"Scrap speed cameras now"- PS in the Telegraph

Flying_Monkey · June 2007

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

If you are getting desperate enough to infer things from someone's argument that that are quite clearly not implied, I suggest that you do not have a decent argument of your own.

Now I guess I'll have to tell 'em
That I got no cerebellum
Gonna get my Ph.D.
I'm a teenage lobotomy

Jaded · June 2007

We have so many death and injuries each year because drivers do not understand how dangerous their vehicle can be, because when they are in it they are cocooned from part of real life, because there are some irresponsible and selfish people out there that resent being told what to do, and because a small minority of that last group is quite vociferous.

The start has to be more enforcement. Keep the cameras, increase the number of police. Have more cameras.

Oh, and the whining has to stop too.

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

Cretin · June 2007

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

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

If you are getting desperate enough to infer things from someone's argument that that are quite clearly not implied, I suggest that you do not have a decent argument of your own.

Now I guess I'll have to tell 'em
That I got no cerebellum
Gonna get my Ph.D.
I'm a teenage lobotomy

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

You should try telling Mister Paul and Cunobelin that, Jaded too. Don't forget Tourist Tony and Rothbrook while you're at it.

dynohub · June 2007

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

Jaded - that's an interesting and significant figure - where did you get it from? I'd like to have a look...

Cretin · June 2007

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

We have so many death and injuries each year because drivers do not understand how dangerous their vehicle can be, because when they are in it they are cocooned from part of real life, because there are some irresponsible and selfish people out there that resent being told what to do, and because a small minority of that last group is quite vociferous.

The start has to be more enforcement. Keep the cameras, increase the number of police. Have more cameras.

Oh, and the whining has to stop too.

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

When correctly trained in any field, you no longer have to tell people what to do. They just do it. Its called education.

Jaded · June 2007

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

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

Jaded - that's an interesting and significant figure - where did you get it from? I'd like to have a look...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Hi,

It's from this article. Re-reading it, the Scottish average may be slightly higher, because of the Dumfries and Galloway figure - it's not entirely clear if that is included.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6238604.stm

--
[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

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

We have so many death and injuries each year because drivers do not understand how dangerous their vehicle can be, because when they are in it they are cocooned from part of real life, because there are some irresponsible and selfish people out there that resent being told what to do, and because a small minority of that last group is quite vociferous.

The start has to be more enforcement. Keep the cameras, increase the number of police. Have more cameras.

Oh, and the whining has to stop too.

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

When correctly trained in any field, you no longer have to tell people what to do. They just do it. Its called education.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I see. That is why so many drivers get caught doing things they were specifically educated NOT to do in their, er, driver training.
Remind us again of why you joined this forum from SS, Simon, amd show us one post by you about cycling.
How's the iodine deficiency?

And it's "borne", not "bourne". The second is a small stream.

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

MattBlackBigBoysBMX · June 2007

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

<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![;)]

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

Firstly, I have not claimed to be an expert on statistics, so why do state that I have?
All I stated is that I work with statistics, which was purely to point out that I understand them.
Either you have gotten confused or you are simply lying to try and undermine my views, which frankly is very disappointing and quite laughable considering that you have just made what would have been my point for me!
That is to say that yes, road safety is very complex which is why I asked how you had arrived at your totally over-simplistic opinion that
"Speed cameras do increase safety, now we need a lot more of them".

I do not understand why you have to be so malicious, I post on these particular threads with no malcontent, just a desire to discuss.

I'm not even saying I disagree with your "Speed cameras do increase safety" sentiment, I just think there are more important areas to address first.

xxx
Matt Black

Wheelies ARE cool.

ACcp · June 2007

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

I'm not even saying I disagree with your "Speed cameras do increase safety" sentiment, I just think there are more important areas to address first.

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

Matt, I think one can address the important areas as well keeping speed cameras. It would probably be better if people focused on addressing the 'more important areas' rather than spending time trying to scrap cameras.

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

Cunobelin · June 2007

As the original thread is still being avoided by "Cretin".

Cretin claims he was speeding throughout the "Advanced Test" - which the IAM states would be unacceptable.
He was challenged to make this claim to the IAM and see if the test was actually valid.

When asked to clarify Cretin stated:<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">You are also aware that the IAM is not the only advanced driving organisation aren't you? You think that I've only taken the one?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Cretin has then failed to answer a request to clarify this statement.

Why the reluctance to make the claims clear?

