Petition the government to publish speed camera data
Discussion
Perhaps we can all support opening up this data, whichever side of the safety or revenue argument you fall.
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/73437
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/73437
Personally I think all government data should be open, where possible, for reasons of transparency and releasing the value of it - value which in this case could be increased safety.
As for my motives, I'm just an individual, I work with data and this is a dataset that would interest me. There's probably a stack of other datasets that would interest me which aren't available, but this one relates to recent threads and piqued my interest. No orchestration - I actually thought this is something both sides of recent debates might support.
As for my motives, I'm just an individual, I work with data and this is a dataset that would interest me. There's probably a stack of other datasets that would interest me which aren't available, but this one relates to recent threads and piqued my interest. No orchestration - I actually thought this is something both sides of recent debates might support.
Edited by simoto on Friday 9th January 22:59
Statistics for another country with speed cameras installed show that approximately 60% of drivers were caught going only very slightly over the limit, i.e. it was absent mindedness / failure to slow down at the fixed camera location, rather than "dangerous" driving that did it.
That's a fail in my books.
That's a fail in my books.
Is it hidden? Have police forces refused FOI requests? If they have then shouldn't people be asking for police forces to be forced to release the data rather than wasting public money making the DoT collect data they don't currently hold? This is a pointless petition IMO and aimed at the wrong people.
Infact it seems that the police are quite open with speed camera FoI requests, where the data exists. This is just an overly broad request for something the DoT does not hold. It's lazyness, not people keeping information hidden.
Infact it seems that the police are quite open with speed camera FoI requests, where the data exists. This is just an overly broad request for something the DoT does not hold. It's lazyness, not people keeping information hidden.
Edited by SteveSteveson on Saturday 10th January 12:12
simoto said:
Riley Blue said:
I can't see how knowing this information is going to be of benefit to anyone.
Great. Then this data should be open for all and not hidden for the few.Guybrush said:
It's already known that the vast majority of people caught exceeding speed limits are both statistically the least likely to have an accident and have the cleanest histories in this respect, so I guess this information requested could in some way help reinforce that.
Err, what? So driving faster makes it less likely to have an accident than slowing down? HenryJM said:
Err, what? So driving faster makes it less likely to have an accident than slowing down?
The other way around. Fewer accidents occur at higher speeds than lower speeds.It doesn't mean you should drive faster than normal to try to reduce chance of an accident
Someone tell me when you should use fewer rather than less
Sorry, I'm being thick. Surely if a person drives down a road and once they do it at 30 and in another, everything else is the same, but the speed is 40mph, then surely the faster one is more likely to have the accident?
Of course there could be loads of other reasons other than the speed, but removing them faster is more dangerous than slower.
Of course there could be loads of other reasons other than the speed, but removing them faster is more dangerous than slower.
HenryJM said:
Sorry, I'm being thick. Surely if a person drives down a road and once they do it at 30 and in another, everything else is the same, but the speed is 40mph, then surely the faster one is more likely to have the accident?
Of course there could be loads of other reasons other than the speed, but removing them faster is more dangerous than slower.
Unfortunately it doesn't work like that, you're forgetting humans are involved. As you drive faster don't you take more care?Of course there could be loads of other reasons other than the speed, but removing them faster is more dangerous than slower.
If you look at the figures and assuming you're driving normally, you're more likely to be involved in a low speed accident than a high speed one.
If youve had any accidents have they been low speed or high speed?
Edited by saaby93 on Saturday 10th January 19:54
saaby93 said:
HenryJM said:
Sorry, I'm being thick. Surely if a person drives down a road and once they do it at 30 and in another, everything else is the same, but the speed is 40mph, then surely the faster one is more likely to have the accident?
Of course there could be loads of other reasons other than the speed, but removing them faster is more dangerous than slower.
Unfortunately it doesn't work like that, you're forgetting humans are involvedOf course there could be loads of other reasons other than the speed, but removing them faster is more dangerous than slower.
Ask yourself whether you're going take more care driving at 60 or 30. At which speed would you be more worried about the consequences of an accident
Think if you're a pedestrian too. Are you going be more careful crossing a 30 road or do you check twice (at least) before crossing a 60 road.
If you look at the figures and assuming you're driving normally, you're more likely to be involved in a low speed accident than a high speed one.
If youve had any accidents have they been low speed or high speed?
You seem to be saying that if you want to improve safety then increase speed, so the bit I lived on that had four people die in three accidents in six months would have been improved by people going faster. Is that correct? As it they reduced to and enforced a 30 limit and nobody has died there since.
HenryJM said:
What figures?
I asked you where you found the graph in this thread 
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
HenryJM said:
You seem to be saying that if you want to improve safety then increase speed, so the bit I lived on that had four people die in three accidents in six months would have been improved by people going faster. Is that correct? As it they reduced to and enforced a 30 limit and nobody has died there since.
no that's not what I seem to be saying saaby93 said:
HenryJM said:
What figures?
I asked you where you found the graph in this thread http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
saaby93 said:
HenryJM said:
You seem to be saying that if you want to improve safety then increase speed, so the bit I lived on that had four people die in three accidents in six months would have been improved by people going faster. Is that correct? As it they reduced to and enforced a 30 limit and nobody has died there since.
no that's not what I seem to be saying Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff