 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / February 2007Britain - Speed cameras fail to halt a rise in fatalities on the roads
http://tinyurl.com/2r76jb Speed cameras fail to halt a rise in fatalities on the roads Last Updated: 2:31am GMT 2/12/2007 The Government's speed camera strategy was dealt a blow yesterday after new figures showed the number of people killed on the country's roads is increasing. Statistics, covering the 12 months to Sept 30 of last year showed a one per cent rise in fatalities with 3,210 deaths. That compares with 3,177 for the same period in 2005. "Road deaths should not be rising," said Paul Smith, the founder of the group Safe Speed, which has called for the speed camera strategy to be scrapped. "But speed cameras and 'speed kills' policies are badly affecting driver skills and especially driver attitudes, " he added. But in defending the use of cameras, a Department for Transport spokesman said: "These are one off quarterly provisional statistics. "These things sometimes go up and sometimes go down. We don't know if they are anything to do with cameras, which still play an essential role in maintaining safety." ---------------------- Of course it's not working because the criminals still get wrist slaps. Scrap the fine system and give these killers license suspension or prison time and the fatality rate will fall like a rock. On Feb 13, 3:01 am, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS" <xeton2...@yahoo.com> wrote: > http://tinyurl.com/2r76jb > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > Scrap the fine system and give these killers license suspension or prison > time and the fatality rate will fall like a rock. No, it's not working because in the UK, speed cameras are huge, bright yellow boxes that you can see from half a mile away. Not only that, but you can buy streetmaps where the location of the permanent ones are clearly marked. Draco > On Feb 13, 3:01 am, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS" > <xeton2...@yahoo.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > Draco It's not working because generally most "accidents" are not due to any factor of the speed that anyone's driving. Most drivers tend to drive at a sensible speed, whether or not that speed complies with the posted limit. nate  Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel > > On Feb 13, 3:01 am, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS" > > <xeton2...@yahoo.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > at a sensible speed, whether or not that speed complies with the posted > limit. Quite so. The underlying idea that speed is responsible for accidents is simply plain barking mad. The only thing that's responsible for accidents ( barring unusual and very rare mechanical failure ) is bad driving and only bad driving. Mostly inattention and stupid risk taking I'd expect. Graham > The underlying idea that speed is responsible for accidents is simply plain > barking mad. Then again, aren't most politicians? And most of the people who elect them? > The only thing that's responsible for accidents ( barring unusual and very rare > mechanical failure ) is bad driving and only bad driving. Mostly inattention and > stupid risk taking I'd expect. Yep. > Graham Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Eeyore said in rec.autos.driving: > The underlying idea that speed is responsible for accidents is simply plain > barking mad. > > The only thing that's responsible for accidents ( barring unusual and very rare > mechanical failure ) is bad driving and only bad driving. Mostly inattention and > stupid risk taking I'd expect. Exactly. Problem is, as a buzz word (or meybe buzz phrase), "Speed Kills," has been quite successful in brainwashing the sheeple to buy into the whole slow is better myth. Signature-- Loco Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend (a.k.a. SADDAM) admits to being a deadly speeder, psychopath and criminal coddler: "> Have you ever driven a car faster than the legal speed limit? Yes, but never deliberately. In fact i got a speeding ticket about 5 years ago for doing 41 in a 25. I just about kicked the cops teeth in cause i was sure he was lying. No way the SL on this wide open stretch could be 25, i thought." Pride of America (c.k.a. Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend/ laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE/Speeders And Drunk Drivers Are Murderers (SADDAM)), 10/3/2002 Message-ID: <3c1753f7.0210030916.7b6f5dff@posting.google.com> http://tinyurl.com/5u4wg Proof that POA is LBMHB/lbVH/SADDAM: See the following: http://tinyurl.com/ahphj > No, it's not working because in the UK, speed cameras are huge, bright > yellow boxes that you can see from half a mile away. Not only that, > but you can buy streetmaps where the location of the permanent ones > are clearly marked. There are so many GATSOs and fake GATSOs in use that if they were worth anything, there should be a difference. GATSOs are also placed such that they are illegally obscured or just barely technically meet the visibility requirements as has been documented on various websites on the devices. Meanwhile, the GATSOs are in large proportion, not functioning correctly and ticketing motorists who weren't even exceeding the taxation speed. I'll guess the lack of motivation to correct the situation because it's profitable just to let it be. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/15/1597.asp "UK: Half of Speed Camera Tickets Issued by Faulty Cameras" <...> "BBC news revealed last Sunday that around half of the speed camera tickets in the Eastern region of England were issued by devices that failed an annual accuracy test and required repairs. " <...> Also see the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMiWPcz7CrY Not only that - but the Brit public hates them so much that they are very effectively fighting back against them even though few Brits own guns to shoot the control boxes with! They just spray-paint the lens black - or douse it with gasoline and set it afire. ENORMOUS number of destroyed traffic cameras there - on a weekly basis. No $4 to park! No $6 admission! http://www.INTERNET-GUN-SHOW.com > Not only that - but the Brit public hates them so much that they > are very effectively fighting back against them even though few Brits > own guns to shoot the control boxes with! They just spray-paint the > lens black - or douse it with gasoline and set it afire. ENORMOUS > number of destroyed traffic cameras there - on a weekly basis. Both the US and Brit govt need a PR campaign if they're really serious about stopping speeding. They should talk about all the thousands of innocent people killed by speeders every year. Tell the public that speeders are clearly a much bigger danger to you and your family than terrorism. The fact that they don't do that is strong evidence that the govt is after speeders just for the money. > "editor@netpath.net" <editor@netpath.net> wrote in > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > about stopping speeding. They should talk about all the thousands of > innocent people killed by speeders every year. But everyone knows that speed isn't the problem. I'd say 99% of the UK population would laugh at such a campaign. Bad driving kills, not speed. Graham >>"editor@netpath.net" <editor@netpath.net> wrote in >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Bad driving kills, not speed. You're right about that. > Graham >> Both the US and Brit govt need a PR campaign if they're really serious >> about stopping speeding. They should talk about all the thousands of [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Bad driving kills, not speed. Are you really that stupid.? Is anyone that stupid? >>>Both the US and Brit govt need a PR campaign if they're really serious >>>about stopping speeding. They should talk about all the thousands of [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Are you really that stupid.? Is anyone that stupid? ITYM "correct." nate Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS, a connoisseur of gay kid porn and a total and complete idiot spewed forth this crap in rec.autos.driving: > Is anyone that stupid? Yer. You are. SignatureAunt Judy demonstrates its lack of understanding of the concept of "</killfile>," and "<killfile>," and what a "thread," is: "Now that takes nerve. You claim to killfile me TWICE in the same thread and you expect people to take you seriously???" Ref: http://tinyurl.com/r5qp9 > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Are you really that stupid.? Is anyone that stupid? Do you actually believe that bad driving *doesn't* kill ppl ? Are you that stupid ? Running a red for example isn't about speed it's about bad driving. Not looking where you're going isn't about speed, it's about bad driving. Do I need to go on ? Graham On Feb 14, 1:42 am, Eeyore > Do I need to go on ? Psst... You realize it's "Aunt Judy/Laura Bush/SADDAM/Whoever else is left at the group home" - you could go on and on and on, and reality still won't sink into it's little brain-damaged head. On Feb 13, 6:31 pm, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS" <xeton2...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Are you really that stupid.? Is anyone that stupid? Only you. -- C.R. Krieger (Been there; drove that) On Feb 12, 8:02 pm, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS" <xeton2...