Now we have:
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade 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?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Are you now claiming that you were allowed to speed without censure on ALL of these courses?

Please answer a simple question:

On the "Portsmouth thread" you claimed to have broken the speed limit and been at one point complimented by the examiner for doing so....
The request is still very simple........

Please identify the examining body whose test you claim to have passed in this manner?

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.)

dynohub · 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 dynohub

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

Jaded - that's an interesting and significant figure - where did you get it from? I'd like to have a look...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Hi,

It's from this article. Re-reading it, the Scottish average may be slightly higher, because of the Dumfries and Galloway figure - it's not entirely clear if that is included.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6238604.stm

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

Oh - I misunderstood - sorry - that's the "income per head" from the cameras - I wonder what of cost of the camera enforcement operation per head is? I'm much in favour of improved driver education, but accept your concerns about what it might cost. However the "income" figure you show is quite low and would, I suspect, mean that the Scottish camera operations are quite possibly loss-making. (That gives the lie to the "cash-cow" argument, but does make me wonder about value for money in terms of impact compared to other enforcement methods)

Jaded · June 2007

I don't know how much cameras cost to install and run across the country (including the cost of processing NIPs) but the total amount collected in fines last year was apparently œ114m

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

dynohub · June 2007

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

I don't know how much cameras cost to install and run across the country (including the cost of processing NIPs) but the total amount collected in fines last year was apparently œ114m

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

I'd really like to know the cost - many people think that whilst more police on the roads would be a good idea, it would cost too much - maybe some degree of trade off against cameras in favour of more police could actually be cost effective? Anyone know where cost of running camera partnerships AND costs of operating traffic police divisions might be found?

Cretin · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cunobelin
Please identify the examining body whose test you claim to have passed in this manner?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Oh, big letters. I like that. Red too.

The Institute of Advanced Motorists. As I have already said.

Cunobelin · June 2007

Thank you for the clarification.

Shame it took so long......

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.)

Cretin · June 2007

Perhaps next time you require a quick answer, you should try reading my original comments. After all, this is a discussion forum, not 'Cunobelin's chamber of repetitiveness'.

Anonymous · June 2007

Just out of interest Cuno.
Which two Universities are you an external examiner for?

Unknown · June 2007

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

<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!!! 
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Sorry about that, my ad hominem insults are a result of being backed into a corner. From now on, if you see these insults in any of my posts, what it actually means is "You're right, you've won the argument, but my psychosis literally prevents me from admitting that." If you hadn't worked that out already. [;)]

--
Spindrift the Reformed
Scrap Speed Cameras Now!
Help Support Safe Speed! Help Save Lives!
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/join.html

Tourist Tony · June 2007

Mongo! I want your children!

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

Unknown · June 2007

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

I do not understand why you have to be so malicious, I post on these particular threads with no malcontent, just a desire to discuss.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
It's really very simple. If you disagree with the core Cycling Plus trolls (of which I was one before I saw the light), you get playground insults, and if you disagree enough times, you get banned. The trolls have a problem with the idea of free speech, and are intolerant of anyone with a different opinion to theirs, even when all the science backs up that opinion. If they had it their way then any driver who even disagreed with speed cameras would be banned from the road. As it is they have to make do with banning them from the forum. It's all part of the oppressive, maniacal intolerance which shows that, far from having some kind of liberal agenda, these people are deeply belligerent and disturbed.

If you're interested, you'll find that those in the Safe Speed forums are infinitely more open to genuine debate. There, you do not get banned simply for disagreeing, and indeed, Paul Smith gives people huge numbers of chances before being banned. Only the very worst trolls, who stir and stir with every post (e.g. Jub Jub aka Mister Paul), end up being banned. And so despite complaints from the core Cycling Plus trolls that you get banned from Safe Speed just for disagreeing, they are being entirely hypocritical, as the exact same thing is instead true of their own dank little board.
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by MattBlackBigBoysBMX

I'm not even saying I disagree with your "Speed cameras do increase safety" sentiment, I just think there are more important areas to address first.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I've already told you. You're not allowed to say things like that. If you don't stfu right now then I'll call you a troll.

--
Spindrift the Reformed
Scrap Speed Cameras Now!
Help Support Safe Speed! Help Save Lives!
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/join.html

Tourist Tony · June 2007

Take me now, big boy!

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

"Scrap speed cameras now"- PS in the Telegraph

Comments

Categories