Brake Declares War.
Discussion
Apparently Brake have issued the following PR:
==============================================
Road Safety Charity condemns anti-speed camera campaigners for incitement to violence
The road safety community has condemned fringe antispeed camera groups for illegal and offensive bullyboy tactics following threats posted on a
motoring website against Mary Williams OBE, chief executive of Brake, the road safety charity.
The threats outlined this morning in The Times appeared on a chat site on a motoring website last week. They were removed last night following a formal warning from police using anti-harrassment legislation.
Shockingly, anti-camera campaigners have defended the threats which included death threats. Paul Smith, who campaigns against cameras, described the threats as mild reactions, quite frankly. Mr Smith runs an anti-camera website featuring a picture of a burnt out camera on its news page, with the words "This "necklaced" camera on the A38 is typical of the response we expect."
Mary Williams said: "Anti-camera campaigners who break laws such as avoiding paying fines, necklacing cameras, or making nasty threats against individuals working for road safety, are being exposed for what they are bully boys. Journalists using information from these sources should be advised to bear this in mind and treat information and statistics supplied by them with extreme caution."
"Brake will continue to support Government policy on speed cameras on the evidence of their success at reducing speeds and casualties a 35% reduction in casualties in the pilot areas."
Rob Gifford, Executive Director of the Parliamentary Advisory Committee on Transport Safety said: "Debates about the effectiveness of speed cameras should be held on the basis of research, not personal abuse. I am surprised that the opponents of cameras have sunk to such depths."
Vicky Cann, assistant director of policy & campaigns with Transport 2000 said: "The facts about casualty reductions at camera sites have sometimes
been lost in recent media debates which instead sympathise with drivers who break the law. We hope that responsible motoring organisations and all those
interested in safer streets will disassociate themselves entirely from these threats."
Notes to editors:
* The UK has the fourth worst recorded rate of child pedestrian fatalities in Western Europe and Northern Ireland has the worst.
* Death on the road is the biggest cause of death to children aged 12-16 in the UK.
* 'Excessive speeds' can be relatively low. At 35mph the Department for Transport estimates that a driver is twice as likely to kill a child they hit compared with at 30mph.
* At 20mph there is a nine in ten chance, estimates the DfT, that a child hit will survive. At 30mph this reduces to only 50% of children
surviving.
* The Health Development Agency, part of the Department of Health, has called for speed limits of 20mph on residential roads to save lives of
children threatened by traffic travelling too fast for the environment.
* A survey of 1,500 children by Brake found that 40% of children are scared of traffic when on foot and 1 in 3 said the road outside their own
house was dangerous;
* A survey last month by the BBC found that 75% of drivers support speed cameras.
===========================================
Stand by for an explosive Safe Speed response.
Best Regards,
Paul Smith
Safe Speed
www.safespeed.org.uk
==============================================
Road Safety Charity condemns anti-speed camera campaigners for incitement to violence
The road safety community has condemned fringe antispeed camera groups for illegal and offensive bullyboy tactics following threats posted on a
motoring website against Mary Williams OBE, chief executive of Brake, the road safety charity.
The threats outlined this morning in The Times appeared on a chat site on a motoring website last week. They were removed last night following a formal warning from police using anti-harrassment legislation.
Shockingly, anti-camera campaigners have defended the threats which included death threats. Paul Smith, who campaigns against cameras, described the threats as mild reactions, quite frankly. Mr Smith runs an anti-camera website featuring a picture of a burnt out camera on its news page, with the words "This "necklaced" camera on the A38 is typical of the response we expect."
Mary Williams said: "Anti-camera campaigners who break laws such as avoiding paying fines, necklacing cameras, or making nasty threats against individuals working for road safety, are being exposed for what they are bully boys. Journalists using information from these sources should be advised to bear this in mind and treat information and statistics supplied by them with extreme caution."
"Brake will continue to support Government policy on speed cameras on the evidence of their success at reducing speeds and casualties a 35% reduction in casualties in the pilot areas."
Rob Gifford, Executive Director of the Parliamentary Advisory Committee on Transport Safety said: "Debates about the effectiveness of speed cameras should be held on the basis of research, not personal abuse. I am surprised that the opponents of cameras have sunk to such depths."
