spindrift Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 I'm a bit bored with hearing this "only 5% of accidents are caused by speeding" line. People don't know where it stemmed from, namely Daily Mail hype of an already flawed and unscientific DfT report which was misquoted as usual by the Daily Mail a few years ago and then taken up by Clarkson who as we know is a thoroughly unbiased chap never, ever prone to a rant. The stats in the report were only based on 'initial police assessment', i.e. at the scene - anyone who has been involved in a serious accident knows that any objective assessment of speed is only carried out afterwards, after statements are taken, examination of vehicles and skidmarks etc. Plus the Independent Statistics Commission questioned the stats anyway as 'understating by half as many again' the figures of those injured, as they did not tally with NHS figures nor with convictions. Quite right, I've seen that myth trotted out by speedophiles before, someone even claimed it on this thread but seems to have disappeared after it was pointed out he was talking a load of old trousers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrywhite Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Apparently 40% of road deaths are caused by drink drivers, alarmingly that means 60% are caused by sober people - surly you are better off drunk!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 It's between 20 and 30 per cent, but you should really be quiet barry, grown ups are talking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonjon Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Apparently 40% of road deaths are caused by drink drivers, alarmingly that means 60% are caused by sober people - surly you are better off drunk!! Its them immigrants that cause all the accidents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrywhite Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Rubbish, it's just over ten per cent, including driving under the influence of drugs. Wow - so thats 90% sober people crash, wheres the whisky chasers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Two sources please, the first that blames pedestrians for 80% of RTAs involving motor vehicles and pedestrians, and one, solitary, single post from me that has EVER APOLOGISED FOR CRIMINAL CYCLISTS. I can tell you confidently you will fail on both counts, and once again i ask you to argue with what I've said, not your silly lies. Before I have to prove my number, how about you provide a source for the number you provided first? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Quite right, I've seen that myth trotted out by speedophiles before, someone even claimed it on this thread but seems to have disappeared after it was pointed out he was talking a load of old trousers. Anyone who doesn't roll over and die in awe of your opinion is now a speedophile. Your arrogance is quite impressive, in an offensive kind of way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DT Ralge Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 The actual stats are massively more complex than any single statistic or headline can possibly convey - click on this link to see how the complexity of published figures on ACCIDENT CONTRIBUTORY FACTORS from 2005 shape up: http://www.dft.gov.uk/adobepdf/162469/221412/221549/227755/contributoryfactorstoroadacc1802 For starters, note that there are, in this analysis at least, 77 contributory factors available to the police! Happy reading (if you can keep awake long enough!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoroughGal Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 (edited) Wrong. Look it up. The reason why opinions garnered from lay interpretations are often wrong is that many people have speeding convictions and don't like being labelled as ciminals because of it. Yes, speeding is a criminal offence, and a conviction results in a criminal record. If asked you are obliged to disclose it, unless it is spent, although many companies - prospective employers for example - will often ask for details of convictions excluding minor traffic or speeding offences. There is no such thing as a "motoring offence". The law says there are just "offences" and at least one jduge has remarked that "offence" is merely shorthand for "criminal offence" or "crime". Speeding is a crime. It is in fact easy to come to this conclusion because the magistrates' court can impose a fine if you are caught speeding and they only have the power to impose fines on convicted criminals. Put simply, any action which is punished (prosecuted) by the state is a criminal offence. Do you have any of your own opinions or knowledge of this matter? You could have at least changed the wording.... You are not given a CRO - criminal record - number following a speeding offence and it is not recorded on the police national computer. Edited July 28, 2009 by BoroughGal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treatment Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 Why not become a member of the Freemasons ? You won't just get a Mobile Speed Camera on your road, you will probably get 10 per cent of the local Police Force on it. Just get the handshake right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now