Biker's fatal crash linked to speed camera (From Daily Echo)

Johnny77 wrote:
He might have been speeding, but he's dead because of the camera.
No comment from the Safety Camera Monkeys?

The Rising Phoenix wrote:
What a sad waste of life, thoughts go to the family.

It has been proven that speed cameras cause more accidents than they prevent, but they also generate money! There needs to be a serious review of their uses and locations.

Dusty wrote:

Johnny77 wrote: He might have been speeding, but he's dead because of the camera. No comment from the Safety Camera Monkeys?

No he is dead because of the way he was riding his bike, simple as that. Excessive speeding and excessive braking can only be the fault of one person. Tragic as it all is facts are facts and if bike riders were to follow the law or at least drive at a reasonable speed, instead of brake neck speeds. Half of the fatalities would be avoided. The speed camera never lost control the rider did!!!

G0Rf wrote:
speed kills

StEmmosfire wrote:
If you want to see a good example of mass irresponsible riding from bikers then just travel up and down the A326 a few times, especially during rush hour.

The Watcher wrote:
A tragic loss of life, but once again another example that speed kills. . Fortunately no one else paid a price for his reckless speeding.

bigfella wrote:

StEmmosfire wrote: If you want to see a good example of mass irresponsible riding from bikers then just travel up and down the A326 a few times, especially during rush hour.

And drive up and down ANY road to see good examples of car drivers acting irresponsibly! At ANY time. I'm not sure what your point is? Oh wait, yes I do. Another excuse to lay into bikers. Do you think when trouble breaks out at a football match its ALL football supporters that are to blame?

News Fanatic wrote:
Speed cameras would be more effective if they were hidden and their locations not publicised.

Hector2004 wrote:
Once again I find myself astounded at the moronic, ill-informed opinions people have. Of course the camera van was responsible. “Speed kill’s” is abject nonsense from poorly educated and brainwashed simpletons:- Fly a 747 and tell me how well that works at 30mph ! There are many factors affecting road safety but unfortunately, speed is the most lucrative for these parasites.

Hector2004 wrote:
@moulefanggoule : I understand your point and accept that there is much validity in it. However, you are wrong about the cameras. If you were to do some honest and unbiased research, you would find that they have killed many, many, many more than they have saved. P.s. there is a huge amount of this evidence in the public domain and easily obtainable though FOI.

moulefanggoule wrote:
To add a little perspective here. If the rider would have been doing his 78MPH coming down the slope at the cooper dean r'bout and a police CAR had joined the road from the slip would the rider have reacted in the same way? I think he would have as it's instinctive to see the law and react accordingly. People break and act stupidly even when they're not breaking the law! So my point is would all you people blaming the camera and not speed blame a patrolling police car in this instance? If so are we to stop patrolling cars in case they cause and accident/incident? The debate is endless but there has to be limits on what is an acceptable deterant for speeding. Camaras may cause accidents but only because people aren't abeying the law. In the long run camaras keep speed to a minimum and thus reduce accidents.

StEmmosfire wrote:

Hector2004 wrote:
@moulefanggoule : I understand your point and accept that there is much validity in it. However, you are wrong about the cameras. If you were to do some honest and unbiased research, you would find that they have killed many, many, many more than they have saved. P.s. there is a huge amount of this evidence in the public domain and easily obtainable though FOI.

Prove it, I mean using official statistics and not "my mate read this on some forum somewhere" show us the evidence for your claim.

G0Rf wrote:
speed kills

bigfella wrote:

The Watcher wrote:
A tragic loss of life, but once again another example that speed kills. . Fortunately no one else paid a price for his reckless speeding.

Go away you troll. Your pathetic comments add nothing to the conversation

bigfella wrote:

Dusty wrote:

Johnny77 wrote: He might have been speeding, but he's dead because of the camera. No comment from the Safety Camera Monkeys?

No he is dead because of the way he was riding his bike, simple as that. Excessive speeding and excessive braking can only be the fault of one person. Tragic as it all is facts are facts and if bike riders were to follow the law or at least drive at a reasonable speed, instead of brake neck speeds. Half of the fatalities would be avoided. The speed camera never lost control the rider did!!!

