"Scrap speed cameras now"- PS in the Telegraph

ScumOfTheRoad · June 2007

Hmmm. "Any other forum". Wonder what one specifically he is referring to?

Folks, be mindful of Comet's words.
And note the new tactic - flood this board with trolls, and as trolls do invite sharp retorts. Desperately try to portray yourself and compatriots as being downtrodden. Complain to the site admins. Next it will be bluster on "getting my lawyer involved". I feel sorry for any Future staff - they're just running an online forum for chat about cycling. And we've seen these tactics before. Sigh.

Lord help me for responding directly.
Cretin, you and your mates here ar deliberately inviting inflamed comments with the purpose of making complaints. Complaints to Future Publishing staff members who have a job to do in publishing magazines.

Poppadoppaloppa Copper · June 2007

ScumOfTheRoad is a troll.

Jaded · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

Its hilarious how a section of the forum reserved for 'serious discussion of cycling issues' (or words to that effect) can be hijacked by about five posters obsessed with one man.

This place really is suffering from woefully poor administration. Any other forum would have issued severe warnings now against some of the authors and their invective.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Yes Cretin, you and the others should take your obsession elsewhere.

Hmmmmmmm.

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

Tourist Tony · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

Its hilarious how a section of the forum reserved for 'serious discussion of cycling issues' (or words to that effect) can be hijacked by about five posters obsessed with one man.

This place really is suffering from woefully poor administration. Any other forum would have issued severe warnings now against some of the authors and their invective.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Indeed.
Remind us again of why you joined, Simon?

If I had a stalker, I would hug it and kiss it and call it George...or Dick

Cretin · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jaded
Yes Cretin, you and the others should take your obsession elsewhere.

Hmmmmmmm.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

My obsession? I think you'll find that I've mentioned your favourite villain oh.....once? Twice perhaps. Go through my posts if you don't believe me.

Tell me, if you think the man is so ineffectual, why do you, Cunobelin, Mister Paul, Rothbrook and Tourist Tony all spend so much time trying to pull him down with your pugnacious little comments?

I certainly don't agree with everything ____ _______ says, but I have a lot of respect for the time and effort hes applied to bring the debate to a wider audience, and I think hes achieved much more than hateful people like yourself ever will.

rothbook · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> I think hes achieved much more than hateful people like yourself ever will. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Apart from getting his name (but not face, thank God!) in the papers, what, exactly, has Samm Pith achieved please?

List the official policies changed because of Sm1th's work please.

Jaded · June 2007

"I think you'll find that I've mentioned your favourite villain oh.....once? Twice perhaps. Go through my posts if you don't believe me."

"I have a lot of respect for the time and effort hes applied to bring the debate to a wider audience, and I think hes achieved much more than hateful people like yourself ever will."

A contradiction.

You arrived here as a troll. You still are one. As I said, take your obsession elsewhere please. There's plenty of rubbish on the SS forum, you should fit in well there.

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

mjones · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by MattBlackBigBoysBMX
...
"Speed cameras do increase safety, now we need a lot more of them"

Health and Safety, Risk Assessment and Statistical Analysis is something I have done (and do) professionally, so I have been looking at the raw data (never trust a stats man[;)]) available from the .gov.co.uk websites, and it seems that in the past few years deaths on the road have remained fairly static.
I just wondered on what basis the above quoted opinion was formed?

...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Ah hah! MattBlackBigBoysBMX claims to be a statistics expert, so let's have a closer look at what he is saying....

Looks like you are comparing between the trend in the total number of road deaths and the number of cameras, and infering that a simplistic correlation between the two can tell us whether the cameras are effective? Being a statistics expert you would of course have checked that there are no other confounding factors that might also influence total road deaths; of course you would because if there were other factors then a simple correlation wouldn't tell us anything meaningful, would it?

So let's think- are there any factors, other than the number of speed cameras that might affect the total number of road deaths? Hmmmm. I'm struggling here- this is hard isn't it? but then I'm not an expert in transport statistics like Matt, err, how about: total traffic levels? numbers of motorbikes? increased traffic on rural roads? more younger drivers? a levelling off and maybe even an increase in drink driving? Mobile phones?