Vicky Cann, assistant director of policy & campaigns with Transport 2000 said: "The facts about casualty reductions at camera sites have sometimes
been lost in recent media debates which instead sympathise with drivers who break the law. We hope that responsible motoring organisations and all those
interested in safer streets will disassociate themselves entirely from these threats."
Notes to editors:
* The UK has the fourth worst recorded rate of child pedestrian fatalities in Western Europe and Northern Ireland has the worst.
* Death on the road is the biggest cause of death to children aged 12-16 in the UK.
* 'Excessive speeds' can be relatively low. At 35mph the Department for Transport estimates that a driver is twice as likely to kill a child they hit compared with at 30mph.
* At 20mph there is a nine in ten chance, estimates the DfT, that a child hit will survive. At 30mph this reduces to only 50% of children
surviving.
* The Health Development Agency, part of the Department of Health, has called for speed limits of 20mph on residential roads to save lives of
children threatened by traffic travelling too fast for the environment.
* A survey of 1,500 children by Brake found that 40% of children are scared of traffic when on foot and 1 in 3 said the road outside their own
house was dangerous;
* A survey last month by the BBC found that 75% of drivers support speed cameras.
===========================================
Stand by for an explosive Safe Speed response.
Best Regards,
Paul Smith
Safe Speed
www.safespeed.org.uk
safespeed said:
A survey of 1,500 children by Brake found that 40% of children are scared of traffic when on foot...
Good! They should be scared of the bloody traffic, just as they should be scared of cliff-edges and anything large and pointy - that's what stops kids getting themselves killed!
Having said that, the little sods around my way don't seem that scared of the traffic judging from the way they play chicken with it.
safespeed said:
...and 1 in 3 said the road outside their own
house was dangerous;
Then don't play on it!
AlexH said:
someone said:
They were removed last night following a formal warning from police using anti-harrassment legislation.
NOT TRUE.
PistonHeads.com has received no communication from any police force regarding this matter.
I presume you're preparing another statement Ted?
put the thread back up
Bonce said:
Don't they realise that publishing blatant lies like that in their press releases dilutes the their credibility? Astonishing.
The trouble is so few people know the truth (particularly when it comes to badmouthing PH) that most of the time they won't get caught out. This also goes for journalists too busy or too indifferent to look for the truth.
I think Ted should get in touch with the Times and get them on side. After all, it should make a good story.
I wonder if this Williams lady knits her own jumpers, makes her own bread and cakes, and with a bit of assistance could cook her own goose!
What right have these ill eductated muppets got to try and stir up the public to satisfy their addled egos.
These people should be tested under the mental health act before they are given a platform to dictate to the public at large.
Their statements should carry a warning - 'This correspondant has/has not been certified as sane and lucid.'
(actually they should state -'This person is a complete tosser.' and win an award from the 'Plain English scheme).
I wonder if this Williams lady knits her own jumpers, makes her own bread and cakes, and with a bit of assistance could cook her own goose!
What right have these ill eductated muppets got to try and stir up the public to satisfy their addled egos.
These people should be tested under the mental health act before they are given a platform to dictate to the public at large.
Their statements should carry a warning - 'This correspondant has/has not been certified as sane and lucid.'
(actually they should state -'This person is a complete tosser.' and win an award from the 'Plain English scheme).
Interesting, I've just had a look at the Charity Commission website. Interesting the bit about not engaging in political activities. I note the Brake registered charity number didn't leap out of their site at me. A bit of research needed and then I can feel a letter coming on. Found it: registered charity number 1093244
>> Edited by Godfrey H on Tuesday 16th December 19:34
>> Edited by Godfrey H on Tuesday 16th December 19:34
safespeed said:
Apparently Brake have issued the following PR:
==============================================
Road Safety Charity condemns anti-speed camera campaigners for incitement to violence
The road safety community has condemned fringe antispeed camera groups for illegal and offensive bullyboy tactics following threats posted on a
motoring website against Mary Williams OBE, chief executive of Brake, the road safety charity.