Another ill informed moron tarring bikers with the same brush and can't see how dangerous "safety" cameras are. The gentleman who lost his life isnt the first and wont be the last to die because of these things, say what you like the rider died due to the camera. If it wasnt there he wouldnt have reacted and lost control. Nobody is suggesting he wasnt speeding, are you going to tell me "Dusty" you've never driven too quickly?

Hector2004 wrote:
.....waiting StEmmosfire's re buttal. @Higginz : very wise words of course but they dodge the real issue. i.e. have speed cameras been helpful or not. BTW: I'm happy for people to have their opinion as long as they can justify it with true facts.

Higginz wrote:

Hector2004 wrote:
.....waiting StEmmosfire's re buttal. @Higginz : very wise words of course but they dodge the real issue. i.e. have speed cameras been helpful or not. BTW: I'm happy for people to have their opinion as long as they can justify it with true facts.

@Hector2004 It appears they have not reduced the number of casualties on the roads in the areas that they exist. I'm basing this purely on a fifteen minute internet browse. If true, I'm very surprised.

Hector2004 wrote:
Once again I find myself astounded at the moronic, ill-informed opinions people have. Of course the camera van was responsible. “Speed kill’s” is abject nonsense from poorly educated and brainwashed simpletons:- Fly a 747 and tell me how well that works at 30mph ! There are many factors affecting road safety but unfortunately, speed is the most lucrative for these parasites.

G0Rf wrote:
speed kills

cyclejim wrote:
And if he was going at the speed limit he wouldn't have lost control. You can view this from both perspectives as the inquest seems to have done. Sincere condolances to his friends and family.
.
Speed may not be the sole cause of many accidents, but it certainly influences the severity of them - how do people propose limits are adhered to if we do away with cameras? Letting people go as fast as they like simply is not an option.

The Watcher wrote:

bigfella wrote:

The Watcher wrote:
A tragic loss of life, but once again another example that speed kills. . Fortunately no one else paid a price for his reckless speeding.

Go away you troll. Your pathetic comments add nothing to the conversation

Travelling at close to 80mph (traffic police are experts in estimating speeds) is a danger both to himself and to other road users.
.
To pretend otherwise is extremely ignorant.
.
There is an argument to be had regarding the merits or not of speed cameras and whether they contribute or prevent accidents, but that is a separate discussion.
.
Travelling at these speeds is dangerous to the individuals themselves and other road users.

Dan Kerins wrote:
For those asking about how the speed of the motorcyclist was determined to be 'at least 78mph' this is due to the investigations carried out at the scene, based on things such as skid marks, where the vehicle came to a halt, etc..

This is one of the reasons why roads are closed following such incidents.

Dan Kerins,
Digital Editor

bigmonkeyman wrote:

StEmmosfire wrote:

Hector2004 wrote: @moulefanggoule : I understand your point and accept that there is much validity in it. However, you are wrong about the cameras. If you were to do some honest and unbiased research, you would find that they have killed many, many, many more than they have saved. P.s. there is a huge amount of this evidence in the public domain and easily obtainable though FOI.

Prove it, I mean using official statistics and not "my mate read this on some forum somewhere" show us the evidence for your claim.

http://www.telegraph .co.uk/motoring/news /8719263/Speed-camer as-fail-to-cut-accid ents.html will this do ya??

Hector2004 wrote:
.....waiting StEmmosfire's re buttal. @Higginz : very wise words of course but they dodge the real issue. i.e. have speed cameras been helpful or not. BTW: I'm happy for people to have their opinion as long as they can justify it with true facts.

bigmonkeyman wrote:
http://www.speedcame ras.org/speed-camera -news-article-print. php?id=129 And from official research 2006 Now prove to us that you have the ability to have an opinion which is yours and yours alone,and of course,with proof!!!

Georgem wrote:

G0Rf wrote:
speed kills

Then why is it that hardly anybody who speeds, gets killed doing so?

StEmmosfire wrote:
If you want to see a good example of mass irresponsible riding from bikers then just travel up and down the A326 a few times, especially during rush hour.

