More must be done to address an increase in the number of deaths on Gloucestershire’s roads, the county’s police and crime commissioner (PCC) has said (BBC News).
Order by Latest first | Oldest first | Highest rated | Lowest rated
By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.
Readers may (or may not) wish to see the news in today’s local Gloucester newspaper.
http://www.thisisgloucestershire.co.uk/Gloucester-city-centre-set-slow-20mph-speed-limit/story-19842337-detail/story.html#axzz2fterdWDw
Rod King, 20’s Plenty for Us
0
Just to be clear, I never suggested that speed or speed enforcement had contributed to the recent increase in fatalities in Gloucestershire, just sharing that we had, coincidentally, opened a dialogue with the authorities there within the last six months.
I hope to continue that with Martin Surl and have, overnight, established contact with his office.
Eric Bridgstock, Independent Road Safety Research, St Albans
0
Mike: Yes, obviously changing people’s attitudes so that they don’t speed, drink drive, drive dangerously is the best solution….but for those whose attitude won’t change through education, that’s why we also have laws prohibiting such things which can be enforced.
Hugh Jones, Cheshire
0
I think before we start turning this into a speed/enforement debate, we should wait to find out what caused the collisions/crashes. The BBC or newsfeed report does not mention speeding was an issue. For example, how do we know that the motorcyclist who hit the deer was speeding? I also disagree with the just going down the enforcement route.
Surely it’s better to change people’s attitudes so they don’t speed, drink drive, drive dangerously etc in the first place?
Mike, from don’t be that someone
0
Hugh
We briefed on the EFFECTS of speed enforcement, showing that at best speed cameras have had no positive effect on road safety and, more probably, they had caused more collisions than they prevented. Speed compliance is not an end in itself, especially when it leads to more collisions and casualties. A constructive engagement.
Eric Bridgstock, Independent Road Safety Research, St Albans
0
Interestingly, if you look at the BBC news item referred to, it links to an associated story which reports that, over the same period, the number of collisions on Gloucestershire’s roads actually dropped by 10%. It begs the question: which is the better indicator of a road safety – the number of collisions, or the severity of the consequences? The latter can, after all, be down to factors beyond the three ‘E’s. Incidentally, Eric and Idris briefing the Police on speed enforcement? Did I read that correctly?
Hugh Jones, Cheshire
0
There have been many occasions on this newsfeed when regular contributors have been keen to point out that one year’s data does not constitute a trend, and that we should be wary of reading too much into a single set of figures. Perhaps that should apply in this case?
Nick Rawlings, editor, Road Safety News
0
Well said Duncan.
In May, Idris Francis and I briefed Gloucestershire Roads Police, and ACPO, about our research into the effects of speed enforcement. It became clear that their objective or motivation was “enforcing the law” to “improve compliance with speed limits”, even if that does not reduce casualties. They are still considering our follow-up correspondence.
Eric Bridgstock, Independent Road Safety Research, St Albans
0
I recommend lower speed limits and more enforcement. It’s much easier to do that than it is to spend a little time and money in understanding the neuroscience behind human errors and how they contribute to the vast majority of road accidents.
Duncan MacKillop, Stratford on Avon
0