Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Tue Oct 28, 2025 15:55

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 09:53 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 13:07
Posts: 204
Location: Kent
http://www.kentandmedwaysafetycameras.org.uk/how_page03.html

Pretty conclusive results.

Speed cameras don't seem to be loved here in Kent...

No official words on the survey results that I can find.

_________________
"Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts."


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: netting off
PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 04:21 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 04:11
Posts: 171
Location: South East
Interesting how the results contrast to previous years (data also on their site). Could it be that they have inadvertently employed someone honest enough to tell the truth?

Virtually certain that there will be no official comment unless they net these current stats with previous years' results!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 17:40 
Offline
Camera Partnership Staff
Camera Partnership Staff
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 19:48
Posts: 1995
intresting reading until you get to question 12, links from other web sites

Q13 visted the website less than 6 times

Q18 80% of respondants male, Q17 50% age bracket 26 - 44, Q18 no reponsibility for kids

IMO bit of poll hijacking

_________________
now retired


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 18:29 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 23:17
Posts: 499
Probably a better scope of public opinion than most speed camera surveys, although its very difficult to remove the possibility of bias when collecting data in this way. The results seem to reflect the conclusions of the swiftcover.com survey, ie the majority of the public think speed cameras are nothing more that a scam and certainly nothing to do with road safety.

It makes me highly suspicious of how other SCPs have collected the data for their speed camera surveys in the past...did they ask a representivive crossection of the public to fill them in or did they get partnership staff to fill them in instead? Hmmmmmm.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 20:20 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 09:16
Posts: 3655
camera operator wrote:
IMO bit of poll hijacking


IMO Sour grapes...... :lol:

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 21:10 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 00:42
Posts: 832
Email to my “Safety Camera Partnership", copied to my Local MPs and Mr Ladyman.
Quote:
Please see;

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/rapidpdf ... 1.4Fv1.pdf
http://www.kentandmedwaysafetycameras.o ... age03.html
http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,3 ... 23,00.html
http://www.sky.com/skynews/polls/displa ... -1,00.html
http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/articl ... 59,00.html
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/swiftcover2006.doc

Even according to your own data, from 2001 to 2005 you only achieved an average annual reduction in KSI casualties of 1.3% per year. Given the ongoing improvements to vehicle safety, road engineering and casualty treatment, which have resulted in significant safety benefits, all you have achieved is to make the situation worse. It would seem that like parasites on the community you have kept yourselves in well paid jobs at the expense of perfectly safe motorists going about their lawful business with no benefit to the community.

The survey by the Kent and Medway police shows that people;

• disagree that speed cameras reduce accidents
• disagree that dangerous drivers are now more likely to get caught
• agree that speed cameras are an easy way of making money out of motorists
• disagree that speed cameras are meant to encourage drivers to keep to the limits, not to punish them
• disagree that the primary aim of safety cameras is to save lives
• disagree that the use of safety cameras should be supported as a method of reducing casualties and
• agree that there are too many cameras in their local area

Like most people I fully agree with all those views.

It is quite apparent that your propaganda claims about the benefits of and support for speed cameras cannot be upheld. It is time that you and the government acknowledged this, disbanded your “Safety Camera Partnership”. Then you could do something else that is of use and benefit to the community you are supposed to be serving.

Camera operator knows that he only keeps his job with the money from perfectly safe drivers of no danger to anyone. He has very little effect on the dangerous and unsafe drivers from his camera van.

Write to your MP, contact details at;
http://www.parliament.uk/directories/hciolists/alms.cfm
http://www.dodonline.co.uk/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 21:35 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9268
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
Dr L wrote:

He has very little effect on the dangerous and unsafe drivers from his camera van.


OR ANY effect on the increasing volume of unregistered , untaxed , uninsured and illegal drivers who simply give him two fingures rampant and speed off in the sure and certain knowledge that they will never get home to find a letter from SCP or even DVLA waiting for them - so much for that much vaunted ad - "we know where you are "


For all the god Cam op does to these he might as well start selling ice cream - in this case probably more profitable. :wink:

_________________
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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 23:44 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 00:42
Posts: 832
Quote:
From: LADYMAN, Steve [mailto:LADYMANS@parliament.uk]
Sent: 28 June 2006 20:12
Subject: Not read: RE: Speed cameras don't reduce casualties, are just for collecting money and they are not wanted !!!

Your message

To: Safety Camera Partnership
Cc: LADYMAN, Steve;

Subject: RE: Speed cameras don't reduce casualties, are just for collecting money and they are not wanted !!!
Sent: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 11:44:37 +0100

was deleted without being read on Wed, 28 Jun 2006 20:11:37 +0100

Well it would seem he just doesn’t want to accept the reality of the message about speed cameras. Perhaps someone else could remind him so that he does get the message.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.024s | 10 Queries | GZIP : Off ]