Palfrem
MB Enthusiast
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2005
- Messages
- 2,965
- Location
- Solihull, near Birmingham
- Car
- W124 E36 AMG, G 300 GEL his, SLK 200 hers
New speeding guidelines?
- Thread starter Palfrem
- Start date
-
- Tags
- guidelines speeding
Dieselman
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2003
- Messages
- 34,199
- Car
- Peugeot 403 Convertible
Interesting figures from Oxfordshire. Do cameras work? We should know after they go back on again.
Yesterday, the 72 fixed and 89 mobile sites were turned back on using funds from course fees, Thames Valley Police told the paper.
The force said since the cameras were turned off, fatal accidents had risen by 50 per cent, with 83 people injured in 62 accidents in the six months after they were turned off.
Yesterday, the 72 fixed and 89 mobile sites were turned back on using funds from course fees, Thames Valley Police told the paper.
The force said since the cameras were turned off, fatal accidents had risen by 50 per cent, with 83 people injured in 62 accidents in the six months after they were turned off.
Fixed cameras do work and don't work. On the one hand they do cause people to stick to the speed limit when passing the camera, so in towns they can be very useful and a great safety device. On the other hand they can be very dangerous, or rather people who see them can be dangerous.
I am reminded of an incident on the A1 when I was driving at the NSL of 70mph when overtaken by a woman doing around 90mph. She obviously spotted the fixed camera ahead, but her reaction was nothing short of dangerous. She pulled into lane 1 immediately in front of me and braked hard causing me to slow to 50mph whilst she passed the camera and then increased speed back up to aroudn 90mph immediately after.
I am reminded of an incident on the A1 when I was driving at the NSL of 70mph when overtaken by a woman doing around 90mph. She obviously spotted the fixed camera ahead, but her reaction was nothing short of dangerous. She pulled into lane 1 immediately in front of me and braked hard causing me to slow to 50mph whilst she passed the camera and then increased speed back up to aroudn 90mph immediately after.
R2e
Active Member
It is probably relevant that the six months trial covered the 6 darkest month of the year and the worst winter for many, many years. How can they possibly figure out what effect speed cameras have based on switching them back on during the spring/summer?
Ullevi
Member
Shhhhh.
Don't start any of this critical analysis malarky.
You'll only mess up their doctrine:
Speed kills,
Speed kills,
Speed kills,
Speed kills,
Speed kills....
renault12ts
MB Club Veteran
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2009
- Messages
- 16,674
- Car
- 2005 W215 CL500.
Shhhh...they don't get it and will use statistics to beat you.
Speed kills? Does it. If a drunk driver kills someone with his car whilst exceeding the speed limit, which cause is more important, the speeding or the sobriety of the driver?
If a young lad in a stolen car kills someone whilst speeding along, is it the speed or the fact that he just stole a car and was acting recklessly that is more important?
It's far to easy and glib to say speed kills.
Someone speeding today at 50 mph on a stretch of road restricted to 40 is dangerous? Yet if the limit is raised to 50 tomorrow...he is now safe?
Speed kills is a nonsense saying...lacking in any reasoning.
Last year in NI road deaths dropped by more than 50%...unbelievable. Yet this year so far deaths are up by 3 for the same period. Still a huge decrease from 2009 but we are been beaten up by the powers that be over the "increase".
Last edited:
Ullevi
Member
Yep,with you on that one.
But as long as they can continue to pull the wool over the eyes of the sheep (?) they will try to continue with their agenda.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 13,696
- Location
- North Oxfordshire
- Car
- His - Denim Blue A220 AMG Line Premium / Hers - Obsidian Black R172 SLK55
Unfortunately, and as is usual when it comes to statistics regarding speedcams, the figures spouted by Oxfordshire as "justification" for reactivating the fixed camera sites lack any analysis of causation.
However, one thing of note in Oxfordshire's figures is that the number of both minor & serious injuries was effectively unchanged and the only increase was the loudly trumpeted 50% increase in deaths - from 12 to 18. When one considers that the difference between a serious injury outcome and death is largely a matter of luck (or the lack of it), the justification looks a little precarious to say the least.
Dieselman
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2003
- Messages
- 34,199
- Car
- Peugeot 403 Convertible
Whatever that is..??
It is worth noting from the same article that overall road deaths have gone down Nationally.
I do agree that they should have used a full years figures as a reference point.
And yet , 'tis writ in the Bible (Roadcraft) " SPEED IS NOT , IN ITSELF , DANGEROUS " .
The first statement is the cry of the hysterical ; the latter that of reason and logic .
Dieselman
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2003
- Messages
- 34,199
- Car
- Peugeot 403 Convertible
There really is only one test for the speed V's crash severity argument.
For two years NOBODY speed at all, then we can see.
For two years NOBODY speed at all, then we can see.
Very easy to distort the truth with stats. I.e. was that comparing the 6 months with the SAME 6 months the previous year when the cameras were on? Or comparing (for example) 6 spring/summer months with 6 autumn/winter months, where you'd expect a variation anyway.
Last edited:
Personally, I think raising the threshold is wrong. For example, 40+ in a 30 zone is plain reckless. Raising these thresholds is an encouragement to drive faster.
I'm not saying speed alone kills but a sizeable proportion of drivers are not very good, to say the least. So the faster they drive, the more severe the consequences when they do something stupid or something goes wrong.
