I see this as another attempt by the pro-scamera brigade, who use misdirection like "regression to the mean" to "show" that cameras save lives:
The number of vehicles was also increasing rapidly between the end of WW2 and 1991, when speed cameras were introduced. Yet road rests fell each year. If the number of vehicles had significant impact on the number of rests, that figure would have risen each year during that period - yet it fell. The trend slowed with the introduction of speed cameras and two years ago saw the first recorded rise in road rests.
Police Speeding 837Conor formulated on Saturday : I don't follow your buttumed to be obvious link between the...
Police Speeding 838Rather obviously, it is best for the vehicle to travel at a speed that is neither inappropriately...
As with number of vehicles. If this factor was significant, you'd expect to see rests rise, not fall - particularly in the seventies when the country got mobile in a big way.
The number of people who habitually speed used to be close to 100%. However, more people now (including me) don't speed. This is because the pedantantic and draconian speed enforcement has switched peoples priorities from safety to preservation of driving licences.
I know that I'm nowhere near as safe now, rigorously obeying the speed limit, as I was a few years ago. I used to have one "near miss" every few weeks. They are now an almost daily occurrance.
-- Geoff Lane Cornwall, UK