The threats outlined this morning in The Times appeared on a chat site on a motoring website last week. They were removed last night following a formal warning from police using anti-harrassment legislation.
Shockingly, anti-camera campaigners have defended the threats which included death threats. Paul Smith, who campaigns against cameras, described the threats as mild reactions, quite frankly. Mr Smith runs an anti-camera website featuring a picture of a burnt out camera on its news page, with the words "This "necklaced" camera on the A38 is typical of the response we expect."
Mary Williams said: "Anti-camera campaigners who break laws such as avoiding paying fines, necklacing cameras, or making nasty threats against individuals working for road safety, are being exposed for what they are bully boys. Journalists using information from these sources should be advised to bear this in mind and treat information and statistics supplied by them with extreme caution."
"Brake will continue to support Government policy on speed cameras on the evidence of their success at reducing speeds and casualties a 35% reduction in casualties in the pilot areas."
Rob Gifford, Executive Director of the Parliamentary Advisory Committee on Transport Safety said: "Debates about the effectiveness of speed cameras should be held on the basis of research, not personal abuse. I am surprised that the opponents of cameras have sunk to such depths."
Vicky Cann, assistant director of policy & campaigns with Transport 2000 said: "The facts about casualty reductions at camera sites have sometimes
been lost in recent media debates which instead sympathise with drivers who break the law. We hope that responsible motoring organisations and all those
interested in safer streets will disassociate themselves entirely from these threats."
Notes to editors:
* The UK has the fourth worst recorded rate of child pedestrian fatalities in Western Europe and Northern Ireland has the worst.
* Death on the road is the biggest cause of death to children aged 12-16 in the UK.
* 'Excessive speeds' can be relatively low. At 35mph the Department for Transport estimates that a driver is twice as likely to kill a child they hit compared with at 30mph.
* At 20mph there is a nine in ten chance, estimates the DfT, that a child hit will survive. At 30mph this reduces to only 50% of children
surviving.
* The Health Development Agency, part of the Department of Health, has called for speed limits of 20mph on residential roads to save lives of
children threatened by traffic travelling too fast for the environment.
* A survey of 1,500 children by Brake found that 40% of children are scared of traffic when on foot and 1 in 3 said the road outside their own
house was dangerous;
* A survey last month by the BBC found that 75% of drivers support speed cameras.
===========================================
Stand by for an explosive Safe Speed response.
Best Regards,
Paul Smith
Safe Speed
www.safespeed.org.uk
Brake said > "Brake will continue to support Government policy on speed cameras on the evidence of their success at reducing speeds and casualties a 35% reduction in casualties in the pilot areas."
That claim is a provable lie and has been called "lying with statistics" by Cardiff University.
statisticians. As you all know, this is what happened during and after the cameras trial,from police figures in the six areas.
Essex fatalities fell back to the average of the previous 6 years following an upward blip in 1999. One year later Essex deaths had risen by 43% with more cameras. (Just as well they ended the trial early!) By 2002, Essex fatalities were the third highest in ten years.
Lincolnshire returned to roughly the average for the eight previous years following a blip in 1999 but the next year, with even more cameras, fatalities rose by 22% and in 2002 were 29% higher than when the “successful” trial was ended in 2000.
Northants fell back to 1997 levels but by 2002 they had the second highest death figures in 10 years.
During the trial, Notts. fatalities were up by 12.5%, Thames Valley up by 15% and Cleveland up by 18%.
There are more fatal accidents in the home than on the roads and if we look at third party accidental deaths within the NHS.......over 50,000 per annum. Not a word from Mary.
Jesus H Christ on a pogo stick...
These people make me want to vomit. There's nothing worse that the stench of self-righteousness - and they have it in abundance. And if that wasn't bad enough - issuing blatant lies in a press release.
Are there any lawyers in the house? Some heavy duty legal ass-kicking is called for here.
What a bunch of sanctimonious, humourless, lying tossers.
These people make me want to vomit. There's nothing worse that the stench of self-righteousness - and they have it in abundance. And if that wasn't bad enough - issuing blatant lies in a press release.
Are there any lawyers in the house? Some heavy duty legal ass-kicking is called for here. What a bunch of sanctimonious, humourless, lying tossers.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff