Notices
Non Scooby Related Anything Non-Scooby related

Is there a device....................

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 21 October 2004, 02:23 PM
  #61  
Dracoro
Scooby Regular
 
Dracoro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: A powerslide near you
Posts: 10,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Diablo -
Man b, being some 2 miles down the road at this point misses the child altogether, because the child is still in the sweetshop
But he hits a different kid who left the sweetshop 30 seconds earlier.
Old 21 October 2004, 02:31 PM
  #62  
FrenchBoy
Scooby Regular
 
FrenchBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: South Bucks
Posts: 811
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Dracoro
But he hits a different kid who left the sweetshop 30 seconds earlier.
But he also crashes into a huge alien which was just about to destroy the earth and thus saves all humanity...therefore speeding is good.
Old 21 October 2004, 04:05 PM
  #63  
hedgehog
Scooby Regular
 
hedgehog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,985
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Tiggs
its just to get ppl to drive slower, no bad thing.
My precise point is that, under certain circumstances where the speed limit is set below the 85th percentile limit, getting people to drive at or below the posted limit is a very bad thing indeed as it results in more accidents.

I fully take the point that there are some people who do need slowing down and who will greatly exceed the much safer 85th percentile speed but as the increased danger doesn't deter these people I think it unlikely that a few cameras, the location of which they are likely to be aware of, are going to have much impact upon them either. This is where effective and sensible policing comes into the equation and when used in conjunction with a suitable education programme it can be the most effective way to reduce road accidents and fatalities. This has been demonstrated in Durham where their accident and fatality rates are about 40% (can't remember the precise figure now) below the national average and yet they don't have a single camera.

When you think about it if the whole of the country had gone with the policy we see in Durham instead of 3,508 people dying on our roads last year the figure would have been about 2100. The enforced money making policy of speed camera enforcement literally killed 1400 people last year.

If we followed up the Durham model with much more reinforcement of the "never drive too close" rule and the "never drive such that you can't stop in the distance you can see" rule how many more lives could be saved?

The fact is that the anti-speed policy, which is being driven by several groups as it fits their political agenda, is killing a very many people and many of these people are sensible and law abiding. Remember about 97% of accidents occur within the posted speed limit so each one of you who has come on here and said you never exceed the limit is in at least as much danger of being killed by camera policy as the vast majority of drivers who admit to occasionally exceeding the limits by moderate amounts. In truth the cameras might be more likely to kill you than me. Worth thinking about.
Old 27 February 2005, 01:27 PM
  #64  
kingofturds
Scooby Regular
Support Scoobynet!
iTrader: (1)
 
kingofturds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Zanzibar
Posts: 17,373
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

i find these work pretty well against mobile speed detector vans

Last edited by kingofturds; 27 February 2005 at 01:31 PM.




All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:16 PM.