@yahoo.com> wrote in its usual moronic style: > Both the US and Brit govt need a PR campaign if they're really serious > about stopping speeding. They should talk about all the thousands of > innocent people killed by speeders every year. Gee; what an idea! Nobody ever did *that* before! . . . Shithead. -- C.R. Krieger (Bitchy, but for a reason) > Not only that - but the Brit public hates them so much that they > are very effectively fighting back against them even though few Brits > own guns to shoot the control boxes with! They just spray-paint the > lens black - or douse it with gasoline and set it afire. ENORMOUS > number of destroyed traffic cameras there - on a weekly basis. I'd have to disagree with the ENORMOUS claim. Most ppl know where they are, slow down for them and then speed up again. Daft thing is that ppl going at or even just below the SL still slow down for them. So much so that I just heard of one camera that had to removed because it was *causing* accidents when ppl braked hard for it. It proves that the very principle is wrong. It's simply not possible to know your speed accurately whilst driving if you want to be able to watch the road too. Graham On Feb 13, 12:18 am, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com> wrote: <brevity snip/groups adjusted> > It's simply not possible to know > your speed accurately whilst driving if you want to be able to watch the road > too. Beginning drivers on a road test manage to monitor both... and their mirrors. ----- - gpsman > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com> wrote: <brevity snip/groups > adjusted> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Beginning drivers on a road test manage to monitor both... and their mirrors. Drivers on driving tests typically aren't being tested on very busy roads at speeds up to 80 mph. Mirrors are no problem, you merely nead to glance at them to pick up the important info and they're designed to be close to your field of vision and also don't require you to refocus your eyes. Graham On Feb 14, 1:38 am, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com> wrote: <brevity snip/groups > > adjusted> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Drivers on driving tests typically aren't being tested on very busy roads at speeds > up to 80 mph. Now is not the time to poorly qualify your assertion. > Mirrors are no problem, you merely nead to glance at them to pick up the important > info and they're designed to be close to your field of vision and also don't > require you to refocus your eyes. Not for you, probably. A few people focus a little further ahead than the distance to their mirrors. If you can't monitor one simple large gauge and the road, you can't be much of a driver. Even dumbass truck drivers can monitor 6 or more mirrors and 6 or more gauges, shift an unsynchronized transmission through 18 speeds, and watch the road. I don't think a viable defense in court might include "I can't know how fast I'm going -and- drive! What are ya, stupid or somethin'?" ----- - gpsman > > Mirrors are no problem, you merely nead to glance at them to pick up the > important > info and they're designed to be close to your field of vision and also > don't require > you to refocus your eyes. > > Not for you, probably. A few people focus a little further ahead than > the distance to their mirrors. You don't know much about optics do you ? Sorry, let me correct that... You don't know much do you ? I'd get your eyes tested too. Graham On Feb 14, 12:03 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > Mirrors are no problem, you merely nead to glance at them to pick up the > important > > info and they're designed to be close to your field of vision and also > don't require [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > You don't know much do you ? That's pretty funny coming from a guy who doesn't know how to monitor his speedometer and the road. Maybe you could get speed limits abolished based on the "fact" that "It's simply not possible to know your speed accurately whilst driving if you want to be able to watch the road too." > I'd get your eyes tested too. Thank you for your concern. It had deteriorated with my advancing years, but I'm required by law to have it checked every 2 years to maintain my CDL. It seems ok: http://i13.tinypic.com/4ggun2w.png ----- - gpsman > On Feb 14, 1:38 am, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Not for you, probably. A few people focus a little further ahead than > the distance to their mirrors. LOL When you look at what is seen *in* your mirrors, you don't focus at the distance of the mirror. > - gpsman Signature"The iPhone doesn't have a speaker phone" -- "I checked very carefully" -- "I checked Apple's web pages" -- Edwin on the iPhone and how he missed the demo of the iPhone speakerphone. > > > Mirrors are no problem, you merely nead to glance at them to pick up the > > > important info and they're designed to be close to your field of vision and [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > When you look at what is seen *in* your mirrors, you don't focus at the > distance of the mirror. Gpstroll's ignorance knows no bounds it seems. Graham |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.