StEmmosfire wrote:

bigmonkeyman wrote:
http://www.speedcame ras.org/speed-camera -news-article-print. php?id=129 And from official research 2006 Now prove to us that you have the ability to have an opinion which is yours and yours alone,and of course,with proof!!!

lol
.
www.speedcame.org
.
an organisation that supports the abolition of all speed cameras in Britain.
.
They will have an impartial view then.
.
Anybody else have evidence that supports that speed cameras KILLS more people than they save... thought not. What a numpty thing to say!

News Fanatic wrote:

Hector2004 wrote:
Once again I find myself astounded at the moronic, ill-informed opinions people have. Of course the camera van was responsible. “Speed kill’s” is abject nonsense from poorly educated and brainwashed simpletons:- Fly a 747 and tell me how well that works at 30mph ! There are many factors affecting road safety but unfortunately, speed is the most lucrative for these parasites.

Lesson 1: 'Speed kills' does not take an apostrophe! Lesson 2: Compare like with like. It is impossible to fly a fixed wing aircraft at 30mph. Sadly the rider was responsible because he was moving, the camera van was not. There is an easy way to avoid speeding fines: do not speed.

Brite Spark wrote:

Georgem wrote:

G0Rf wrote:
speed kills

Then why is it that hardly anybody who speeds, gets killed doing so?

Unfortunately the witnesses to their speeding are probably dead.

Hector2004 wrote:

StEmmosfire wrote:

bigmonkeyman wrote: http://www.speedcame ras.org/speed-camera -news-article-print. php?id=129 And from official research 2006 Now prove to us that you have the ability to have an opinion which is yours and yours alone,and of course,with proof!!!

lol . www.speedcame.org . an organisation that supports the abolition of all speed cameras in Britain. . They will have an impartial view then. . Anybody else have evidence that supports that speed cameras KILLS more people than they save... thought not. What a numpty thing to say!

@ StEmmosfire: I notice the tone of your posts is starting to become quite defensive; is this because you don't have anything of substance to back up your opinion ? Firstly, you're free to discredit www.speedcame.org but I'd add that there is a bigger conflict of interest with Brake being funded by speed camera manufacturers, wouldn't you ? If you genuinely want to understand the whole road safety vs speed camera issue, you can read up on regression to mean here:- http://www.safespeed .org.uk/rttm.html Gradually, you'll start to see the error of your arguments once equipped with factual data (all of which you can request under FOI).

Georgem wrote:

The Watcher wrote:

bigfella wrote:

The Watcher wrote: A tragic loss of life, but once again another example that speed kills. . Fortunately no one else paid a price for his reckless speeding.

Go away you troll. Your pathetic comments add nothing to the conversation

Travelling at close to 80mph (traffic police are experts in estimating speeds) is a danger both to himself and to other road users. . To pretend otherwise is extremely ignorant. . There is an argument to be had regarding the merits or not of speed cameras and whether they contribute or prevent accidents, but that is a separate discussion. . Travelling at these speeds is dangerous to the individuals themselves and other road users.

The 70mph limit is pretty arbitrary, and came about decades ago, when cars still had drum brakes all round and ineffective cross-ply tyres. Pretending that something magical happens above that made-up limit, which causes cars to suddenly veer out of control for no apparent reason, is somewhat foolish. Especially given the overwhelming evidence that that does not actually happen.

Echo Reader 53 wrote:
I can't believe the prejudice in these comments that are anti-bikes ... it is disgusting quite frankly. I am a car driver and a bike rider. I feel I am a safer car driver because I am a bike rider and have to have much better road sense to avoid drivers who can't see me, carry out very unsafe manoeuvres, disobey the highway code, drive whilst on the phone and deliberately get in my way because I am filtering (because they don't like it - it's not against the law people). This behaviour is called dangerous driving. This is much worse than speeding. When I took my bike test I was taught to do between 32 - 35 mph in a 30 mph area or I will fail my test. Reason? Because I am vulnerable as a rider and must always be one step ahead of car drivers. I was taught the "lifesaver" look over my left shoulder because car drivers' do silly things. I was taught to watch a car that is sat at a junction waiting to pull out as I approach as they will pull out on me ... watch their wheels ... if they start turning then brake. I was taught about wet white lines and drain covers and how to spot diesel spills. I was taught how to read the road. How many "car only" drivers have these skills? Not many.
This poor guy has lost his life because the speed camera was there. If it wasn't there he wouldn't have braked. Yes he was going a bit quick but bear in mind that these machines are designed to go much faster than that and as such have very efficient brakes. That doesn't excuse speeding. The point is that speed itself does not kill ... there has to be another contributing factor for speed to lead to an accident.
So please don't attack us because we ride bikes. We're not brainless morons, we are people. I am an Engineer with a First Class Honours degree. I am a husband. I am a father. Please tone it down.

