From Saturday's Daily Telegraph

http://tinyurl.com/25blc6

(DT article on the speed scare and the proliferation of cameras)

First sensible thing I've read on the speed camera issue in ages.

 

No it's not:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2210072,00.html

 

heh. I'm glad I did a refresh before posting that link!

 

err, what?

 

Nothing to see, really.

I read the OP, and having just read Monbiot's article over lunch, I had
already copied the link ready to reply exactly as Michael did.

But then I happened to d/load (refresh) all new posts before I hit
'send' so I didn't make a 'ginger' post. A close call, I'm sure you'll
admit.

 

OIC - when you said "refresh", I thought you meant a webpage refresh -
I've been using this damn google groups for too long.

 

So, Monbiot raises straw man (with the aid of statistics, I might add,
how ironic) and tosses rattle out of pram.
It must be bollocks then.

 

Which straw man and which rattle?

 

Sucking his keyboard for inspiration, M J Carley typed:

Monbiot is just a ****, no question.

 

The thing that gobsmacks me is that governments are quite obviously no
longer representative of the people that they represent. When they cease
to be, then the electorate guards the moral and G-d-given right to remove
them. Even if that involves the use of lethal force.

So why do we accept every corrupt law and measure that they throw at us,
limiting our 'protest' to whingeing on a newsgroup?

D.

 

<hangs head in shame>

What I meant to write was 'no longer representative of the people who
elected them'.

Still, what do I care? No one reads me, anyway ..

D.

 

Para. 8. Not a true description of the statistical analysis.

Para. 9 onwards. He demeans himself and devalues his view by resorting
to personal attack.

 

How so? Did Booker and North mention the correction to the statistics?

What personal attack? He barely waggles his finger at them.

 

You should have heard him on the Richard Vine R2 show a while back
with Jeremy Clarkson. Monbiot made a fool of himself by trying to
goad Clarkson with some farily personal insults, the latter refusing
to get into a slanging match.

 

Compare the statement made by Monbiot with the government's corrected
stats. Draw your own conclusions.

Don't be devious. The statistics are, to an extent, irrelevant to the
main thrust of Booker and Norths article. Government statistics are, on
past experience, not to be trusted, and fair game for discussion.

Maybe I'm sensitive. It read like he was seriously pissed off with
anyone criticising his point of view.

I'll make my position clear, to save time on this question and answer
thing.
I believe a transport infrastructure exists to facilitate travel. That
may sound obvious, but it means amongst other things that transport
policy should always seek to apply the highest speed limits possible,
within the restrictions imposed by road design, vehicle technology and
human ability.
When this idealistic view is contaminated by political goals, financial
interest and wrong thinking pressure groups, one of the results is the
proliferation of speed cameras. Another is a reduction in speed limits.
Both of these are counter-productive to what should be the goal, which
is to get where you're going quickly, so less time is spent travelling.
I believe the right approach is to improve road design, reduce road
furniture, separate pedestrians and cycles from motor vehicles and
increase driver skills. Speed cameras may have a place, but in my view
they are now an example of fiddling while Rome burns. I see no reason
why any dual carriageway should have a speed limit of less than 70, or
any motorway less than 120. One might limit trucks to 90, but you'll
have to ask rec.driving about that.
Transportation is an enabling factor in wealth generation, and should
not be throttled except in extreme circumstances.

Finally, let me ask you a question. What do you think is an acceptable
road death rate?

 

<snip sensible sounding stuff>

That's all very well as far as it goes, but you didn't mention 'fun'
once. How are we supposed to take your views seriously?

 

It's Monbiot, of course it is bollocks. If the man can get a liberal
lefty like me spitting blood at his stupidity and arrogance, what does
he do to non liberal lefties?

 

Have you had a check up recently? Only this spitting blood and your
indecently low body mass should be a concern.

Or have you died and been reincarnated, as you have a new moniker?

 

The new moniker is because I don't have a proper newsreader and bloody
google bloody groups has a posting limit, and I have to wait a day or
two for the other account to come back. This isn't a disposable
sockpuppet, however, as it uses me uni email address.

 

it was the broken, gay as ****, sig that gave it away, dear boy