RE: You 'Mischievous' Lot
Wednesday 19th March 2003
You 'Mischievous' Lot
Road Safety Minister slams anti-camera stats as lies
Road Safety Minister David Jamieson has launched an attack on those who challenge the effectiveness of speed cameras.
Writing in the spring issue of Advanced Driving, the magazine of the Institute of Advanced Motorists, Mr Jamieson said he felt the need to put before IAM members the contribution that safety cameras are making to reducing deaths and serious injuries on UK roads.
Mr Jamieson said that he wanted to set the record straight about the relationship between speed and accidents.
"The figures that are often quoted of speed contributing to no more than four per cent to seven per cent of accidents are inaccurate and mischievous," he said. The Minister cited independent research which claims that over a two-year trial period, 280 fewer people were killed or seriously injured on the road at safety camera sites - a 35 per cent reduction in killed and seriously injured (KSI) statistics.
Link: www.iam.org.uk
Discussion
Hmmmmn. I note that the IAM does not comment on the minister's postulation.
Personally I can see how a well placed, well signposted GATSO might improve safety at a genuinely dangerous location. Perhaps the road going up and down my estate where children play in the street for example.
Or outside a school where children cross the road without looking.
Or ahead of a blind bend with an entrance just around the corner.
So where do they put them? On straight bits of A road where the first overtaking opportunity for ten miles occurs.
I'm not anti-GATSO. I'm anti-idiot.
Personally I can see how a well placed, well signposted GATSO might improve safety at a genuinely dangerous location. Perhaps the road going up and down my estate where children play in the street for example.
Or outside a school where children cross the road without looking.
Or ahead of a blind bend with an entrance just around the corner.
So where do they put them? On straight bits of A road where the first overtaking opportunity for ten miles occurs.
I'm not anti-GATSO. I'm anti-idiot.
It's often spurious when KSI figures are quoted. Look at this for an example:
www.abd.org.uk/local/northamptonshire.htm
www.abd.org.uk/local/northamptonshire.htm
But wasn't the point that accidents acutally increased in non-camera sites. Overall this has led to a 4-7 percent reduction in accidents I believe.
We have just moved the accident blackspots. A good thing if you have moved a blackspot from outside a school, but I can't think of one road outside a school that has a camera. (OK I forgot the talivan outside Wycombe Abbey).
Andy.
We have just moved the accident blackspots. A good thing if you have moved a blackspot from outside a school, but I can't think of one road outside a school that has a camera. (OK I forgot the talivan outside Wycombe Abbey).
Andy.
boiler said: but I can't think of one road outside a school that has a camera.
Nor can I. And that's my problem with GATSOs. I have nothing against sensible traffic accident reduction measures...and speed limit enforcement has a role in that.
Have you ever seen a police van taking photographs of nutters overtaking around a blind bend and prosecuting them for dangerous driving? I haven't. (Although I would like to think somewhere it does happen) Instead I've seen vans measuring the speed of traffic on the only straight stretch of the A339 where overtaking can take place safely.
I'd like to see a more sensible comprehensive approach to road safety - not one based on the nutter viewpoints of a few plonkers in the local council and road planning department.
My local lot have enough money to put 13 speed bumps into a road only a mile long which has had not any accidents in all the years I've been here but can't afford to fix the grotty road surface of the road next to it. Barmy.
g-force said: They never tell you exactly how any of the statistics were acquired or analysed nor do they quote any statistical errors or confidence limits for the data. If they did then I dare say their results wouldn't be as concrete as they want us to believe.
There's also a great analysis of this on the SafeSpeed web site - www.safespeed.org.uk/gambling.html.
Suppose accidents are genuinely random as to their location. Then, over a year, look at where the accidents were, and sure enough, randomly, there will be clusters. Label these as blackspots, and put in a camera.
Next year, by statistical chance, there will still be clusters - but at different places. But measure the accidents where the cameras were put, and guess what, its decreased. Funny that. Anything to do with the camera? No. Statistical regression to the mean.
As SafeSpeed says, you could have put in a garden gnome instead of a camera and observed the same effect.
This is similar policy that the same government has failed with immigration, failed with the NHS, failed with crime reduction, failed with public travel, and failed to prove beyond reasonarable doubt over issues with Iraq yet we are going to war anyway, so when the Road Safety Minister David Jamieson makes a statement slating others opinions it does not surprise me because under this government they have license to do and say what they want. If they were really serious about speed reduction they would be spending their own money.
boiler said: I can't think of one road outside a school that has a camera. (OK I forgot the talivan outside Wycombe Abbey).
Andy.
Where I live we have the road shown on 5th Gear as having the most Gatso’s given it’s lengh (14 at last count) but we do also have four Gatso cameras outside 2 schools (they are on the same road though at different ends being about 1km apart). These cameras go have film in and people now do slow down – this is as it should be about saving lives especially those whose knowledge of road dangers is limited e.g. primary school children. We also have stupid cameras located on dual-carriageways were no footpaths or housing are close.
The point is this there are some speed cameras outside schools and these do work, they do slow cars down, they are a good thing. However the majority of cameras are a money making scam that do nothing to reduce road dangers, these should be dug up and moved to locations where they work for the public not against them
What's to discuss? Let's just cut to the chaste (sp?)....
Are speed cameras for safety? Usually no.
Are speed cameras to make money? Usually yes.
Does anyone feel safer driving on our roads? I don't.
Would I feel safer if they put cameras (not for speeding, just to see the positioning of cars) on all traffic lights and places where people might be on the wrong side of the road eg. blind bends and hill crests? Yes, absolutely!
If they weren't for ripping us off but genuinely for safety, then I for one and I reckon everyone on here would be 100% behind them.
Are speed cameras for safety? Usually no.
Are speed cameras to make money? Usually yes.
Does anyone feel safer driving on our roads? I don't.
Would I feel safer if they put cameras (not for speeding, just to see the positioning of cars) on all traffic lights and places where people might be on the wrong side of the road eg. blind bends and hill crests? Yes, absolutely!
If they weren't for ripping us off but genuinely for safety, then I for one and I reckon everyone on here would be 100% behind them.
Just took part in a road planning simulation today at uni, we were all in the role of consultants trying to suggest future road strategies.
We discussed speed limits.
We discussed cameras.
There were experts in the room.
Was revenue mentioned? Constantly.
Was safety mentioned? No!!!
If they'd just treat us like adults and tell us the truth it wouldn't be so bad, but I'm sick of being 'safetied' to death!
It may amuse you to know, that not one of these 'experts' had as much as browsed the recent (as in last two years) TRL accident stats.
It may also amuse you to know that I have, and I gave them what-for!
We discussed speed limits.
We discussed cameras.
There were experts in the room.
Was revenue mentioned? Constantly.
Was safety mentioned? No!!!
If they'd just treat us like adults and tell us the truth it wouldn't be so bad, but I'm sick of being 'safetied' to death!
It may amuse you to know, that not one of these 'experts' had as much as browsed the recent (as in last two years) TRL accident stats.
It may also amuse you to know that I have, and I gave them what-for!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff