More Slower Speeds Bullsh1t
Discussion
What a total CROCK OF SHIT!!!!
"The chance of a crash rises by 50% when exceeding the speed limit" ?? FFS!! Are these folks for real?
"Speed cameras are popular"...lmfao..roflmao!!!IDIOTS!!
"Traffic calming works""" hararararararar lmao.
What planet do they reside on, cos it sure as fcukin hell aint earth!
Select commitee of total twats it would seem...i GIVE UP!
"The chance of a crash rises by 50% when exceeding the speed limit" ?? FFS!! Are these folks for real?
"Speed cameras are popular"...lmfao..roflmao!!!IDIOTS!!
"Traffic calming works""" hararararararar lmao.
What planet do they reside on, cos it sure as fcukin hell aint earth!
Select commitee of total twats it would seem...i GIVE UP!
"Speed management must be central to a sustainable..." blah blah. What merchant bankers. C'mon lads (and lasses) we've GOT to do something.
Quite what, I'm not sure.. but we're very rapidly heading down hill. Gotta do something before it's too late.
CarZee? any ideas mate?
Denny, yeah - the move abroad option seems more and more appealing.
C
Quite what, I'm not sure.. but we're very rapidly heading down hill. Gotta do something before it's too late.
CarZee? any ideas mate?
Denny, yeah - the move abroad option seems more and more appealing.
C
The facts and figures they quote are all referenced and many refer to TRL studies - the only data available on accident rates and speed son UK roads as far as I know.
So answering this with 'Its all a crock of shit' or throwing a brick through an MP's window isn't really going to help.
So answering this with 'Its all a crock of shit' or throwing a brick through an MP's window isn't really going to help.
Hi Spn.
It is a crock of shit.
Why?
Well i contacted TRL and asked them what percentage of crashes were caused by speed alone, no other factors involved.
They replied that they didnt have ANY figures for speed as an initiator in crashes.
Thats why its a crock, cos i took some time to find out from THE people who write these dam lying reports.
Still, have to admire yer persistence in trying to change me..have some respect!
It is a crock of shit.
Why?
Well i contacted TRL and asked them what percentage of crashes were caused by speed alone, no other factors involved.
They replied that they didnt have ANY figures for speed as an initiator in crashes.
Thats why its a crock, cos i took some time to find out from THE people who write these dam lying reports.
Still, have to admire yer persistence in trying to change me..have some respect!
spnracing said: Have you read TRL 421 and TRL511?
I don't think they claim that speed is the initiator of accidents - just a contributory factor.
Is anyone claiming any different?
Yes, me.
TRL323, investiagting causal factors in accidents, claimed 7% - based on actual accident figures.
The West Midlands Police figures, over four years, have speed as a causal factor in 2 or 3% of accidents, based on actual accident figures.
TRL421 and TRL511 yield statistics about accidents based on projections and formulae - not real accidents.
Which do you prefer - statistical spin, or observed reality?
It's funny to me reading this and many other posts. It seems that actually people are arguing more about semantics than what's actually happening here.
I have no allegance to any drivers association (apart from membership of PH and the OLC), but here is my take.
Reading the briefing, the main theme that comes out to me is that speed cameras, if properly used, can assist in reducing the speed that drivers use, both in averages and maximums, in any particular area. However, it then goes on to argue that lower speed limits overall would be good for the soul, mind and country - which in my view is just plain idiotic.
What impressed me is the way that they have presented this paper. Some of their facts are hyperbola, but so are many of the counter arguments that people use against organisations like this.
To me, it's simple. Speed in itself doesn't kill. Speed coupled with a driver or third party error has a simple relationship, if things go wrong at a greater speed they will tend to cause more damage, things going wrong at a lower speed will cause less damage. There are always the cases though of the driver that lost it at 120 and only scratched his bumper, and the driver that had a child step out in front of him/her at 10mph and killed them outright, but such "limits of normal distribution" are always used by organisations or individuals that wish to make points to refute the normal situation.
In my mind it's interesting that the "anti-speed" community is far more organised than the "appropiate-speed" community. To create such a briefing paper, and to be so organised in presenting these "facts" in a "well researched and unrefutable manner" as, prima facie, presented in the referenced paper is obviously the work of an organised and well researched (if somewhat misguided) body.
Reading from an apprial basis would lead me to conclude that whilst the layout is somewhat confusing to the reader, the presentation of the facts by reference to exisiting HCT and other HMG facts is designed to lead the reader to conclude that the statements are true and therefore should be believed. It's a cleverly constructed paper from that point of view, however being 3 pages long would lead me to conclude that it is too long winded for most people to get to the end.
The fact that there isn't - to my visibility, a similar set of actions and papers being produced by the "appropiate speed" community means that if this is taken into account over and above the "facts" then that "community" has only itself to blame.
However, there is an interesting paradim that relates to this. High speed cars tend to cost considerably more than the "average" community is either prepared or able to spend. That B/C1 community therefore that presumably does have the disposable income is, I would probably tend to suggest, in general too busy with work and family commitments to actually take the time and effort to produce similar works of briefing papers.
