P
Paul Smith
Guest
On Sat, 7 Jun 2003 12:24:57 +0100, "David Gillbe" <david.NO^&[email protected]> wrote:
>> >Interesting - not really, I think the people concerned have every right in answering in the
>> >manner they did, you asked questions that as far as I care, have been answered satisfactorily in
>> >the public domain, why should you get special treatment.
>> Well, in that case you'll obviously be able to provide references.
>You provide them yourself, on your own website.
What a cop out! Whatever you might think I've found no valid evidence whatsoever to support the
central questions raised in my letters to Brunstrom and Sharland.
>And personal experience does a lot as well, having been hit twice on my bike by drivers who were
>driving over the speed limit at the time.
I don't even suppose you know that for a fact. Anyway, anecdotal evidence is unlikely to be
sufficient.
>> I certainly do have enemies. Mostly they are liars playing god with public safety.
>I see far more evidence that speeding does cost lives than that it doesn't. Your argument that it
>is not the speeding itself but the dangerous driving that comes with it that costs lives is
>pathetic. Speeding in itself is dangerous. Cars over the speed limit are often out of control -
>because they are driving to fast. It is fairly simple science that a car going faster is less
>likely to be able to stop or manoeuvre in order to avoid an accident. That is why speed limits
>exist (except on the M25, where they serve as a form of traffic control - a completely different
>topic). If every single car had some kind of limiter ensuring that it never went over the local
>speed limit, I have absolutely no doubt that less accidents would occur, and that less accidents
>would be fatal. Perhaps you are the liar playing God with the public safety, or perhaps, each time
>you get in your car, you are merely lying to yourself by pretending that driving over the speed
>limit is safe.
Perhaps you would like to ponder on the fact that we had the safest roads in the world long before
modern speed enforcement, and now we're losing ground at a very significant rate.
The principles which made our road the safest in the first place could have continued, in which case
we could reasonably expect to have 2,500 deaths a year, not 3,500.
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK http://www.safespeed.org.uk please remove "XYZ" to reply by email speed
cameras cost lives
>> >Interesting - not really, I think the people concerned have every right in answering in the
>> >manner they did, you asked questions that as far as I care, have been answered satisfactorily in
>> >the public domain, why should you get special treatment.
>> Well, in that case you'll obviously be able to provide references.
>You provide them yourself, on your own website.
What a cop out! Whatever you might think I've found no valid evidence whatsoever to support the
central questions raised in my letters to Brunstrom and Sharland.
>And personal experience does a lot as well, having been hit twice on my bike by drivers who were
>driving over the speed limit at the time.
I don't even suppose you know that for a fact. Anyway, anecdotal evidence is unlikely to be
sufficient.
>> I certainly do have enemies. Mostly they are liars playing god with public safety.
>I see far more evidence that speeding does cost lives than that it doesn't. Your argument that it
>is not the speeding itself but the dangerous driving that comes with it that costs lives is
>pathetic. Speeding in itself is dangerous. Cars over the speed limit are often out of control -
>because they are driving to fast. It is fairly simple science that a car going faster is less
>likely to be able to stop or manoeuvre in order to avoid an accident. That is why speed limits
>exist (except on the M25, where they serve as a form of traffic control - a completely different
>topic). If every single car had some kind of limiter ensuring that it never went over the local
>speed limit, I have absolutely no doubt that less accidents would occur, and that less accidents
>would be fatal. Perhaps you are the liar playing God with the public safety, or perhaps, each time
>you get in your car, you are merely lying to yourself by pretending that driving over the speed
>limit is safe.
Perhaps you would like to ponder on the fact that we had the safest roads in the world long before
modern speed enforcement, and now we're losing ground at a very significant rate.
The principles which made our road the safest in the first place could have continued, in which case
we could reasonably expect to have 2,500 deaths a year, not 3,500.
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK http://www.safespeed.org.uk please remove "XYZ" to reply by email speed
cameras cost lives