The Red Light- Speed Camera Safety Myths - Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars

928GTS · 05-28-2003, 18:11

It is about time that we stand up and fight against the red light and speed cameras. The pollies have feed us nothing but BS regarding the effectiveness of these devices.

They have nothing to do with safety!!

The redlight camera is ineffective in preventing accidents and there has in fact been an increase in rear end accidents in the Melbourne metro area since their introduction. Vic Roads commissioned a 10 year study and the report has been ignored by the Bracks Bushrangers.

"The results of this study suggest the installation of the RLC (Red Light Camera) at these sites did not provide any reduction in accidents, rather there has been increases in rear end and adjacent approaches accidents on a before and after basis with the changes in the intersection signals.

There has been no demonstrated value of the RLC as an effective countermeasure"

http://www.freedom.gov/auto/rlcdocs/95aussie.pdf

What do you think will happen when people slow down?
What is the private speed camera operator going to do, when his his revenue falls?
Are you going to trust that the private operator and the cash strapped politician are not going to employ some real dirty tricks?

How do you know whether the devices have not been calibrated to catch you, even though you have not done nothing illegal?

I suggest you go to the following links - you will realize that we have a real problem with regards to trust!!

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Conten...1/082izwax.asp
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,49470,00.html
http://www.sense.bc.ca/news/news-01.htm
http://www.sense.bc.ca/news/news-02.htm
http://www.politechbot.com/p-03475.html

So what are you going to do?

Aussie Pete · 05-29-2003, 17:50

This is an email thread I've been involved in with one of the people involved in studies published by the RTA etc. Note how I've gone out of my way to accept some of the factors they have brought up, yet the arrogance and defensiveness of the replies when the conversation started to question the study is unbelievable. I mean is this guy a pimply teenager with a lack of self confidence?

You'll have to read this in reverse as per normal email threads.

Sorry for the length of the post.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jack,

It's interesting to note that someone mirroring your position in the USA also seems to have a dismissive view of people who question road safety reserach:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Conten...000/001/082izw
ax.asp

I wonder (and will find out eventually) how many of these studies
supporting blatant fleecing of motorists with revenue cameras and increased insurance premiums have been funded by insurance companies and other interest holders such as the RTA or Police. Was yours?

Looking at your study it is with great humour that I note some of the conclusions of the report are able to be made by statistical samples of, oh, shall we say small data points. Or statistical comparison of data sets separated by over 15 years on the "same" roads. Same in what way? Haven't roads and cars improved since 1978?

The point of what I am saying is that if you can't take people
questioning your research you shouldn't be doing what you're doing. If that was the case people in my game could say planes are safe and we've been designing and selling planes for decades so who are you (public member who lost a family member) telling us how to do our job.

Take a look at what you said to me and tell me how I could accept it as anything other than arrogant.

A closed door policy is proof of an insecurity, an admission of
shortcomings.

Please accept this message as a fitting reply to yours.

Peter A.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jack McLean [mailto:jack@raru.adelaide.edu.au]
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2003 3:03 PM
To: Peter M
Subject: RE: Road Safety Related to Speeding

I have been working on road accident research for 40 years, with
emphasis on at-scene and epidemiolgical investigations. My PhD work was at the Harvard School of Public Health. I take offence at your suggestion that I choose my research topics on the basis of the answer that I expect to get.

Read your last paragraph below. Don't you think that perhaps you might be looking for data to support your preconceived views?

I think that there is little point in continuing this exchange of
views but please read our research reports.

>Yes, I guess so. Not afraid to say I'm wrong, however on the other >hand neither am I afraid to say some urban speed limits are too >high. In fact some are out of touch with reality. I see 70 zones >past roadside parking out the front of shops around blind corners >yet drivers still go past at 70. Go figure. And yet Montana has seen >a different and opposite result.
>
>However, what I was getting at in my last email was that I have seen >arguments on both sides of the equation based on 'research' where it >is clear a mandate or idea was conceived beforehand. Take a typical >thesis - how many students end up with a thesis that discredits their >initial scope? Not many.
>
>For the reasons above, whilst the NT has a higher fatality 'rate'
>what other factors are involved? Is it the high number of foreign
>drivers, wildlife, large vehicles, high CofG and heavily laden
>vehicles (4WDs and caravans etc)?
>
>I guess I might as well admit that in my time in the aviation
>industry including being involved in incident investigations I have never seen the same approach we are seeing with a single minded and apparently myopic emphasis on speed as the evil axis of road safety. No one I discuss this issue with believes the speed versus BAC relationship nor the relative risk factors as they seem very, very extreme.
>
>To help I should clarify my aim: place the onus on educated and
>trained drivers to drive carefully and within the abilities of
>themselves and their vehicle. Don't set a blanket ceiling (too low
>or too high in many cases) for low skilled drivers telling them
>they're safe up to that point.
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jack McLean [mailto:jack@raru.adelaide.edu.au]
>Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2003 1:57 PM
>To: Peter M
>Subject: RE: Road Safety Related to Speeding
>
>
>Admit you were wrong about the NT fatality rate.
>
>
>
>
>>I am interested in knowing whether you are aware of the reverse fatality trend for highway speed limits as indicated in the
>>following link:
>>
>>http://www.hwysafety.com/hwy_montana_2001.htm
>>
>>I am getting the feeling that 'results' are proving to be a better
>>indicator than so called 'research'. I suspect it's just the nature
>>of our processes that any 'research' is driven by a pre conceived idea. For example, was there an assumption or brief before the 1997 study was undertaken?
>>
>>Thanks again,
>>_______________________________
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Jack McLean [mailto:jack@raru.adelaide.edu.au]
>>Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2003 12:52 PM
>>To: Peter M
>>Subject: Re: Road Safety Related to Speeding
>>
>>
>>Peter,
>>
>>The research you refer to is accessible on our web site:
>>http://raru.adelaide.edu.au/
>>
>>The RTA site presents an accurate summary of our research.
> >
>>The NT has a fatality rate that is 3 times greater than any other
>>State, based on either population or distance travelled.
>>
>>Jack McLean
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Dear Professor,
>>>
>>>I must excuse myself for contacting you directly and taking your
>>>time, however I am now heavily involved in campaigning on Road
>>>Safety and in particular trying to shift our government's focus from
>>>taking pictures of people and raking in millions of dollars to
>>>pursuing the issue of human factors and driver behaviours.
>>>
>>>I am particularly taken aback by organisations such as the RTA NSW
>>>who love taking small quotes from research and drumming these
>>>'facts' over and over into the eyes and ears of the public to
>>>support their actions. In this case I am asking for clarification on
>>>the 'research' that points to equivalency between blood alcohol and
>>>speeding, and relative risk factors for small speeding increments.
>>>See the reference website:
>>>
>>>http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety...as/speedingres
earch.html
>>>
>>>Can you please advise where I can get a copy of this research paper?
>>>
>>>Also, I have heard that the people who conducted this research
>>>(perhaps yourself included) may at some stage have claimed such
>>>representations from the RTA and others may be a mis quote of the
>>>actual findings. Is this true?
>>>
>>>Finally, has any research been done in finding whether higher
>>>freeway and highway speed limits may reduce exposure to fatigue and
>>>actually reduce accidents? (i.e. why such a low fatality rate in the
>>>NT? Why did Montana USA see a reduction in fatalities when it
>>>abolished country area speed limits? German autobahns?)
>>>
>>>Thanks so much for your help,
>>>Peter A.
>______________________________________________

John McMaster · 05-29-2003, 18:13

AP;
With regard to the NT,you are pretty close to the truth.

What they don't tell you in their stat's is that most of the fatals etc, are tourists both interstate and international, who have'nt got a clue about driving in the outback.

They also choose to leave out the fact that a lot are also Aboriginal,who overload their vehicles and in a lot of cases are too drunk to even walk let alone drive.
That their vehicles are unroadworthy,unregistered and uninsured.

If there is one thing I can't abide in research it's per capita based data,because it does'nt reflect the true picture.

Aussie Pete · 05-29-2003, 18:17

For the record in the acknowledgements made in the subject research article funding is disclosed as coming from the Federal Office of Road Safety (FORS). However, as anyone who understands these structures often funding can be made indirectly. For example, there was recent talk of car manufacturers contributing a set fee of every sale towards enhanced driver education programs. I would guess the car makers would want a say in how/why/where the money is spent even though such programs would be 'funded' by the government.

XR8 Lamah · 05-29-2003, 18:20

Hmm . . Interesting AP !
Did you end up discovering whether he was RTA / Industry funded ? **Edit** Oops - you answered already :) **/Edit**

While I can understand RTA / Police interest in pushing the speed limit issue, what is the Insurance industry's interest ? ( do they subscribe to the speed kills pov ? )

Aussie Pete · 05-29-2003, 18:28

I have yet to receive a reply to the above last email. Stay tuned!

As for insurance companies, look at what you have to go through to get insurance if you have more than two speeding fines - increased premiums, increased excesses etc. It's in the insurance companies' interests to have you caught because they get free revenue as well.

skip · 05-29-2003, 21:58

AP a very good read, it really shits me when you question the Governments (or Police) so called "research" and they respond by saying "it came for a university so it's true"

Here's an article that I found, it might have already been posted before but it shows what another country is doing to try and decrease their road toll.

This is a good quote...

Quote:

that only 9 per cent of fatal accidents were caused by speeding.

==>Italy

Aussie Pete · 05-29-2003, 23:28

You driven in Italy? Speeding figures lowly because they're so busy knocking each other off in other ways!

Rodderz · 05-30-2003, 00:56

I fail to see the continuing abundance of speed camera's popping up everywhere. Speeding fines and camera's may slow people down on day to day driving, but will it actually TEACH THEM HOW TO DRIVE???

I think not. It wont effect much the road toll. Educate on driving skills and there you will have a lower road toll. Get rid of bad habits, stupid behaviour etc of the roads, rather than handing out fines willy nilly!

928GTS · 05-30-2003, 02:41

The problem we are facing is that the Vic Govt expects to issue 1.5 MILLION Infringement Notices in the next 12 Months!!

And they will get their way, not because the vast majority of road users are speed freaks and red light runners.

It is because most road users do not care that have been well and truly done over, or they just don't realize it yet.

You will get caught whether you are innocent or not!

Documents have been lodged with the courts for a class action regarding Camera Detected Offences to be launched in NSW.
In the next few weeks a leading law firm will place advertisements, callng for people to join.

http://members.iinet.net.au/~glennat/

The fight back has started and maybe this is the beginning of a turnaround.

Most of you do not remember when the supercars (GTHO PH4, V8 Xu2 and 340 Chargers were) shelved because of politcal interference and the crap so called performance cars that followed

Don't let this happen again and don't allow yourselves to be screwed by the jerkoff lefties that are running the states!!