Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNorm
Eh?
So you don't want to move on from the 70s?
No, it's a case of "OK you were speeding, which increases the risk of death and serious injury, so we are going to deal with you harshly before you kill someone." An ounce of prevention, etc.
So you would be in favour of speed cameras if it could be shown that they reduce speeding (which is bad driving)?
Maybe road safety has improved faster in the Nordic countries than in the UK. I don't see how that link shows that speed cameras are ineffective.
Those people need educating.
So where do the 3000 deaths per annum occur?
Hmm. The full document referred to in the first link is about cameras at road works, and found a 2% reduction in fatal injuries associated with their use.
As for the second link, there is no mention of the source data, but from the article: "It also acknowledged that road casualty figures have fallen significantly in the town over the past year"
I agree, putting more officers in cars should be effective. Also very expensive.
|
the 3000 deaths per year occur mostly on 30 limit roads
have a read through download 4 on this page
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics...atbritain20071
for a breakdown on what caused them
i will try to find the breakdown on deaths per speed of road but they bury that stuff well but i know that it hasn't change much for the last 30 or 40 years and 30 roads were always by far the riskiest because they have the most pedestrians on them
and of all the road users needing education they are by far the biggest one that should be educated
personally i think every school child now should have to pass a driving test they can choose not to drive if they wish after but at least they would understand putting a foot on a zebra crossing doesnt mean a car will or even can stop in time
and that they need to look left right and often behind themselves to cross at junctions ( which from the last stats i read were again one of the highest risk places next to crossing between parked cars )