Safe Speed Forums

Comment: Taking credit for the overall drop in accidents, but when the accidents rise the SCP's shrug their shoulders, take no blame and say "we're still needed - the lunatic drivers still won't slow down!".

edit: here is their press release - quote: In real terms this means 60 people avoided serious injury or death last year as a direct result of the introduction of safety cameras.

Link

Accident toll cut by speed cameras
Mar 23 2006

ROAD safety chiefs today praised the success of speed cameras in Warwickshire following a reduction in the number of accidents and casualties at camera sites.

Since the first Gatsos appeared in the county in 2002, officials say there have been 254 fewer collisions and 459 fewer deaths and injuries at specific camera sites.

Warwickshire now has 27 fixed speed cameras.

Separate figures also show a fall in collisions and casualties at non-camera sites last year following a countywide rise in the number of accidents in 2004.

The Warwickshire Casualty Reduction Partnership, which operates the cameras, said the two sets of figures showed motorists were monitoring their speed more closely than ever before.

Stephen Rumble, the group's spokesman, said: "Certain drivers drive at whatever speed they like until they think there's a risk of a speed camera being in place, but there's pretty strong evidence that others are taking note of our warnings and do not want to pick up penalty points because of the risk of detection.

"People have been used to setting their own limits - and we are trying to change that."

The partnership is made up of representatives of Warwickshire Police, the county council, the Highways Agency and Primary Care Trusts.

I'm beginning to think that only degree qualified mathematicians should be permitted to quote statistics.

254 fewer collisions? Get a grip. Since speed is the primary reason for a miniscule number of crashes, there must be tens of thousands of collisions every year in Warwickshire. I'm surprised there's any cars left.

Keeping an eye on speed is fine, no problem with that. Setting one's own limit - can't really see why that's viewed as a bad thing????
That 254 crashes haven't happened purely because people are driving at the speed limit where some cameras are is clearly a misunderstanding of maths.

If what they're claiming is true - the "direct result" bit - the cameras would have needed to jump out and grab the cars, thus stopping them inches from contact with one another.

Will be interesting to see the number of lives saved next year.

Bloody heros these cameras...... If only we had more of those around in Arnhem in 1944........

_________________

RTTM

It's been covered ad-nauseum on this website and others - measurements at "Camera Sites" are meaningless. This is because:

1) of RTTM; The rules for siting of cameras give them a tendency to be installed after a "spike" in casualty rates at the chosen site. The casualty rate at that site returns to normal afterwards and the camera gets the credit, even though the return to normal would have happened anyway. This isn't science, it's statistical tomfoolery.

2) Heavy speed enforcement moves people onto other roads, and the accidents move with them. Those 60 people have probably still been killed or injured, they've just done it elsewhere (and now fall conveniently outside the scope of the statistical study)

Slowing people down at specific sites isn't even what the SCPs claim to be about - they want people to slow down EVERYWHERE just from the THREAT of cameras, and they say as much in the press release. So why not use EVERYWHERE (within their Jurisdiction) as the statistical yardstick? I think we all know the answer to that one.

I wish they would stick with the "It's the law and we can enforce it if we want to" line and not bother with statistics at all unless they can produce some that actually mean something.

_________________
“For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.” - H. L. Mencken

Warks have also said that they've also reached the target for reducing fatalities for 2010 - didn't see any mention of other injuries.Seems to methey (like the rest ) only advertise that bits that suit them .

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

Warks have also said that they've also reached the target for reducing fatalities for 2010 - didn't see any mention of other injuries.Seems to methey (like the rest ) only advertise that bits that suit them .

Interesting to see in another ad the move to smiley sids by the same lot ---loosing friends ??

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

Unbelievable ... you really couldn't make this stuff up...