To give you an idea of the amount of work - my company currently employs 3 full time, and 4/5 part time people to perform our companies briefing/networking work for broadband in the public sector. Is there actually the commitment in terms of time and effort from PH/ABD or similar to do the work to refute and educate in a balanced, logical means against organisations such as this?
I'm not having a go at anyone in particular, just at the end of the day pointing out that to counteract anything in public life you have to be prepared to spend the same amount of time and effort that the "other side" is willing to put into it.
To quote from Alec Bourne
"It is possible to store the mind with a million facts and still be entirely uneducated"
J
I have no allegance to any drivers association (apart from membership of PH and the OLC), but here is my take.
Reading the briefing, the main theme that comes out to me is that speed cameras, if properly used, can assist in reducing the speed that drivers use, both in averages and maximums, in any particular area. However, it then goes on to argue that lower speed limits overall would be good for the soul, mind and country - which in my view is just plain idiotic.
What impressed me is the way that they have presented this paper. Some of their facts are hyperbola, but so are many of the counter arguments that people use against organisations like this.
To me, it's simple. Speed in itself doesn't kill. Speed coupled with a driver or third party error has a simple relationship, if things go wrong at a greater speed they will tend to cause more damage, things going wrong at a lower speed will cause less damage. There are always the cases though of the driver that lost it at 120 and only scratched his bumper, and the driver that had a child step out in front of him/her at 10mph and killed them outright, but such "limits of normal distribution" are always used by organisations or individuals that wish to make points to refute the normal situation.
In my mind it's interesting that the "anti-speed" community is far more organised than the "appropiate-speed" community. To create such a briefing paper, and to be so organised in presenting these "facts" in a "well researched and unrefutable manner" as, prima facie, presented in the referenced paper is obviously the work of an organised and well researched (if somewhat misguided) body.
Reading from an apprial basis would lead me to conclude that whilst the layout is somewhat confusing to the reader, the presentation of the facts by reference to exisiting HCT and other HMG facts is designed to lead the reader to conclude that the statements are true and therefore should be believed. It's a cleverly constructed paper from that point of view, however being 3 pages long would lead me to conclude that it is too long winded for most people to get to the end.
The fact that there isn't - to my visibility, a similar set of actions and papers being produced by the "appropiate speed" community means that if this is taken into account over and above the "facts" then that "community" has only itself to blame.
However, there is an interesting paradim that relates to this. High speed cars tend to cost considerably more than the "average" community is either prepared or able to spend. That B/C1 community therefore that presumably does have the disposable income is, I would probably tend to suggest, in general too busy with work and family commitments to actually take the time and effort to produce similar works of briefing papers.
To give you an idea of the amount of work - my company currently employs 3 full time, and 4/5 part time people to perform our companies briefing/networking work for broadband in the public sector. Is there actually the commitment in terms of time and effort from PH/ABD or similar to do the work to refute and educate in a balanced, logical means against organisations such as this?
I'm not having a go at anyone in particular, just at the end of the day pointing out that to counteract anything in public life you have to be prepared to spend the same amount of time and effort that the "other side" is willing to put into it.
To quote from Alec Bourne
"It is possible to store the mind with a million facts and still be entirely uneducated"
J
joust said:
In my mind it's interesting that the "anti-speed" community is far more organised than the "appropiate-speed" community.
J
Hit the nail on the head there. Not only is the 'pro-speed lobby' disorganised, it is full of viewpoints such as there should be no speed limits at all. It also seems to have been hijacked by anti-New Labour extremists. A great pity.
I've just had a thought.
Surely the best way to knacker speed cameras is to either put a clock inside them or cover the insides with some non descrpt white powder.
I wonder how keen they would be to refill them if they were ticking or they could get Anthrax from them.
If they were all outside schools or even the vast majority inside 30mph limits I wouldnt care a jot. The way they are though is bollocks and to suggest the only 4% of people think they are bollocks is a complete and utter crock of shit.
Matt.
Surely the best way to knacker speed cameras is to either put a clock inside them or cover the insides with some non descrpt white powder.
I wonder how keen they would be to refill them if they were ticking or they could get Anthrax from them.
If they were all outside schools or even the vast majority inside 30mph limits I wouldnt care a jot. The way they are though is bollocks and to suggest the only 4% of people think they are bollocks is a complete and utter crock of shit.
Matt.
Blimey Plotloss!
You aint catchin the Deltaf ranting disease are ya mate?
Coulda sworn that was my post....
So Ok SPN, what should we do then?
Lets hear your solutions, suggestions etc regarding "our" way forward.
Im plenty willing to listen to anyones viewpoints on the speeding subject, even if i consider some of them to be a waste of breath.
Im all ears mate, what should we doing?(and dont say slow down please..).
You aint catchin the Deltaf ranting disease are ya mate?
Coulda sworn that was my post....
So Ok SPN, what should we do then?
Lets hear your solutions, suggestions etc regarding "our" way forward.
Im plenty willing to listen to anyones viewpoints on the speeding subject, even if i consider some of them to be a waste of breath.
Im all ears mate, what should we doing?(and dont say slow down please..
).Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff