boomer

Tonight (Saturday), Channel 4, 19:00

Looks like in interesting program to watch!!!

mb

[Edited by boomer - 7/6/2002 3:12:30 PM]

Boost II

iTrader: (1)

I just set a reminder for this but I thought it was on Ch. 4 - looks good anyway!

boomer

Boost,

oops, well spotted - it is on Channel 4 (not ITV1 like i first posted - doh!)

mb

Neil Smalley

I'll watch it, but after other such programs i'm sceptical it'll do anything other than tow the speed kills party line...

I bet it won't mention the statisical chicanery that goes into proving the case FOR speed cameras and repeats the now laughable 3rd of every accidents is caused by speeding spin

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

Darn, missed it. Was it any good, or would it just have annoyed me?

A.

boomer

It was quite a balanced program, taking all views into account.

However, it did reinforce my hatred for people like Professor David Begg and Chief Constable Richard Brunstrom who are so anti-car it is a wonder that we are allowed on the tarmac in the first place [img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img]

Oh, and unfortunately the program was duped into the "one third" explanation of RTAs

mb

Boost II

iTrader: (1)

At least the Police are starting to notice that speed camera policy is driving a wedge between themselves and the public and motorists are less cooperative than they used to be. As was suggested on the show our only hope is that the politicians will realise the same thing - Blair will do anything for a vote (who remembers promises on extented drinking hours, ban on fox hunting etc etc.) I have no doubt that once the masses start getting speeding tickets through the door just taking the kids to shcool etc the backlash will be massive and suddenly the goverment would rather get votes than save lives.

Now just need to find the address of my local "direct action" group and send those guys a thank you note


Also who knew the Gatso was invented by a ******* Rally driver - stabbed in the back by one of our own

Katana

We live by the rules and we die by the rules. This man has broken the sacred code, though shalt not harm thy own kin. Illuminati law states that he must be "reeducated"...

Boost II

iTrader: (1)

LOL

pacenote

Bit late for that he's dead.
Apparently according to program he actually used the cameras to help him drive faster !!

Katana

Well then according to the Klingon code of honour, his disgrace is passed down to his children...

BOB.T

GOOD[img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img]


[Edited by BOB.T - 7/7/2002 7:25:41 PM]

Boost II

iTrader: (1)

LOL again

Hopefully he didn't die because someone hung a tyre full of burning petrol around his neck

dsmith

Was a good balanced prog Imho.

Allowed some of the interviewees to peddle the same old stats without being challenged - but - some were obviuosly careful to use "speed is a factor in ..." rather than "speed caused....".

Even the most pro-car ones amongst us have to accept that the "a factor in" is far more common than "caused".

Also pointed out that 1 or 2 cameras that appear on the surface to be merely revenue genrators have a purpose (e.g. one bit of dual-carriageway that couldn't be classified 70 due to the bend radius and sightlines had a camera from day 1). Also others that were willfully hidden so were blatantly not a deterrent.

It did highlight at some lenght the very very localised impact of cameras and their low impact on general driver behaviour whick does make them effective at accident blackspots but useless in other areas.

Deano

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

Undoubtedly. The statistic I've heard quoted is that speed 'is a contributory factor in a third of accidents'. This means, of course, that it's not even a factor in two thirds, and tells us nothing whatsoever about the main cause of the remaining third.

It's a bit like those 'healthy' meals that are quoted as '90% fat free'. Saying that they're '10% pure lard' doesn't fit the marketing model quite as well, even though it means exactly the same thing

A.

boomer

http://www.abd.org.uk/one_third.htm

mb

Ratman

Surely speed is a factor in 100% of RTAs?

If everyone was stationary, there'd be far fewer accidents.

This is clearly the basis of the current Government's transport "policy".

Ratman
MY98 Wagon

astraboy

Yeah, all you have to do is grind the country to a halt and no-one will die from speeding.
heh, radical but effective
I'm off to burn a speed camera and a couple of MPs.
astraboy.

Pete Croney

I came back from Dono on the A14, yesterday, avoiding the GP outpouring.

I was amazed, not just at the amount of cameras, but at the postions of some of them.

One in particular was at the end of a left hand bend, just beyond where it passes under a bridge. It is completely hidden until you reach the bridge. One minute you are negotiating a sweeping bend, the next you are on the brakes, mid bend, because everyone in front is braking for the speed camera, irrespective of how fast they are going.

I'll be that bend is fun in the wet

^Qwerty^

I turned this on by accident and found it quite interesting. I was quite interested in the drink driving part, where the government started to turn drink driving into a non-sociable thing to do.

However, Im far to young to remember this, so can anybody comment on what went off, and how common place drinking and driving were?

On the whole, I tend to find that most traffic on the motorway is breaking the law with regards to speeding and maybe 1/2 on A roads. I doubt that most of the country was driving around pissed out their heads, so just how is the government going to change/remove the "speeding" culture that we live in, which was a question asked by the program IIRC?

muppet paster

Local to me, most cameras are positioned in all the places where they seem to have the best chance at catching out anyone no paying attention, such as the bottom of steep hills, or the centre of along straight where things seem to run-away with yer. Can't think of any on a corner though.

boomer

Pete Croney,

"I came back from Dono on the A14, yesterday, avoiding the GP outpouring.

I was amazed, not just at the amount of cameras, but at the postions of some of them."

what is even more ridiculous is that the A14 was a brand new road a few years ago. Thus, it must have been built with inherent accident black-spots - the designer should be sued!!!

mb

pacenote

I'm commuting along the A14 a lot recently. I assume the camera your on about is the one near Kettering, going eastbound, (a Truvelo), perhaps its been put there to slow drivers down as they go round the corner and encounter traffic merging from slip road, which cannot be seen before entry to bend - bad design or just an excuse to site a camera. There's another a bit further on near a crossroads as well.

DaveD

iTrader: (2)

I too travel along the A14 occasionally, and know these two cameras well.
The one at the x-roads is well positioned IMHO, since this is a very dangerous junction with roads coming in at right-angles to a dual carriageway. Camera or no camera, I would always back off to below the limit for this kind of junction, which is basically badly designed and unsuitable for a modern dual carriageway.
The camera at Kettering could be potentially viewed as a way of slowing traffic on a blind slip entry onto the A14, but because it's not visible until the last moment, does cause a lot of sudden braking. Again, money would probably be better spent on a longer slip road than a camera which doesn't even look at the junction it's trying to protect!

I do remember a Ch4 programme on a while back where locals were campaigning to slow traffic speeding through their busy (30mph) village. The council spent thousands on (useless) calming measures, but for some reason never thought of installing speed cameras....bazaar.

I missed the program in question, but it is repeated tonight (well tomorrow morning, actually) at around 4:50am. I'll remember to set the video this time!!