Oh, that's quite a few factors isn't it? and I didn't think for long either, so there are probably some more. No doubt Matt has already thought of these factors and can explain how he's taken account of them in his analysis? I'm sure he has, he is an expert in these things![;)]

Cunobelin · June 2007

Apologies for the cross posting....

Cretin

You still haven't answered the other thread where you wereasked whether your advanced driving test was IAM or not?

Have you decided yet?

He that buys land buys many stones.
He that buys flesh buys many bones.
He that buys eggs buys many shells,
But he that buys good beer buys nothing else.
(Unattributed Trad.)

Jaded · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

I have a lot of respect for the time and effort hes applied to bring the debate to a wider audience, and I think hes achieved much more than hateful people like yourself ever will.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

You think these are achievements to be proud of:
* Suggesting that Granddads should get someone else's speeding ticket whilst in their coffins?
* Encouraging people to change their number plates to avoid detection?
* Denying your own words (because they are publicly unacceptable), then admit to them, then say you actually still stand by them?

You never answered my question either - how much will your extra driver training cost, who will pay for it and how will it be enforced?

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

bad company · June 2007

As most of you know I generally support PS and the campaign (can't bring myself to use the initials which remind me of Nazis). Having said that I can no justification in scrapping all of the cameras. Some (not many) are well placed and no doubt they have saved lives.

IMO we have far too many cameras often placed for profit rather than safety. I would campaign to reduce the number of cameras but not to scrap them altogether.

I AM THE STIG - HONEST

Cunobelin · June 2007

Anyway - back on topic....
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Tell me, if you think the man is so ineffectual, why do you, Cunobelin, Mister Paul, Rothbrook and Tourist Tony all spend so much time trying to pull him down with your pugnacious little comments?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

It is simply replying to the comments. The unfounded and ridiculous claims are posted, and a reply asked for - a reply is forthcoming.......

THat is the way "most forums" work.

It is probably uncomfortable not having the moderator appearing telling the poster that they are wrong, not allowed to query the official line, or if they do they will be banned - but hey, we are more democratic here!

There is no "trying" to demolish the claims made - it is like shooting fish in a barrel!

It goes like this....

Bridge dweller comes onto site and posts claim

A reply is than made with the (often peer reviewed) evidenced reasons why the claim is invalid

Bridge dweller then claims evidence is not relevant

A reply is then posted again explaining why it is relevant

Brdge dweller gets huffy and starts making unfounded claims

Claims are queried

Bridge dweller tries to confuse things

Claims are queried again

Bridge dweller slinks off to another thread fo a while, hoping his / her failure to answer will be forgotten

He that buys land buys many stones.
He that buys flesh buys many bones.
He that buys eggs buys many shells,
But he that buys good beer buys nothing else.
(Unattributed Trad.)

ACcp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jaded
Yes Cretin, you and the others should take your obsession elsewhere.

Hmmmmmmm.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

My obsession? I think you'll find that I've mentioned your favourite villain oh.....once? Twice perhaps. Go through my posts if you don't believe me.

Tell me, if you think the man is so ineffectual, why do you, Cunobelin, Mister Paul, Rothbrook and Tourist Tony all spend so much time trying to pull him down with your pugnacious little comments?

I certainly don't agree with everything ____ _______ says, but I have a lot of respect for the time and effort hes applied to bring the debate to a wider audience, and I think hes achieved much more than hateful people like yourself ever will.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I figure he could have achieved more in terms of road safety if he put more effort into road safety and less into his war on cameras. But then that is a bit dull, not very emotive and unlikely to get one on telly or many visitors to one's website. Far better to whine on about unfair cameras (even though there are far bigger things in the world to worry about) and make out that sensible speed is fine and acceptable. So more people will speed and more people will die. There's a lot of bad karma coming that feller's way.