Torchie1 wrote:

Echo Reader 53 wrote: I can't believe the prejudice in these comments that are anti-bikes ... it is disgusting quite frankly. I am a car driver and a bike rider. I feel I am a safer car driver because I am a bike rider and have to have much better road sense to avoid drivers who can't see me, carry out very unsafe manoeuvres, disobey the highway code, drive whilst on the phone and deliberately get in my way because I am filtering (because they don't like it - it's not against the law people). This behaviour is called dangerous driving. This is much worse than speeding. When I took my bike test I was taught to do between 32 - 35 mph in a 30 mph area or I will fail my test. Reason? Because I am vulnerable as a rider and must always be one step ahead of car drivers. I was taught the "lifesaver" look over my left shoulder because car drivers' do silly things. I was taught to watch a car that is sat at a junction waiting to pull out as I approach as they will pull out on me ... watch their wheels ... if they start turning then brake. I was taught about wet white lines and drain covers and how to spot diesel spills. I was taught how to read the road. How many "car only" drivers have these skills? Not many. This poor guy has lost his life because the speed camera was there. If it wasn't there he wouldn't have braked. Yes he was going a bit quick but bear in mind that these machines are designed to go much faster than that and as such have very efficient brakes. That doesn't excuse speeding. The point is that speed itself does not kill ... there has to be another contributing factor for speed to lead to an accident. So please don't attack us because we ride bikes. We're not brainless morons, we are people. I am an Engineer with a First Class Honours degree. I am a husband. I am a father. Please tone it down.

Is there a car made today that won't comfortably clear 100mph? Lets all drive 'a bit quick' as we all have vehicles that are capable, in fact lets have total road anarchy and the survivors will be those in the strongest fastest vehicle with the most air-bags. I wonder who will be asking for peace on the roads then, the motorcyclists perhaps if there are any left. We could accept that speed limits are there for a reason and anyone who gets caught out is a mug who deserves to pay the extra premium on their insurance. In this particular case, the Police camera vehicle and operator were completely within the law and attempting to catch motorists who think the law doesn't apply to them. There are 'Camera' signs warning that the road is/could be monitored for speeding and there are 50 mph signs indicating what the legal limit is....... how much more information can be put out? In this case it was ignored and the ultimate price was paid but trying to offload the blame and wriggle out of the consequences makes all motorcyclists look like bad losers. Accept that high speed was a mistake and learn from this accident.

Echo Reader 53 wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

Echo Reader 53 wrote: I can't believe the prejudice in these comments that are anti-bikes ... it is disgusting quite frankly. I am a car driver and a bike rider. I feel I am a safer car driver because I am a bike rider and have to have much better road sense to avoid drivers who can't see me, carry out very unsafe manoeuvres, disobey the highway code, drive whilst on the phone and deliberately get in my way because I am filtering (because they don't like it - it's not against the law people). This behaviour is called dangerous driving. This is much worse than speeding. When I took my bike test I was taught to do between 32 - 35 mph in a 30 mph area or I will fail my test. Reason? Because I am vulnerable as a rider and must always be one step ahead of car drivers. I was taught the "lifesaver" look over my left shoulder because car drivers' do silly things. I was taught to watch a car that is sat at a junction waiting to pull out as I approach as they will pull out on me ... watch their wheels ... if they start turning then brake. I was taught about wet white lines and drain covers and how to spot diesel spills. I was taught how to read the road. How many "car only" drivers have these skills? Not many. This poor guy has lost his life because the speed camera was there. If it wasn't there he wouldn't have braked. Yes he was going a bit quick but bear in mind that these machines are designed to go much faster than that and as such have very efficient brakes. That doesn't excuse speeding. The point is that speed itself does not kill ... there has to be another contributing factor for speed to lead to an accident. So please don't attack us because we ride bikes. We're not brainless morons, we are people. I am an Engineer with a First Class Honours degree. I am a husband. I am a father. Please tone it down.

Is there a car made today that won't comfortably clear 100mph? Lets all drive 'a bit quick' as we all have vehicles that are capable, in fact lets have total road anarchy and the survivors will be those in the strongest fastest vehicle with the most air-bags. I wonder who will be asking for peace on the roads then, the motorcyclists perhaps if there are any left. We could accept that speed limits are there for a reason and anyone who gets caught out is a mug who deserves to pay the extra premium on their insurance. In this particular case, the Police camera vehicle and operator were completely within the law and attempting to catch motorists who think the law doesn't apply to them. There are 'Camera' signs warning that the road is/could be monitored for speeding and there are 50 mph signs indicating what the legal limit is....... how much more information can be put out? In this case it was ignored and the ultimate price was paid but trying to offload the blame and wriggle out of the consequences makes all motorcyclists look like bad losers. Accept that high speed was a mistake and learn from this accident.

You don't ride a bike do you? No I didn't think so. Totally missed the point. Speed in itself doesn't lead to an accident. It can't. If it does then we would have to all stand perfectly still to be completely safe. Something else has to happen as well as the speed to cause an accident ... it's just that speed is picked on time and time again as it's easy to steward. And I bet you read this and still don't get it.

StEmmosfire wrote:

Hector2004 wrote:

StEmmosfire wrote:

bigmonkeyman wrote: http://www.speedcame ras.org/speed-camera -news-article-print. php?id=129 And from official research 2006 Now prove to us that you have the ability to have an opinion which is yours and yours alone,and of course,with proof!!!

lol . www.speedcame.org . an organisation that supports the abolition of all speed cameras in Britain. . They will have an impartial view then. . Anybody else have evidence that supports that speed cameras KILLS more people than they save... thought not. What a numpty thing to say!

@ StEmmosfire: I notice the tone of your posts is starting to become quite defensive; is this because you don't have anything of substance to back up your opinion ? Firstly, you're free to discredit www.speedcame.org but I'd add that there is a bigger conflict of interest with Brake being funded by speed camera manufacturers, wouldn't you ? If you genuinely want to understand the whole road safety vs speed camera issue, you can read up on regression to mean here:- http://www.safespeed .org.uk/rttm.html Gradually, you'll start to see the error of your arguments once equipped with factual data (all of which you can request under FOI).

LOL
.
answer the question Hector, you said "Speed Camera's kill more people than save" you cant prove that can you, nope didnt think so.
.
stop back pedalling and admit your wrong.

Hector2004 wrote:
It's very difficult to prove unequivocally that the camera is responsible, granted but this whole hypothesis of 'the evils of speed' is based on statistics. Using the same measures and the same data, it is easy to demonstate that there has been a massive increase in death and serious injury since the mass introduction of speed cameras in the uk.
If you provide me a credible counter argument and prove me wrong, I will of course concede.

Hector2004 wrote:
It's very difficult to prove unequivocally that the camera is responsible, granted but this whole hypothesis of 'the evils of speed' is based on statistics. Using the same measures and the same data, it is easy to demonstate that there has been a massive increase in death and serious injury since the mass introduction of speed cameras in the uk. If you provide me a credible counter argument and prove me wrong, I will of course concede.

thesouth wrote:
I have also been to numerous road deaths due to people speeding.

Those who are naive enough to 'pass the blame" to the cameras should see a few more sights of real life ie a small child who has lost her life through a speeding motorist, before making illinformed comments.

chrisdemeanour wrote:
It seems obvious that he was speeding but I am intrigued as to how this poor guy's speed can be said to be a "minimum of 78mph" perhaps one of our denizens of law and order, and protector of life and property can enlighten us? I hope the image of that poor guy lives with the camera operator for ever, Police are supposed to prevent crime and offences not take pretty pictures of it to make a few quid.