Workshard - I am sorry if you feel distressed or offended by the discussion here.
In my youth I rode a motorcycle, and my brother was nearly killed on one - by a driver overtaking approaching a blind bend - so I am more than aware that motorcyclists are not always the agents of their own misfortune. My brother was off work for over a year, and still carries the results of one drivers carelessness.
This thread is intended as a criticism of the money
wasted by the pointless producing of statistics by
two separate Cumbria County Council sponsored bodies - one of which claims to be reducing accidents by prosecuting speeding.
The money poured into THAT organisation should in my opinion be spent on measures that address the far wider range of causes - one of which you have highlighted because of your unfortunate experience.
The DfT stats 19 figures show that speeding in excess of the posted limit accounts for 5% - 7% of accident causes, and yet "Safety" Camera Partnerships have been sucking up the lions share of road safety spending, on the back of statistics THEY produce, and misrepresent to their various councils.
Elsewhere, I have highlighted the numbers of people killed or injured at low speeds - including the tragic deaths that occur on peoples driveways.
In the past, the DfT claimed 33% of accidents were due to speeding - and it has taken them years to back away from that early error on their part.
You may have read of councils around the UK that have withdrawn funding for their speed camera partnerships, and invested their road safety grant from the government in road improvements of the type you advocate.
Swindon was the first to do this, but others have followed suit BECAUSE their budgets have been cut elsewhere.
Cumbria unfortunately has stuck it's head in the sand, and stuck obstinately to funding speed cameras on the flimsy excuse that people have died on X stretch of road - without linking those awful statistics to a cause.
I hope you realise that in order to make a change, the councillors in charge of the funding have to be made aware of their own short sightedness, and to look at the case for speed cameras, AND the fact that they are funding BOTH these bodies,
whose statistics don't even compare to each other.If you click on my profile, you should find enough information to contact me - unlike the former head of the Cumbria Safety Camera Partnership who posts here under an alias (or two - possibly out of embarrassment at his part - but I doubt it) - as he continues to promote prosecuting speeding as the only way to reduce accidents!
His statistics ignore the effort of motor manufacturers to install better in car safety features, and of the paramedic service improvements that save more lives at the road side, and instead claims all the improvements in statistics were due to speed cameras!