Countryfile yesterday
Discussion
Did anyone else catch this blatant piece of propaganda? I know its not normally a PH'er programme but the missus is from farming stock so she watches it and I really wish I hadnt - a new TV was almost needed.
Article was on speed limits on rural roads, and every cliche in the book was wheeled out - including the bereaved mother whose offspring was killed by a drunk driver, calling for a blanket 40mph on all rural roads.
There was no response from the other side of the argument, I can only presume no chance was given, and the piece ended with the reporter demanding a reduced limit on all rural roads from an MP. They even rolled out the Skoda with the speedlimiter.
Every lie (sorry, statistic) you could think of was used - and whilst I have every sympathy for anyone in the same situation as that mother, I fail to see the relevance in this context.
I think I need to go and have another lie down...
Article was on speed limits on rural roads, and every cliche in the book was wheeled out - including the bereaved mother whose offspring was killed by a drunk driver, calling for a blanket 40mph on all rural roads.
There was no response from the other side of the argument, I can only presume no chance was given, and the piece ended with the reporter demanding a reduced limit on all rural roads from an MP. They even rolled out the Skoda with the speedlimiter.
Every lie (sorry, statistic) you could think of was used - and whilst I have every sympathy for anyone in the same situation as that mother, I fail to see the relevance in this context.
I think I need to go and have another lie down...
Can't see it happening myself.
It'd be too expensive to change all those national speed limit signs. They could adjust the national speed limit, but then they'd have to put up other signs on the A roads.
This is why most policy relates to motorways and inner cities. There's little enough of it that excercising control is practical.
I don't fancy the chances once they have GPS implanted in peoples brains at birth though!
It'd be too expensive to change all those national speed limit signs. They could adjust the national speed limit, but then they'd have to put up other signs on the A roads.
This is why most policy relates to motorways and inner cities. There's little enough of it that excercising control is practical.
I don't fancy the chances once they have GPS implanted in peoples brains at birth though!
I saw it. It was complete bullshit.
" A drunk driver came round the bend and killed himself, his passenger and my daughter".
Then the very next words out of the presenter's mouth was "speed".
Like the fact that he was drunk had nothing to do with the crash then?
Theyre idiots who make these biased programmes.
" A drunk driver came round the bend and killed himself, his passenger and my daughter".
Then the very next words out of the presenter's mouth was "speed".
Like the fact that he was drunk had nothing to do with the crash then?
Theyre idiots who make these biased programmes.
I saw this bull
t also, and it made my blood boil.
It started with the usual assumption that ALL accidents are caused directly and only by exceeding the posted speed limit, then tried to illustrate it with a tragic example. But it was a drunk driver!
At this point I decided that the programme had been made by simpletons.
Perhaps they had too much trouble finding a tragic example of an accident caused by exceeding the speed limit?
I think a short missive to Country File's email is on the cards...
t also, and it made my blood boil. It started with the usual assumption that ALL accidents are caused directly and only by exceeding the posted speed limit, then tried to illustrate it with a tragic example. But it was a drunk driver!
At this point I decided that the programme had been made by simpletons.
Perhaps they had too much trouble finding a tragic example of an accident caused by exceeding the speed limit?
I think a short missive to Country File's email is on the cards...
Just sent:
Dear Sir,
In regard of yesterdays "speed" article broadcast on BBC1; I have never seen a more biased programme in my life.
Where were the "balancing" counter arguments?
Did you even bother to ask anyone other than the "speed kills" lobby to contribute?
The part that i found particularly galling was the way the unfortunate lady whose daughter was killed by a drunk driver was used, yes used, as a pawn in the "speed kills" lobbie's arguments that you people so kindly contributed towards.
The fact that the lady's daughter was killed by a drunk driver completely escaped your reporters attention and obviously the programme editors, as the very next part of the programme went on to make "speed" its focus again.
Its not as though the fact that the driver was DRUNK had anything to do with the death of that ladys girl, is it? But off you went all the same on a "speed kills" propaganda trip.
I found the speed limiter in the car a particularly fascinating item as it demonstrated exactly why an idea such as speed limiters in cars is fatally flawed.
What do i mean?
Well how about the fact that your reporter obviously felt safer with her foot planted into the shagpile but still doing the MAXIMUM limit for that road?
How's THAT making her safer huh? It simply means that she believed she was somehow "safer" because the car had slowed her to the legal limits!
Quite what thats got to do with safe driving is beyond me. Its not as though she COULDNT POSSIBLY have an accident when the car was governing her speed, indeed a number of these speed limited vehicles in the pilot trials have been written off! But you didnt mention that either!
Bias, Bias and more BIAS. BBC a New Labour Lap Dog.
