Safe Speed Forums

I may be a little bit paranoid. They may actually be out to get me. But what I have noticed recently is that a large amount of evidence that supports anti-camera views appears to be vanishing from the web.

For example the West Midlands Road Accident Review that used to be available, and was copied onto Ringroad.org.uk has now vanished from sight, apart from a few references to it on other sites that completely ignore the accident causes part. In fact ringroad itself has vanished and the URL now points to a pro-cycling/anti-car site with no mention of Russel Eden (local to me here) at all.

Am I imagining it?

Should we mirror anything useful found so that we cannot be discredited just through official pressure to remove such documents from the public domain?

Should I see somebody about a prescription?

yes I've lost a damming report from Sup. Sue Waren on cameras that shows accidents in surrey cannot be impacted by cameras as speeding related accidents make up just 3% of surrey's fatalaties.

I needed it for the following local rag letter that never made it:

Speed cameras to be slashed, 2nd June guardian

I was interested to read (speed cameras to be slashed, 2nd June) guardian the claim that “Speed cameras have achieved a 23% collision reduction and have almost halved the number of collisions at sites where someone was killed or seriously injured” as this implies the currently deployed cameras are making a positive contribution. The reality of course is that this is a spin on words aimed to convince us that we need this new partnership and the automated enforcement cameras they deploy.

It is difficult to believe speed cameras alone have had such a positive impact. Particularly given Surrey Police’s earlier report also authored by Superintendent Sue Warren, which concluded that Speeding accounted for just 3% of casualties.

Perhaps someone in the partnership can explain how their speed cameras can cut accidents by so much when 97% of vehicles involved where not speeding?

While they are at it perhaps they could explain why their data is at odds with Surrey’s official casualty reports, which show road deaths in Surrey have remained almost static since 1991 and actually increased in 2002 and 2004.

Surrey needs qualified, intelligent traffic police patrolling our roads looking for uninsured, unregistered and unfit drivers who are immune from speed cameras and to exercise discretion when confronting motorists who occasionally stray a few MPH over the limit.

Notes to editors:

The table below shows Surrey casualty data for the last five years.
Year Fatal Serious Slight Total
2000 73 595 6224 6894
2001 53 658 6446 7157
2002 66 629 6123 6918
2003 63 493 5899 6455
2004 72 576 6254 6902

If this is true and not paranoia then it reveals a sinister entity at work quietly rewriting history to suit political objectives.

Oh sorry, this has already been posted by a G. Orwell a while ago in 1948.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

at least I got my letter published - the neighbor spotted it while I was away.

I shall await eagerly the scamerati PR machine to respond. - I don't think they've got any angles I've already made them rethink the 1% = 5% claim because they couldn't find the evidence.

(hint look on the ABD website)