I don't eat newly created species of marine life, or even newly discovered species of marine life for that matter, but if I did eat any sort of marine life, I would use this guide: -www.fishonline.org/information/MCSPocket_Good_Fish_Guide.pdf

Jaded · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by bad company

IMO we have far too many cameras often placed for profit rather than safety. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Speed camera fines hit œ114.6m

That's about enough for one medium sized bypass. Lets get things into perspective, eh?

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

CometGirl · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by MattBlackBigBoysBMX

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Tourist Tony

Any other cyclists here?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Me, Me Me!
Can we campaign to get rid of those cycle lanes that island off from the road for a few yards, then join back up with the traffic pointing straight at them!?!

Bloody lethal!!!

Wheelies ARE cool.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Yes, hell yes. AND those ones which take a person along the sodding pavement for ten yards, and then throw them straight back into a line of fast moving traffic exactly where motorists aren't expecting them. (I'm thinking particularly of the one along Albert Enbankment...)

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by CometGirl

Yes, hell yes. AND those ones which take a person along the sodding pavement for ten yards, and then throw them straight back into a line of fast moving traffic exactly where motorists aren't expecting them. (I'm thinking particularly of the one along Albert Enbankment...)
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

One in Wrexham is much better - you go round the bins at some old people's flats where they don't expect you, and then you shoot into the traffic at a busy junction, just at the point where motorists are reading the traffic on the other side.

rothbook · June 2007

Same as, Prince of Wales Road in Norwich- spits you out into traffic coming the other way!

Cretin · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cunobelin

Apologies for the cross posting....

Cretin

You still haven't answered the other thread where you wereasked whether your advanced driving test was IAM or not?

Have you decided yet?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Where did I suggest that it was not? And to which test do you refer - IAM or Rospa? Or shall we talk about skidpan training and ridedrive courses?

rothbook · June 2007

Got that list of Small Pith's acievements yet cretin?

Cretin · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jaded

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

I have a lot of respect for the time and effort hes applied to bring the debate to a wider audience, and I think hes achieved much more than hateful people like yourself ever will.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

You think these are achievements to be proud of:
* Suggesting that Granddads should get someone else's speeding ticket whilst in their coffins?
* Encouraging people to change their number plates to avoid detection?
* Denying your own words (because they are publicly unacceptable), then admit to them, then say you actually still stand by them?

You never answered my question either - how much will your extra driver training cost, who will pay for it and how will it be enforced?

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

How nice of you to selectively quote that post of mine. Why don't you try again and quote the entire post, highlighting the part where I wrote that I don't agree with everything he's said?

And why are you still banging on about the extra driver training cost, when I've said quite explicitly that the cost of such measures would be bourne by the driver? Why are you ignoring my previous answers and inventing new arguments based on misinformation? Do you really think that my opinions are so vacuous that I'll forget what I've previously posted? You constantly use the word 'Troll' but your posts demonstrate quite appropriately to whom to sentiment is best ascribed.

llanberispass · June 2007

Or the one on the A49 soutbound in Stockton Heath by Bridgewater School. The local residents were complaining about parking in the side roads so the council converted most of the cycle lane into a layby for pickup parents!! So much for the safety of cycling school children.

Anyway it was a useless cycle lane as it was of those wonderful creations made on a wide bit of road. Just below it (where cycle space would be useful) is a narrow section which can be hairy if one does not assert ones right to the road space (ie one is a school child).

Pathetic.

Jaded · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

And why are you still banging on about the extra driver training cost, when I've said quite explicitly that the cost of such measures would be bourne by the driver? <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Well, you didn't answer the questions. You want to see cameras scrapped. You were asked what you would provide in their place. You said drivers should be trained.

This takes no account of how much the cost will be, how it would be enforced, and more to the point, whether SS members and your fellow PS acolytes would pay any attention to it, given your dislike of law enforcement.

The current 'cost' per head in Scotland of speed camera fines is œ1.42; now, making the assumption that around half the population of Scotland are drivers, that equates to œ3.00 per driver.

What is your training likely to cost? Somewhere between œ50 and œ150. You think drivers will pay this? At the moment very few drivers pay speeding fines. You wish to penalise the whole driving population because a few drivers get speeding fines. How selfish is that?

How much will your training cost, who will pay and how will it be enforced?

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

rothbook · June 2007

Got that list of Small Pith's acievements yet cretin?

Cretin · June 2007

Actually Jaded I answered all of your questions except the cost - because I don't really know what it would cost. As a guideline the IAM examination costs about œ85, but if the test became a requirement the cost would be more than that as the observers are volunteers.

I also said that a larger traffic police force would be part of a prefereable solution - I would be happy to see police cars all over our roads. Its odd how you casually ignore this and continue to blither on about how I just want to break the law.

Drivers will pay it if they are required to, just as they are required to pay VED, insurance, and fuel duty. They are required to pay for a passport if they want that, the cost is not just for the document but also for the services made available by the British government in foreign lands.

You suggest my idea is selfish? How on earth is raising the overall level of driving standards in any way selfish? Such measures would help make our roads safer, which would have a big impact on the annual cost of road traffic incidents, insurance premiums, costs to the NHS, the benefits are almost incalculable.

I've already told you, I'm not an accountant. I don't know what it would cost. You asked for ideas, and I've given them. I think they're sound, I think they're better than sending fines through the post, or painting lines on roads. Failure to provide exact costings isn't a failure to respond to your questions, its a demonstration of the futility of trying to provide honest answers to someone as blinkered as you.

rothbook · June 2007

cretin, look at the fuss caused by drivers voluntarily breaking the law and paying œ1.42.

You seriously think they would roll over and meekly hand over œ85?

Oh, and got that list of Small Pith's acievements yet cretin?

Jaded · June 2007

The fact that you think your ideas are sound when they haven't been thought through is indicative of your engagement with this thread.

You wish to make ALL drivers pay œ85 instead of a very few pay œ60 when they break the law.

I take it this is the nub of the SS campaign; you know, the part of their Road Safety Campaign that hasn't been made public?

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

Pete Owens · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by llanberispass

Or the one on the A49 soutbound in Stockton Heath by Bridgewater School. The local residents were complaining about parking in the side roads so the council converted most of the cycle lane into a layby for pickup parents!! So much for the safety of cycling school children.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

You mean this one:
http://www.warringtoncyclecampaign.co.u ... -lanes.pdf
If only they had converted most (or even all) of it.

There are two factors that are particularly irritating here:-
1. That the council refused to take any action when we pointed out the danger the lane was causing to cyclists - but jumped to create parking spaces when prodded by motorists.

2. They claimed that the road was too narrow to allow 2m wide cycle lanes, yet manage to paint parking spaces that wide.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
Anyway it was a useless cycle lane as it was of those wonderful creations made on a wide bit of road. Just below it (where cycle space would be useful) is a narrow section which can be hairy if one does not assert ones right to the road space (ie one is a school child).

Pathetic.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

It is a general failing of all cycle lanes. They can only be installed in the first place if there is sufficient lane width available... And if sufficient space is available then the road will be cycle friendly and the cycle lane acts to reallocate road-space to motor vehicles (as in this case).

The exception is where one lane of a dual carriageway is converted to a cycle lane (as on the A56 Chester Road).

Pete

Cretin · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jaded

The fact that you think your ideas are sound when they haven't been thought through is indicative of your engagement with this thread.

You wish to make ALL drivers pay œ85 instead of a very few pay œ60 when they break the law.

I take it this is the nub of the SS campaign; you know, the part of their Road Safety Campaign that hasn't been made public?

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Then you implicitly accept that anybody not being fined œ60 is a good driver?

Tell me, if the current driving standards are good enough, why do we still have so many deaths and serious injuries each year?

rothbook · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> Then you implicitly accept that anybody not being fined œ60 is a good driver?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

 Say hello to the great big speedophile straw man everybody!!!

Jaded · June 2007

No, I don't think that.

However I do think that the constant barrage of whining about drivers who get fined for speeding does no favours for road safety.

It generates a culture where law-breaking is actually defended. That is what most of the SS site is about. That is why it is so foul.

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

"Scrap speed cameras now"- PS in the Telegraph

Comments

Categories