Safe Speed Forums

Oh no, it makes perfect sense. you see this is a great way for them to make their speed cameras appear much more effective than they actually are. See this for the explanation. Or simply take a peek at my signature below!


You have a habit of simply claiming something is or isn't without supporting evidence or reasoning, even though the argument has been presented to you. Is that not a telltale characteristic of a disingenuous poster?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

what SCP is that, if there is money to be made i bet they would fall over themselves to set a gatso up

Do you have a feeling for how often you look at the speedo?

The only camera I know of in my county that has any real effect on safety is the A36 at Wellow Hampshire, and that also needed a Sid infront to make it work. There have of course been 20+ years of concerns and a planned bypass that never got the money or permission to bulldoze a few homes. I was asked to cost the removal of utillities plant 15 years ago. Since then ther have been 8 deaths (maybe more?)

It is still two junctions on the crest of a hill and a dip.. so there may be more deaths yet.

As for watching the speedo, I don't do it below 35mph. If a road needs a 20 or a 30 limit, I aint got time to look at the speedo.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

Hey complacency-man (for safe you are not) - would you care to address the above point you have so conveniently avoided until now? Would you claim that you were blameless if you were to be in an accident caused by you driving too fast for the conditions yet below or at the posted legal speed?!

If you were to kill or injure your passengers or a pedestrian as a result, would you use 'I wasn't speeding, I was simply following the rules' as a defence?!

Ah yes, Anton. The one where two deaths occured soon after it was installed. As you say, the problem is the road layout here.

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

Redesigning the junction, or prohibiting right turns here would do a much better job than a speed camera. Traffic's usually crawling through Wellow anyway.

OOps! Speed camera supporter brands scp's "idiots"!

Question mr safetyman; If theyre wrong about siting them only after a death or serious injury ( which seems silly to you and hence wrong) then could it be just possible that the whole policy is wrong?

If so, why support something thats not working? Thats just "silly" to me.

_________________
"Safety" Scamera Partnerships;
Profitting from death and misery since 1993.

Believe nothing- Question everything.

No fundementaly the polocy is good, However it is underuse, If speed cameras were more widley used, mobile and desreate 10000's more people would be caught and hence slow down Accident rates would then plummett.

If car manufacturers were forced to speed restrict thier cars Accident rates would plummet, bigger more expensive (and more profitable) car sales would plummet, thats why the rulers dont take this option they have spare workers to kill and profits to maintain.

Enough said (or was it?)

10000's? Millions are already being caught annually, yet the policy is having no impact!

Perhaps you could get mummy to help you with your next post?

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

Paul



Regards

Malc

Is it even English that he's trying to emulate?

"Perhaps you could get mummy to help you with your next post?"
_________________
Paul Smith


please read forum rules paul, i think you may well find somthing about this type of behavior, now if you want a sensible debate, lets go otherwise or may have to ban yourself

"ou may have to ban yourself"

Safetyman, do let us know when, and if, you ever do choose to debate sensibly, because all you seem capable of doing is chucking in unintelligible, illiterate, and ill-conceived gobbets of dogma. There are many here who would love the opportunity to dismantle you in a "sensible debate", please do give us that chance!

[English speaker]
The first letter of a sentence should be capitalised.
Proper nouns, such as 'Paul', should be capitalised.
'I' should be capitalised.
Commas and clauses should be used correctly.
All text should be proof-read.
[/English speaker]

Thats a ridiculous statement.
The policy has led to a rise in fatals. How can that be "good"?
Its led to the criminalisation of millions of ordinary drivers who didnt go on to have an accident after they were photographed, how can that be "good"?
Its led to disatster in the area of police/public relations, how is that "good"?

I could go on all day like this but the point is made.



Ahh i see, youre of the "if it aint working give the patient more medicine" school.
The facts, the undeniable facts are simply that what youve proposed has been played out on the roads since speed cameras were incepted into this failed road safety "belief". The belief that control of a minor factor will somehow affect the causes of the other factors. Well it dosent and it hasnt. Its been a complete (and i apologise to the forum for this but it really wont suffice to use another adjective) FUCK UP, with millions been hammered and accident rates going ever skyward. More of the same in this instance wont work.
Just like aspirin for foot and mouth wont work......maybe a speed camera would work there?



Drivel! Accident rates will ONLY fall if speed is THE CAUSE OF THE ACCIDENTS BEING REPORTED!!!! 98% of accidents dont occur OUTSIDE the speed lmits, how will a camera stop the 98% from happening. Explain that one!



Oh i see. This isnt anything to do with speed its a cover for an envy complex you have. The politics of envy. "must get thos hateful car drivers".

Youre busted "safetyman" youre a joke.

_________________
"Safety" Scamera Partnerships;
Profitting from death and misery since 1993.

Believe nothing- Question everything.

Thats a very presumtious statement!, I feel rather sorry for the people who have to massage thier own ego by buying such cars and motorcycles.
I feel that they do this beacause they have little self confidence and lack any type of skills in other areas so have to BUY prestege.

Now If they took up a sport this Psychological dificulty may be managed better.

Surely you meant:

"I'm about to make a very presumptuous statement!"

Oh the irony!

I have two cars that you would probably consider fit your stereotype. In my opinion, if you met me, you would probably find that I don't lack self-confidence or communication skills. I got them because I like cars and technology.

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

Whats that got to do with safety and driving then? Nothing at all.



Your real motives are laid bare, youre jealous, envious and spiteful just because you disagree with what someone else buys. WTF has it to do with you what cars or bikes people buy?
Its none of your bloody business you spiteful controlling little worm.



Yeah i concur, i choose full contact street fighting; want to play?

_________________
"Safety" Scamera Partnerships;
Profitting from death and misery since 1993.

Believe nothing- Question everything.