|
I don't want to go on about it either Tim but the TRL report has been hijacked by the ABD - I've read the report and I've read the ABD's interpretation of it. This is what TRL (who actually wrote it) say about it.
"The TRL study cited by the ABD, TRL Report 323, concerns "A new system for recording contributory factors in road accidents". TRL 323 is not a study of crash causation. It is a study of how to collect data. It was not designed to draw statistically reliable conclusions about the causes of road crashes. The accidents included in the three month study were not a statistically representative sample of all accidents. There is no basis for using the study to generalise about the speed-crash relationship."
I agree with you entirely that there is a mixed picture - but that means at least some cameras have a part to play alongside education and much better enforcement against bad driving.
Sometimes the bad driver is the guy that puts his foot right down in an area where he/she shouldn't, sometimes it isn't.
There's no excuse for piggy-bank cameras but there's no excuse for driving like a prat either.
Apologies for continuing this one but there are, as always, at least two sides to the story and I hate, really hate, any organisation (governmental or otherwise) that misrepresents the facts. If their arguement is good enough then why exagerrate the significance of an irrelevant study
|