"John" wrote in message
...


3,650 per year - where was that?

You are correct - it is now below 3000 dead per year (2,940) for the first
time since records began in 1926. My mistake! ROSPA put this down to:

"Local authority road safety programs, police, "government-led strategies"
and technological advances in vehicles."



Has independent scientific studies been carried out of before and after
data, and comparisons made with similar locations that haven't applied 20
mph speed limits, and current downward trends accommodated, which proves
that any drop in KSIs has definitely been *caused* by the introduction of
lower limits?


Yes.



A clean licence is one thing, and an obsession with speed limits is
another, but are you therefore necessarily a "safe" driver? Do you ever
drive "too fast for the conditions"? It is implicitly speed within the
limit, and it is a larger factor in injury collisions than speeding (speed
above the limit). It is an increasingly dangerous phenomena which may
well be the result of the presence of speed cameras which condone and
practically encourage it.


No. The speed limit is not a "target" to aim for but an absolute limit when
conditions are optimal. Speed should be reduced accordingly with adverse
conditions. That is obvious, or should be.



I find that if I don't shoplift I don't get caught by the shop's CCTV
either.

Or is it just a coincidence? I don't speed, yet have been flashed by a
speed camera. Many dangerous drivers don't get caught by speed cameras -
simply because they are being dangerous, but within the speed limit.

I can't see why people have such a big problem with cameras, I don't give
them a second thought.

The problem is that they brain-wash drivers into believing that they are
safe and, more importantly, legal, no matter how dangerously they drive -
so long as they don't break the speed limit within range of a speed
camera.


Not at all. The driver who killed 4 club cyclists in Wales a few years ago
was driving within the speed limit on black ice which he failed to take into
account. He was only fined £180 for having 3 faulty tyres.

Had there been a safety camera on that road maybe he would have *thought*
more about his speed and the 4 people may not have died.

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/