I'm not saying speed alone kills but a sizeable proportion of drivers are not very good, to say the least. So the faster they drive, the more severe the consequences when they do something stupid or something goes wrong.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 13,696
- Location
- North Oxfordshire
- Car
- His - Denim Blue A220 AMG Line Premium / Hers - Obsidian Black R172 SLK55
Just to put some numbers to this (albeit with no causation factors), this is a tabulation from a report on BBC News about the fixed cameras being switched on again in Oxfordshire. The "Cameras On" numbers relate to the period August 2009 to January 2010 and the "Cameras Off" numbers relate to the period August 2010 to January 2011:
At Camera Sites Cameras On Cameras Off
Collisions 60 62
Slight Injuries 55 70
Serious Injuries 13 13
Fatalities 0 0
Elsewhere Cameras On Cameras Off
Collisions 885 867
Slight Injuries 999 982
Serious Injuries 160 179
Fatalities 12 18
If anyone claims to deduce anything statistically significant from those numbers then they're probably delusional
What is statistically significant is that the Thames Valley Scamera Partnership's funding stream is flowing again
Collisions 60 62
Slight Injuries 55 70
Serious Injuries 13 13
Fatalities 0 0
Elsewhere Cameras On Cameras Off
Collisions 885 867
Slight Injuries 999 982
Serious Injuries 160 179
Fatalities 12 18
If anyone claims to deduce anything statistically significant from those numbers then they're probably delusional
What is statistically significant is that the Thames Valley Scamera Partnership's funding stream is flowing again
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 13,696
- Location
- North Oxfordshire
- Car
- His - Denim Blue A220 AMG Line Premium / Hers - Obsidian Black R172 SLK55
Causation: what caused the collision in the first place, for example whether or not anyone was exceeding the posted limit (which is the only element of driving that a fixed camera may influence), whether they were driving under the influence of drink or drugs, etc.Whatever that is..??
The issue of whether or not a collision is fatal being largely random is also highly significant but often ignored when headlines are sought.
steve333
MB Enthusiast
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2009
- Messages
- 4,201
- Location
- Dorset
- Car
- Cls350cdi in palladium,C200k in tenorite,Slk320 in red.
^ +1,if the government gave the police more funding to get unlicensed/uninsured/banned drivers off our roads it would have a far greater affect on safety than turning speed cameras back on will.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 13,696
- Location
- North Oxfordshire
- Car
- His - Denim Blue A220 AMG Line Premium / Hers - Obsidian Black R172 SLK55
A little more info on the Oxfordshire speedcam switch-on.
Someone made an FOI Request and found out that throughout Oxfordshire the number of road deaths at fixed camera locations while they were switched off were... (drum-roll)... None. That's right, zero, nada. Remember that during the period that the fixed cameras were inactive mobile enforcement was still being actively carried out.
Take a look at the causation factors and for the 62 recorded Serious and Slight injury accidents at fixed camera sites in that period "Exceeding Speed Limit" was cited in just two cases. So that's good strong justification for turning them back on then
Someone made an FOI Request and found out that throughout Oxfordshire the number of road deaths at fixed camera locations while they were switched off were... (drum-roll)... None. That's right, zero, nada. Remember that during the period that the fixed cameras were inactive mobile enforcement was still being actively carried out.
Take a look at the causation factors and for the 62 recorded Serious and Slight injury accidents at fixed camera sites in that period "Exceeding Speed Limit" was cited in just two cases. So that's good strong justification for turning them back on then
NISFAN
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2010
- Messages
- 903
- Car
- F13 M6.....for now
F*ck speeding, get the vast majority (it seems) that think the middle lane is the cruising lane, some education.
Lazy brain dead f*ckers
Lazy brain dead f*ckers
jepho
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2011
- Messages
- 210
- Car
- W203 C220 CDI Coupe
F*ck speeding, get the vast majority (it seems) that think the middle lane is the cruising lane, some education.
Lazy brain dead f*ckers
Maybe... I don't think it is the whole story though.
My personal bête noire is the idiots who believe that because they want to join a motorway from the slip road, all they have to do is pull directly into my path, before they have reached motorway speed, thus forcing me to brake hard or move over into the middle lane which may already be occupied.
I echo the sentiment - LBDF
Whatever happened to give way to traffic on the motorway before joining?
NISFAN
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2010
- Messages
- 903
- Car
- F13 M6.....for now
jepho,
don't get me started, I know exactly what you mean.
Perhaps these people think that the inside lane is exclusively for cars joining or leaving the motorway, and of course trucks. They probably feel that you in a CAR shouldn't even be there in the first place
I say get rid of traffic police, and use a fellow motorist voting system
A system where motorists can log a complaint against others. When you get 10 complaints or votes, you get a fine and points for 'being a prat', and a 6 month ban from voting yourself.
That is what we need, and it will cover all driving practices, including dangerous speeding.:bannana:
don't get me started, I know exactly what you mean.
Perhaps these people think that the inside lane is exclusively for cars joining or leaving the motorway, and of course trucks. They probably feel that you in a CAR shouldn't even be there in the first place
I say get rid of traffic police, and use a fellow motorist voting system
A system where motorists can log a complaint against others. When you get 10 complaints or votes, you get a fine and points for 'being a prat', and a 6 month ban from voting yourself.
That is what we need, and it will cover all driving practices, including dangerous speeding.:bannana:
