) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

allan tracy wrote:
That's what everyone who hates the cameras (speed or otherwise)
conveniently forgets, that there seems to be an endless supply of
f**kwits out there.

And the ****wits don't have to worry about the cameras, because they're
driving a stolen car, or have fake plates or haven't bothered to
register it.

We used to have this system where the ****wits were penalised while the
reasonable drivers could break stupid laws when doing so wasn't overly
dangerous; you see, we had people in cars driving around the roads to
stop those who behaved dangerously and punish them. Unfortunately that
was expensive, whereas setting up cameras which penalise the reasonable
drivers while doing nothing to affect ****wits brings in money, so road
safety was thrown out the window in the search for easy cash.

And now ****wits like you defend the scam that's done more to reduce
road safety and destroy respect for the police than anything I can
think of.

Applause

All Allan needs to do is to look at how little the road casualty figures
have gone down over the course of a decade during which the primary safety
- crash survivability - of cars has rocketed.

Changing nothing else would have seen casualty figures falling drastically,
ergo the stasis must be due to a negative effect from the other changes.

All Allan needs to do is to look at how little the road casualty figures
have gone down over the course of a decade during which the primary safety
- crash survivability - of cars has rocketed.


Hit the back of a combine harvester or a hay truck at thirty and let's
see what your crash survivability does for you.

It doesn't make a tosh of difference what they do to cars when they
still have to share the same road with monster HGVs. Hit one of those
head on and there's always only going to be one winner.

Changing nothing else would have seen casualty figures falling drastically,
ergo the stasis must be due to a negative effect from the other changes.

I'm sorry but that's complete ********.

By far, most stretches of road still do not have speed cameras so have
been unaffected.

On the roads where they have been introduced reportable accident have
declined by between 41% and 69%.

Overall (Nationally) the level of traffic accidents has declined
slightly (not much) but this has to be set in context of year on year
traffic growth which should (normally) have led to more accidents.

allan tracy ) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying :

All Allan needs to do is to look at how little the road casualty
figures have gone down over the course of a decade during which the
primary safety - crash survivability - of cars has rocketed.

Hit the back of a combine harvester or a hay truck at thirty and let's
see what your crash survivability does for you.

Hit a stationary truck at 30 in a '70s car.
Hit a stationary truck at 30 in a modern car.

Look where the **** you're going, and DON'T hit a stationary truck at
all...

Changing nothing else would have seen casualty figures falling
drastically, ergo the stasis must be due to a negative effect from
the other changes.

I'm sorry but that's complete ********.

By far, most stretches of road still do not have speed cameras so have
been unaffected.

On the roads where they have been introduced reportable accident have
declined by between 41% and 69%.

Overall (Nationally) the level of traffic accidents has declined
slightly (not much) but this has to be set in context of year on year
traffic growth which should (normally) have led to more accidents.

If you think about that for a brief moment, you'll realise that you're
actually agreeing with me.

In article . 170,
Adrian says...
allan tracy ) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying :

All Allan needs to do is to look at how little the road casualty
figures have gone down over the course of a decade during which the
primary safety - crash survivability - of cars has rocketed.

Hit the back of a combine harvester or a hay truck at thirty and let's
see what your crash survivability does for you.

Hit a stationary truck at 30 in a '70s car.
Hit a stationary truck at 30 in a modern car.

Look where the **** you're going, and DON'T hit a stationary truck at
all...

The one thing about my Capri is that the steering wheel sticks a LONG
way out of the dashboard and the centre of the boss is exactly at chest
height thus meaning that any serious accident is likely to result in me
being impaled on it.

That and crap 1970's brakes makes you leave a lot more room.


--
Conor

Religion, ****ing people over for millennia.

In message , Conor
writes
That and crap 1970's brakes makes you leave a lot more room.
You do realise that having admitted to driving an old car, Doug will now
be looking up (making up) figures to show that you car is dirtier than a
new one therefore you are polluting more.
--
Clive.

In article , Clive Coleman.
says...
In message , Conor
writes
That and crap 1970's brakes makes you leave a lot more room.
You do realise that having admitted to driving an old car, Doug will now
be looking up (making up) figures to show that you car is dirtier than a
new one therefore you are polluting more.

Ah but I have a retort all lined up. The additional pollution caused
over the pitiful 5000 miles a year it does is far less than the
pollution that would be caused in it's disposal and the subsequent
manufacturing process of a replacement vehicle.

--
Conor

Religion, ****ing people over for millennia.

"allan tracy" wrote in message
ups.com...


On the roads where they have been introduced reportable accident have
declined by between 41% and 69%.

Didn't one of the recent reports on camera effectiveness query the amazing
difference between the police's statistics, and the NHS's statistics, which
apparently showed that the number of treated casualties hadn't declined at
all?

Paul

allan tracy wrote:

Hit the back of a combine harvester or a hay truck at thirty and let's
see what your crash survivability does for you.

The idea is to drive slowly enough to be able to stop without hitting
it at all. About being in control of the vehicle and driving safely
based on road conditions.

The poster above said the road was NSL so the actual posted limit was
60mph but that was too fast for the conditions.

It doesn't make a tosh of difference what they do to cars when they
still have to share the same road with monster HGVs. Hit one of those
head on and there's always only going to be one winner.

Not certain there will be any winners at all, only losers.

Changing nothing else would have seen casualty figures falling drastically,
ergo the stasis must be due to a negative effect from the other changes.

I'm sorry but that's complete ********.

However making the roads safer, for example dualling a number of major
A-roads, instead of refusing to do this because policies are anti-car
might have some effect.

By far, most stretches of road still do not have speed cameras so have
been unaffected.

On the roads where they have been introduced reportable accident have
declined by between 41% and 69%.

Because the number of injury accidents on this road was unportionally
high to begin with, which is why they put the speed cameras there, so
it was likely to fall anyway. Now let's say that the normal "average"
number of deaths on a particular road is 0.1 a year, one every 10
years. One year there is a crash and 2 people are killed. They put a
camera there and there are no deaths in the next 5 years and the
average has gone down. But the odds were that there would be no deaths
in the next 5 years on this road anyway based on averages.

Overall (Nationally) the level of traffic accidents has declined
slightly (not much) but this has to be set in context of year on year
traffic growth which should (normally) have led to more accidents.

No, a higher presence can often make accidents less likely to occur. In
an extreme example, if the roads are now so congested that everyone is
moving only at a snail's pace, it is highly unlikely there will be any
major accidents at all (maybe a few damage-only or minor-injury ones
but that's all).