Regards DeltaF
Dear Sir,
In regard of yesterdays "speed" article broadcast on BBC1; I have never seen a more biased programme in my life.
Where were the "balancing" counter arguments?
Did you even bother to ask anyone other than the "speed kills" lobby to contribute?
The part that i found particularly galling was the way the unfortunate lady whose daughter was killed by a drunk driver was used, yes used, as a pawn in the "speed kills" lobbie's arguments that you people so kindly contributed towards.
The fact that the lady's daughter was killed by a drunk driver completely escaped your reporters attention and obviously the programme editors, as the very next part of the programme went on to make "speed" its focus again.
Its not as though the fact that the driver was DRUNK had anything to do with the death of that ladys girl, is it? But off you went all the same on a "speed kills" propaganda trip.
I found the speed limiter in the car a particularly fascinating item as it demonstrated exactly why an idea such as speed limiters in cars is fatally flawed.
What do i mean?
Well how about the fact that your reporter obviously felt safer with her foot planted into the shagpile but still doing the MAXIMUM limit for that road?
How's THAT making her safer huh? It simply means that she believed she was somehow "safer" because the car had slowed her to the legal limits!
Quite what thats got to do with safe driving is beyond me. Its not as though she COULDNT POSSIBLY have an accident when the car was governing her speed, indeed a number of these speed limited vehicles in the pilot trials have been written off! But you didnt mention that either!
Bias, Bias and more BIAS. BBC a New Labour Lap Dog.
Regards DeltaF
BBC site link
Oh oh. Limiter's mentioned again.
Oh oh. Limiter's mentioned again.
BBC Countryfile site said:
Rural Road Speeds
Campaigners are calling for stricter measures to control speed on rural roads, as road deaths in the countryside continue to rise.
While overall fatalities are falling, death rates on rural roads have risen for four consecutive years. The most recent figures available show that in 2003, 1,818 people died on rural roads, an average of more than five deaths a day.
Campaign groups such as Roadpeace and the Campaign to Protect Rural England claim cars speeding through villages and country lanes have changed the whole character of the countryside, with walkers, cyclists and horse-riders increasingly fearful of using public roads. They are demanding a blanket 30mph speed limit for all villages and a reduction of the 60mph limit for rural roads to 50mph or 40mph, depending on the type of road.
They also want a stricter enforcement of existing speed limits and are critical of proposals in the Government's Road Safety Bill to reduce penalties for motorists convicted of speeding offences.
Charlotte Smith speaks to relatives of road accident victims in Nottinghamshire and Kent and tries out a car fitted with a new type of speed limiter which automatically reduces the vehicle's speed in line with the speed limit.
I think there is merit in reducing the speeds on some rural roads. Rural life in some villages is now completely different. I remember as a child being able to walk hand in hand up the country lane with my mum, you can't do that any more because a minority of drivers take it upon themselves to drive at high speed around lanes with hedges. I doubt many people here can be accused of such actions, but we all know that some idiots drive like that.
Perhaps local councils should spend money on creating pavements on some of these roads, and improving the layout on certain sections - curtailing hedgerows on difficult twisty sections perhaps?
30mph through villages isn't so bad, after all these villages are usually very pretty, and you might even stop for tea and scones!
The 1800 or so people killed on rural roads in 2003 is quite revealing - considering the placement of Gatsos on dual carriageways and the like.
I'm not having a go at the experienced drivers, just saying that there is a time and a place for everything.
Perhaps local councils should spend money on creating pavements on some of these roads, and improving the layout on certain sections - curtailing hedgerows on difficult twisty sections perhaps?
30mph through villages isn't so bad, after all these villages are usually very pretty, and you might even stop for tea and scones!
The 1800 or so people killed on rural roads in 2003 is quite revealing - considering the placement of Gatsos on dual carriageways and the like.
I'm not having a go at the experienced drivers, just saying that there is a time and a place for everything.
Just sent this:
Ahhh, that's better
I said:
Dear Sir / Madam,
I am writing to complain about the piece broadcast on Country File about the speed limits on rural roads.
It was the most inaccurate, one-sided piece of journalism I have seen in a long time and the first one that has caused me to complain.
Firstly, let me give you my point of view: I am a motorist, and as such have a daily struggle to get to my destination avoiding congestion, and losing my licence to a 'Safety Camera Partnership.'
I also believe that no fatalities should be accepted as 'one of those things', however, I believe that the way to reducing casualties is not to focus on ONLY speed limits.
Secondly, allow me to point out 2 seriously flawed assumptions that your piece was based upon:
1. That all accidents are the direct and sole consequence of exceeding the posted speed limit.
While it is obvious that a percentage of accidents have excessive speed as a contributory factor, it is faintly ridiculous to assume that all accidents are caused by exceeding a speed limit. Even the government has been unable to provide statistical data to prove the claim that "1 third of all accidents are caused by speed."
