Gatso

[Baghdad or Bust]

go out on the road... any road... and 99% of cars break the speed limit on every journey they make and yet these 99% of drivers only account for less than 15% of road deaths. 85% have other causes - and thats using the DTA's own figures.

So if we all do it its ok? What about mugging old ladies - if we all did that everytime we went to buy a pint of milk would that be ok?

Is 15% of all road deaths an acceptable figure? Out of interest how many people is that killed each year that you find acceptable as you have all the facts and figures to hand?

 

[Sp!ke]

I'm not going to convince you am I ?

Well let me say that if I pull over in Richmond park, I will be breaking another law and be given a fine for stopping.

You are putting words in my mouth here as I am not advocating any blanket increase in speed nor do I rate myself as a particularly talented driver - but I do consider myself safe. (and I speed occasionally)

 

[Baghdad or Bust]

nor do I rate myself as a particularly talented driver - but I do consider myself safe. (and I speed occasionally)

My driving is a damn site safer than many who never venture over the limit.

That statement there would appear to be rating yourself.....


But as you say i will not be swayed by the people who believe they have the right to choose which laws they are going to uphold and those they aren't and then whine when they get given punishment.

Would i be right in thinking you have done nothing about approaching the council to discuss their reasons behind the speed limit in Richmond Park? Could it be to protect the dear and your car from the dear? I don't know i am asking as one again you are the man with the facts and figures.

 

[Baghdad or Bust]

I am not advocating speeding at all, I am making the point that society is being dummed down and we are being turned into this nanny state unable to make our own decisions about what is safe speed or not.

So it would be an abolition of all speed limits and a free for all that we decided what speed was suitable as and when we like it? Speed limits have been around for a very long time - it isn't a new concept - what frightens people much as it did when the clamp down started on drink drivers that they might actually get caught and lose their license to drive through anti social and dangerous behaviour. Much like speeding.

 

[andy_k]

[edit] go out on the road... any road... and 99% of cars break the speed limit on every journey they make and yet these 99% of drivers only account for less than 15% of road deaths. 85% have other causes - and thats using the DTA's own figures.

go figure

much as I agree with most of what you are saying I'd love to know how the law abiding 1% of the drivers (as far as speed is concerned) on the road are being held responsible for 85% of the fatal accidents.

My maths may be flawed but that's got to be wrong - another case of statistics being manipulated or maybe you'd care to elaborate?

Andy

 

[Sp!ke]

Calm down Bagdad, lets not get personal here.

My driving is a damn site safer than many who never venture over the limit.

That statement there would appear to be rating yourself.....

No, far from it, its more of a sad indictment on how poor the general standard of driving is in the uk today.

All I am saying is that I disagree with cameras replacing traffic cops.

The deer in Richmond Park are hardly under threat of extinction - in fact they have to regularly cull them to keep the numbers down. When I see deer in the park near the road I slow right down to a crawl but equally, when I see a clear open stretch for a mile ahead with no dangers of any kind, I do feel that I should be allowed to use my judgement to be allowed to increase my speed beyond a crawl up to say 30mph. If it is ok to do 30mph outside a busy primary school but not in clear open countryside then something is clearly wrong.

In this climate of gatso's, one can spend £100 on a camera warning device and then drive like a complete jerk with almost complete impunity, safe in the knowledge that the device will prewarn you of any camera location and knowing that away from motorways at least there are very very few traffic patrols out on the roads that may present a threat to your license. The use of camera's are making this kind of behavior possible.

I do not advocate any blanket increase or lifting of speed limits although there are a few areas where stupid limits have been put in place for no other reason than to raise revenue by camera placement. If there were no cameras this steady spread of revenue driven reduced limits would cease. Areas with national speed limits in place quite happily for years are being replaced with much lower limits and gatso's without any reduction in accidents - why?

As for the percentages Andy, the figures simply suggest that the primary causes of 85% of accidents is not speed. It does not suggest that 85% of accidents were caused by the 1% of people that dont speed

One can infer from these statistics that the government are investing the vast majority of resources on trying to reduce the cause of only 15% of accidents whilst pretty much ignoring the other 85%. Am I too synical thinking this is because there is money to be made here and not because they actually want to save lives?

In my mind it is simple. If they want to save lives then fine. However somewhat unsurprisingly it is now clear that cameras don't achieve this as death rates have gone up year on year since the advent of Gatsos. This being the case then surely re-evaluate the problem and think again rather than continuing to cover the county in these devices.

The fact that the government know the figures and yet choose to ignore them in favour of more revenue raisers, against both scientific and popular opinion leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

Burn them or pull them all down I say - then they might actually *have* to think properly about tackling the real causes of serious accidents.