SnailyBoy Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 You wouldnt understand! Let me guess, there's a conspiracy out there. Made up of drivers wearing caps and gloves constantly patrolling the highways and byways. When they spot you in particular they immediately slow down to at least half the posted limit. Just tempting you to try and overtake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xt500 Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 Let me guess, there's a conspiracy out there. Made up of drivers wearing caps and gloves constantly patrolling the highways and byways. When they spot you in particular they immediately slow down to at least half the posted limit. Just tempting you to try and overtake. Yes you guess because its something you know nothing about! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 If you'd said 40 I'd have taken that bet. You realise that schools are only open for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, 35 ish weeks a year. You're arguing about the wrong topic though. The government DID call them safety cameras, this thread isn't about whether you should speed or not, it's about the government lies in order to hoodwink people like you into accepting the cameras. It's worked obviously, you still think that safety is all about speed. Government lies, country shocked! On a scale of government lies between 1 and 10, this barely registers. If all cars travelled at 10mph, how many fewer fatalities would there be? Granted there aren't a huge number at the moment, but out of those, how many would have been injurious rather than deadly had the speed been reduced? Speed is a factor of road safety, as are seat belts, driving with due care and attention, the mechanical condition and performance envelope of the car being driven and so on. The sooner all cars have a "black box" the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnailyBoy Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 Yes you guess because its something you know nothing about! Why don't you tell us all about it....... You could start off by explaining how much better qualified you are than the average motorist out there, who always seem to be in your way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xt500 Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 Government lies, country shocked! On a scale of government lies between 1 and 10, this barely registers. If all cars travelled at 10mph, how many fewer fatalities would there be? Granted there aren't a huge number at the moment, but out of those, how many would have been injurious rather than deadly had the speed been reduced? Speed is a factor of road safety, as are seat belts, driving with due care and attention, the mechanical condition and performance envelope of the car being driven and so on. The sooner all cars have a "black box" the better. But no doubt you will be the one of first to moan when everything you go to buy costs massive amounts because of the high costs of transport as a result of them not being able to make any reasonable progress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 If you'd said 40 I'd have taken that bet. You realise that schools are only open for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, 35 ish weeks a year. What about evening classes, Saturday morning clubs, holiday clubs and classes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 In YOUR narrow minded opinion but actually there are many arguements.One would be that the speed limits have been lowered solelyfor the purpose of increasing revenue where a camara has been erected.If speeding was actually as dangerous as SOME would like us to think then there would be alot more accidents as there are billions of speeding occurances each day. Theres also the fact that where its bleated that cameras have been erected because of accidents with the intent to mislead people to think that the accidents were caused by speed when actually in alot of cases speed had nothing to do with it at all. One example was a camera was erected after 2 accidents,one of which was caused by a heart attack! Any driver worth there salt will tell you nowadays its not speeding motorists they fear but actually the slow drivers and the day these are targeted wont be a day too soon.How some of them tie their own shoe laces never mind manage to get a vehicle from a to b is beyond me,never mind their bad attitudes,and you seem to fall well in with that. And it begins - you can't reasonably argue any merits to speeding so you have to start resorting to insults. How can obeying the law be "narrow minded"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Annie Bynnol Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 There is no report, no study and no comment made by the Department for Transport. The DfT have released a list of 75+ local authority sites on which there is data in various forms and depth. Road Safety Minister Mike Penning has made a comment attached to the release, this asks local opinion on the data and influence policy. It asks the other LA to report. It asks Police Forces to release details of prosecutions. Some posts repeatedly quote one website that has a view of the data and imply that this is a DfT view. This is not correct. This website seems to have quoted the Daily Mail. There are other sites which have selected data to support their case. What all readers should do is analyse evidence and act on it to influence local policy. What some contributors will do is extract evidence that supports their view. I can cope with that as that is what debate is. What some contributors are doing is imply the Press Release on August 24th is reaserch that proves their view. This is not true and has to be challenged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 But no doubt you will be the one of first to moan when everything you go to buy costs massive amounts because of the high costs of transport as a result of them not being able to make any reasonable progress. That is why we don't reduce all speed limits everywhere to 5mph. It would cut deaths by road accident to effectively zero, but the price is not worth paying. Which leads to the inevitable question. What price is worth paying? How many deaths per year are we willing to tolerate as being the necessary cost of having a reasonable transport system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upinwath Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 Not only missing the point, but missing the point about the point and confused about the topic, impressive! Not really. I'm bright enough to know politicians lie but am a good enough driver for their lies not to matter in this case. Back to the OP and ANGELFIRE1. The "revenue collecting" rant is a bee in the bonnet job. I see someone miffed at being stupid enough to pay the optional extra road tax after blindly driving through a safety camera. It's just another, "I was daft enough to break the law and get caught" thread disguised as a a political thing. Pathetic rubbish really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.