2. That observing the speed limit will somehow prevent you having an accident, and stop all road casualties.
This was neatly demonstrated by your presenter, driving the GPS limited Skoda. She seemed to suggest, that driving this car meant that she was safe, because it was unable of exceeding the limit. I presume, by that logic that it would be safe to jump behind the wheel of that Skoda whilst drunk? I don't think so. Do you really think that reducing the limit to 40mph, and flooding the countryside with speed cameras will mean that there are no more accidents? Frankly, that scenario fills me with dread, as I imagine everyone driving along, eyes glued to their speedo and not the road because they're petrified of getting more points.
I found it extremely distasteful, when you featured a woman who had lost her daughter, in an attempt to illustrate your flawed arguments. What exactly does getting hit by a drunk driver have to do with speeding? I would venture to suggest that the current obsession with speed, with the resulting reduction in traffic police numbers, has made drink driving easier to get away with. Perhaps you had difficulty finding a bereaved parent who lost a child in an accident caused only by speed?
The whole piece was badly researched, presented and gave a completely one-sided view of how to tackle road casualties, much like the government's current policy. I was about to say that I expect more from the BBC, but I'm sorry to say that it's just the sort of short-sighted, one-sided "Daily Express" type journalism that is all too common now.
Yours sincerely,
Ahhh, that's better
parrot of doom said:
I think there is merit in reducing the speeds on some rural roads. Rural life in some villages is now completely different. I remember as a child being able to walk hand in hand up the country lane with my mum, you can't do that any more because a minority of drivers take it upon themselves to drive at high speed around lanes with hedges.
so how would lowering the speed limit change the behaviour of the 'irresponsible minority' then?catso said:
I think there is merit in reducing the speeds on some rural roads. Rural life in some villages is now completely different. I remember as a child being able to walk hand in hand up the country lane with my mum, you can't do that any more because a minority of drivers take it upon themselves to drive at high speed around lanes with hedges.
It wouldn't. How do you change the behaviour of the irresponsible minority? Heavy policing? Reporting on your neighbours? Citizen's arrest? I don't know. Better to have the attitude test at the start of the driving test process and weed out those unsuited to driving -- but that would miss the thousands who've got licences already.
What IS the solution to the irresponsible minority?
Dwight VanDriver said:
Those of you that watched the programme and were observant, the straight stretch NSL into the 30 limit, is an illegal limit. The 30 red roundel at the bottom was missing so did not comply with TSGD and therefore limit unenforceable.
DVD
Well spotted! I didn't see that.
Tell it to the 3 speeders the chap 'caught' from his scamera van!
catso said:
I think there is merit in reducing the speeds on some rural roads. Rural life in some villages is now completely different. I remember as a child being able to walk hand in hand up the country lane with my mum, you can't do that any more because a minority of drivers take it upon themselves to drive at high speed around lanes with hedges.
TBH I don't really know. One would hope that the law of averages would eventually catch up with such people, and their rights to drive would be curtailed. Saying that, without adequate road policing, such punishments would have little effect.
Perhaps introduce more of the 'slow down 30' signs, that seem to be quite effective?
Personally, I'm in favour of snipers.
Deltafox said:
I found the speed limiter in the car a particularly fascinating item as it demonstrated exactly why an idea such as speed limiters in cars is fatally flawed.
You just made me think about my last accident.
The car was acting very sluggish..(it turned out only to be running on half its cylinders) so i was having to 'mash my foot into the carpet' to get up to speed.
I was driving it like this for a couple of days and just got used to the sound of the engine over revving and the car not getting up to speed. It was like auto pilot was engaged and nothing dangerous could happen.
Then I realised too late that i was actually going faster than I meant to be and the traffic stopped...Oops. I have never rear ended anyone in a properly working car, so i think you have a point!
Yeah i can see why it can cause crashes Hedders.
The presenter was oblivious to the fact that 30 (limited) might well not have been safe, yet there she was, well pleased with herself and commenting on how it "feels like someone is pulling you backwards"....thatll be the engine braking then....
Yet on she ploughed, blissfully at 30 with absolutely no consideration given to anything else.
Speed limiters in cars; what a mindless idea that is, as mindless as speed cameras infact.
The presenter was oblivious to the fact that 30 (limited) might well not have been safe, yet there she was, well pleased with herself and commenting on how it "feels like someone is pulling you backwards"....thatll be the engine braking then....
Yet on she ploughed, blissfully at 30 with absolutely no consideration given to anything else.
Speed limiters in cars; what a mindless idea that is, as mindless as speed cameras infact.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff