not all, some).
How often are you stopped at lights (2 lanes of traffic) pedestrians step out without a glance down the road, or between the two lanes, or worse when there is only one lane occupied, blindly walk past the bus in front, assuming nothing is coming in the other lane................ that frightens me a lot.
If nothing esle, remember cyclist are hard to see, and dont stop very quickly either, and are notorious for ignoring lights as well. (not all, some).
A few months ago 2 sisters were killed in their car just outside Sheffield. There was uproar in the press blaming the dangerous nature of the road and an instant call to lower the speed limit from NSL to 50mph.
They were calling it a 'Killer Road' because of the number of deaths on the road in the last 5 years (5). The fact that this accident was at least a mile away from the 'Killer' section seems to have escaped the local journalists and councillors.
I went past the accident site a few days later. The car hit a dry stone wall on the outside of a tightish corner on a downhill section of the road.
I doubt that a lower limit would have made any difference.
The possibility of it being driver error (which a majority of RTA's are) has not been mentioned which is not surprising. Blaming the driver would not go down well with the family or be used as ammunition to lower the limit.
It is very tragic for the family but this knee jerk reaction by the press and local councillors geally annoys me.
FIND THER CAUSE OF THE ACCIDENT FIRST, MUPPETS!
They were calling it a 'Killer Road' because of the number of deaths on the road in the last 5 years (5). The fact that this accident was at least a mile away from the 'Killer' section seems to have escaped the local journalists and councillors.
I went past the accident site a few days later. The car hit a dry stone wall on the outside of a tightish corner on a downhill section of the road.
I doubt that a lower limit would have made any difference.
The possibility of it being driver error (which a majority of RTA's are) has not been mentioned which is not surprising. Blaming the driver would not go down well with the family or be used as ammunition to lower the limit.
It is very tragic for the family but this knee jerk reaction by the press and local councillors geally annoys me.
FIND THER CAUSE OF THE ACCIDENT FIRST, MUPPETS!
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff