Safe Speed Forums

Well, cerainly "captain gatso" who claims to be a member of Safe Speed doesn't appear to be motivated in the slightest by the perceived negative saftey impact that is stated.

(and I can't beleive on that piston heads thread that spindrift got banned for asking questions and "Captain Gatso" didn't for wishing cancer on a fellow poster)

Also I wonder if Captain Gatso signed Paul Smith's scrap speed cameras campaign?

If he did he's hypocrite because he supports them:

Captain Gatso "But we do not touch cameras sited in proper accident black-spots, or built-up areas. Those cameras, we applaud. We want to see more of them. But it's the revenue-generators we go after; the ones on major trunk roads, motorways and main roads. Because 75 per cent of accidents happen in built-up areas, and that's where the cameras should be."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 61335.html

I really think Safe Speed should rethink it's attitude to scrapping all cameras.

Well that seems to be a direct contradiction, you state that you can draw any conclusion, and then that you can't.

That's an aside, you accept that the TRL documents are peer reviewed and accepted. And that Safespeed uses these documents in it's own campaign. In particular, the TRL report that states that headline casualty reductions had been hugely inflated by the effect of RTTM. Safespeed had said this for years, then TRL confirmed it

I'm not doubting your sincerity for a moment in having read this, but where did he say this? On PH somewhere?

For the record, though I have no official role in Safespeed, I have never seen any mention of this by any member about any other member, or had any reason to suspect that any member was Captain Gatso, so if they are then they're keeping it very quiet. He may be a 'user' rather than a member for all I know, but then I'm sure you know that doesn't mean he's part of Safespeed


EDIT: Also for the record, I am here because I'm worried - deeply worried - about road safety policy in the UK today. I feel that driving standards and safety policy were far better when I started driving 20 years ago, and I want to do something about it if I can. If I was just some camera hater who just wanted to drive as fast as he could, there's loads of rather lower-brow car forums (PH springs to mind for a start) that would suit me better.

And as someone upthread said, if we're so insignificant, why do people who seem to fear us keep coming back to stir up trouble? Surely we'd just die a natural death if they just buggered off?


And now I'm going to leave this thread alone, as it's clearly a 'bubble-up' of a temporarily locked one, so any one who isn't just a car-hating troll should just leave this thread alone.

Bye.

Why do you think that?

If speed cameras were scrapped, this would force the reversal of the current reduction in traffic police. Therefore with more traffic police enforcing all traffic law rather than cameras fining drivers for a single specific offence, the roads would become safer would they not?

If you think that increasing traffic officers does not make the roads safer, perhaps you would care to state why, since all available research suggests that the only way to increase road safety is to increase traffic police patrols.

SafeSpeed is a road safety campaign and road safety is not just about speed cameras.

Speaking for myself, in general speed cameras do nothing for road safety, the same with SPEC’s.

They are being used under the disguise of road safety as a means to justify brainwashing people into accepting control by an elite body of people. The same goes for Health and Safety. The British roads today are so designed to cause confusion and panic which in turn leads to accidents and even deaths. So in effect this government is aiding and abetting.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

:" Also for the record, I am here because I'm worried - deeply worried - about road safety policy in the UK today. I feel that driving standards and safety policy were far better when I started driving 20 years ago, and I want to do something about it if I can. If I was just some camera hater who just wanted to drive as fast as he could, there's loads of rather lower-brow car forums (PH springs to mind for a start) that would suit me better."

"Speaking for myself, in general speed cameras do nothing for road safety, the same with SPEC’s.
They are being used under the disguise of road safety as a means to justify brainwashing people into accepting control by an elite body of people. The same goes for Health and Safety. The British roads today are so designed to cause confusion and panic which in turn leads to accidents and even deaths. So in effect this government is aiding and abetting."

These are two excellent quotes which sum up my feelings about speed cameras and road safety exactly!

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

I agree as with others on here that speed cameras are a good thing in the right place which, I believe is how they started out. So Captain Gatso is not wrong to support them. He’s merely saying that most are not being use for the purpose they where intended.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

It would involve scrapping much of the Zeitgeist. Controls have formed the modern world. Everybody is at it, from factories, shipping and logistics, broadcasting, utilities and travel etc. The coppers are at it too.

Technology depends on one question ... how should we divide the work between people and machines? That's what the sites about, IMO.

Did you sign Paul Smith's "scrap speed cameras" e-petition?

The Safe Speed campaign would state machines = 0% police = 100% seeing as the campaign's stated aim is to see ALL speed camera's scrapped.

Well, some fascinating replies so far. However nothing really positive, only scrap speed cameras and how awful they are. I don't see how this can increase road safety since if it succeeded all that would happen is that many more people would ignore the law when it came to driving.

If SafeSpeed is a speed camera campaign then it should be honest and say so.
If it is a road safety campaign, then it need prominent* coverage of its road safety policies. Removing cameras is not a policy.

Oh, and reading lists of how bad life is in the UK reminds me of reading the Daily Mail. It doesn't advance road safety one bit, it is simply chaff in the wind. It makes you sound like right wing conspiracy theorists.


* on the website, on this forum, in press releases, in media comment.

No, you are twisting it deliberately.

My final answer on this matter:

I think the Government's evidence is fine
I think the conclusions drawn by SafeSpeed are wrong to begin with and the evidence presented by Paul Smith has never been validated by any third-party of sound standing in the road safety field.

I can read a book that shows a picture of a red apple. 9/10 persons will report that it is a red apple, yet the other may report it as a red banana. That doesn't mean the original evidence is flawed, it just means the person who somehow derived "red banana" from the evidence got it wrong.

So much for not commenting any more...

Has anyone ever noticed how somebody comparing forum comments with the Daily Mail is positioning themselves politically just as precisely as they are those they are commenting on?

So you've not been fined - I think you should stop reading the Daily Mail and the GOS for a bit, it's bad for your health.

I don't see an "obsession" with road pricing by the Government. The CC in Manchester was defeated. No doubt if it hadn't, you'd be claiming it was some sort of deliberate conspiracy by the Government and that the votes were rigged.

Be thankful you don't live in Ireland, the stamp duty rates are almost double ours.

Yup, he said he was a member of Safe Speed, which to me means he's paid membership fees.

I appreciate your civil tone on this thread, but I must ask you who exactly you think you are to be making demands like this. As noted the campaign is in a state of flux, and will no doubt, at some point in the not-too-distant future, see updates and revisions to properly reflect it's standpoints in today's climate. The only decision you have to make is whether to support it or not. If not, bye bye, if yes then why not get involved in helping to shape policy and generate content, instead of barracking from the cheap seats?

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

Surely you are aware that your inference doesn't automatically constitute fact.

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

Captain Gatso: "I am a member of the BRDC, IAM, Safe Speed and the ABD and I passed both my IAM advanced driving test in 1995 and my advanced motorcycle test back in 1997 and always practice 'ROADCRAFT' along with an ethos of "only driving to what I can see and safely brake to!" and have done lots of track work, so I think I can talk about the subject!"

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topi ... 49437&i=60

Yes yes, I have no doubt he said that, I merely wanted to check that you were aware that just because you inferred more from his statement, doesn't mean your assumptions are correct. Furthermore, just because someone has managed to fill out a registration form for a forum, or even a payment form for paypal, does not mean that they become an official spokesperson, nor that their individual thoughts and actions represent official policy. Why is it that you seem to struggle so much with this concept? Murderer George Trepal was a member of MENSA, but that does not mean that all MENSA members are murderers, nor that MENSA condones or encourages murder, you see?

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.