Safe Speed Forums

You're wavydavy/bimblely/yusulfalbindownpub the troll aren't you?

Ah, now I know who you are!! You give yourself away too easily Wavey gravy. Each time the hatred shines through.

For reference, I have learned more from the so called 'fake copper' than I am ever to likely learn from you so i'll pass if you don't mind. You can go now, run along then, there's a good chap.

PS wavey Davey,

You might want to have a look at this thread. I guess we're not the only whingers then?

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/forum/viewt ... ht=#111239


Of course none of this helps either of our causes BTW.

I have suspended the account of 'skipflashintro' on the basis that there's a high probability that he is a previously banned poster.

If I'm wrong the account can be quickly re-enabled if the user provides verifiable evidence of identity by email to psmith@safespeed.org.uk

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Unfortunately I think that's why the discussion is stifled. A lot of C+ members feel the same about coming over here. I see plenty of fruitless conflict in both forums independently.

All forums are the same. C+ members are put off visiting here because of the unhelpful blasting they get from some SS members, and vice versa. I think the truth is that the majority of both sides are open to decent debate.

It isn't familiarity that breeds contempt, but ignorance.

If this is true, I think its only of a minority over there. And tbh I can hardly blame them - I can't remember the last time I cycled on the roads and didn't have to deal with at least one idiot.

likewise but you'd have to be pretty bloody stupid to think that speed cameras or any speed kills propaganda has done or will do anything at all to stop those idiots from running you down.
The problem isn't just a motorist thing either, although they obviously have the potential to do a whole lot more damage. From what I see around south London, and as posted in another thread, there's a good number of cyclists who are in need of a COAST lesson. I see plenty of people riding too fast for the conditions and making suicide runs up the inside of turning buses and trucks - and that's without going to richmond park.

Yep I totally agree. Speeding drivers never gave me any problems while riding. Drivers who pass only 12 inches away, or overtake and turn left in front of me, or shout obscenities from the window, or beep their horn on approach (scares you shitless that one), they're the ones I don't like.

I don't see a great deal of 'unhelpful blasting' here. We have a rule against ad hominem arguments which is enforced gently but firmly.

If any C+ folk want to debate on here, I'll do my very best to ensure that they are made welcome and get a fair hearing. We could even set up a "C+ Bridge" forum and appoint impartial moderators.



Very cute.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Paul. I seriously wouldn't bother. I've spent some time to debate with them as MTB_rider and they really aren't interested in anything other than personal insults and discrediting your entire philosiphy.

I really do think that they need to get over themselves.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

That's not true though is it? You've just given up on a thread over there because you asked a reasonable question and all of your responses but one were reasonable answers. The one poster that you were unhappy with continued to upset you, while others (me included) thought that they were having a reasonable discussion with you.

So are you exaggerating slightly, or do you just feel unhappy about being disagreed with?

It doesn't look like we have found a bridge building format yet...

Let's try a few individual bricks:

- DfT speed surveys reveal that around 60% of vehicles are excceding the speed limit on most road types, yet recent DfT information confirms that only 5% of injury crashes were coded with 'exceeding speed limit' as a contributory factor. How come 'speeding' is underrepresented in the crash stats by 12:1?

- A central part of the Safe Speed case is that speed cameras and associated policies are having a serious detrimental effect on driver quality. The authorities have ignored this possibility. Do you agree that such an effect is possible?

Would you like to carry these items to C+ for discussion?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

I was (AM infact) upset that what I hoped would be a reasonable discussion (and as you point out quite correctly WAS a reasonable discussion with certain members) was basically hyjacked by a couple of people who weren't interested in debating at all, more ramming their POV down my throat by picking holes in everything I said. I'm not prepared to debate somewhere where every other post is a torrent of personal abuse and impossible questions about SS policy over which I have no control.

To answer your question Jub Jub, the solition is not one that can happen over night. Ideally in the long term I would like to think that all drivers were capable and competent enough to set appropriate speeds for themselves without needing to be told how fast to drive. I don't believe that this will ever happed, so yes, I would like to see limits set at a level where the competent and reasonable majority can stay within them. I would also like to see prosecution for a few MPH over the limit scrapped as quite frankly its petty.

The trouble is, any change in policy has to be coupled with a change of attitude. The extra freedom must be accompanied by extra responsibility on the part of the motorist. If limits were set at an appropriate and safe speed for a given set of conditions then the motorist MUST be made to understand that as conditions change, so the safe speed changes. It also needs to be made clear that the limit is not a target.

However, the tricky bit, as you rightly stated, is how to deal with the massive speed differentials that having much higher limits would generate. Part of me wants to say that there should be a minimum enforcable speed on our major routes. However, this has to allow for adverse conditions and would have to be set so low as to be pointless.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

Paul. I tried to raise the above points on C+ (I might have gone about it in a hand-fisted way, I don't know). On point 1. A couple of the C+ members have latched on to what seems to be a 'readers digest' version of the DfT stats that claim that 12% of KSIs are caused by 'excessive speed'. No clarification of the definition of 'exceesive'. This was a brick wall as I couldn't find the link to the sourse data that's been published here. Any attempt to 'reason' the data was met with accusations of false representation. This accusation was also made when introducing the RTTM argument.

On point 2 - not directly raised, but apparently exceeding the speed limit is bad therefore cameras must be good.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

I understand what you are saying. It does seem however that whatever the scenario, it is the poor driving that puts a spanner in the works. Cameras are said to be dangerous because poor drivers are unable to act safely around them. And on the other side, altering the speed limit system is dangerous because the poor drivers can't manage with the one we have now, and confusing the issue ofr them is only going to make it worse.

Done, and I assume you can see the response.

So the ONLY workable solution is to remove the bad drivers through education and the presence of trafpol. (Which was the point I was trying to make to Cab)

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

OK. So if you remove the bad driving, what is then the problem with the cameras?

It's clearly necessary to ignore bimbly/whoever because he lies, cheats, misrepresents and misquotes. No one can carry out a reasonable discussion in such circumstances.

It would be helpful if other C+ folk recognised that problem and discounted his claims to zero.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

They have serious adverse effects on driver quality.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety