Hi! We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
But as we’re losing ad-revenue from this then why not make a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
WHICH ONE’S THE SPEEDER?
(Clue: it’s probably not the one you think it is)
Ask most people who’s the biggest menace on the road and they will probably say ”Boy racers”… young men in “souped up” cars who have a reputation for reckless and illegal driving behaviour, often exacerbated by drink or drugs - excess and inappropriate speeds, tailgating, lane hopping, inadequate signalling - to the accompaniment of loud, pounding music.
But new research by West Yorkshire Casualty Reduction Partnership shows they may not deserve their reputation… Analysis of speeding and red light offences in West Yorkshire by age of offender between 2005-2007 reveals that, out of a total of 141,242 offences, fewer than 7%
- 9737 – were committed by drivers aged 16-24. However, 28,738 were by 25-34 year olds + 38,529 by 35-44 year olds.
All together, older drivers commit 93% of all speeding offences. “It’s easy to blame young people for the ills of society,” says partnership chair Steve Thornton. “They are an easy target to brand as speeders but these new figures prove this is not the case.”
nice to see someone actually spending time researching this...!
Joined: Apr 04, 2006 Posts: 10118 Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 8:42 am Post subject:
It also says this
'With almost 3,000 young drivers killed or
seriously injured each year, something
needs to be done. Safety campaigns play a
key role in making drivers much more
aware of the direct link between their
behaviour and the consequences of not
taking risks seriously.'
Joined: Mar 15, 2006 Posts: 3219 Location: Windlesham, Surrey
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 8:42 am Post subject:
Surely this is totally meaningless without including the mileage of each age group in the equation. _________________ Anita
TomTom VIA 135 - App 12.075
UK map 1130.12368
Samsung Galaxy S21
Joined: Feb 27, 2006 Posts: 14907 Location: Keynsham
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 8:43 am Post subject: Re: Which Age Drivers Are The Worst?
MaFt wrote:
Quote:
Analysis of speeding and red light offences in West Yorkshire by age of offender between 2005-2007 reveals that, out of a total of 141,242 offences, fewer than 7% - 9737 – were committed by drivers aged 16-24. However, 28,738 were by 25-34 year olds + 38,529 by 35-44 year olds.
Ergo rest assured more than half the offences were committed by people who are not 68 going on 69 year olds. Told Ya!!
This is in any event a statistical truism - the older you get, the more a survivor you are, otherwise you wouldn't have survived. Alas (or should that be "fortunately"?), all the accidents and deaths happen to people younger than "you" and with the passage of time, there become more of "them" than there are of "you". If I were NOT a brilliant driver, mate, I would never have survived to become older than anybody else in the world. _________________ Dennis
Joined: Apr 04, 2006 Posts: 10118 Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 8:50 am Post subject:
Anita wrote:
Surely this is totally meaningless without including the mileage of each age group in the equation.
Of course it is Anita, but surely that's what statistic s are meant to be, other than try to 'prove a point' that isn't true. But if you are the government (or government quango), you just blatently lie about it and hope that it will go away.
Joined: Feb 27, 2006 Posts: 14907 Location: Keynsham
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 9:00 am Post subject:
Anita wrote:
Surely this is totally meaningless without including the mileage of each age group in the equation.
Since March 2000, I've driven some 550,000 miles (every one of them without the assistance of bangy boomy music and not a single one of them in a black VW).
Old people who don't drive black VWs and don't play bangy boomy music are safe drivers.
This is why dears and peasants don't survive to the age of 68. _________________ Dennis
Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40 Posts: 23848 Location: Hampshire, UK
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 9:24 am Post subject:
You have to wonder where they got their pool of respondents for the survey too, I realise that as a driver my view is biased but do we really believe any of their findings?
Quote:
More than 80% of West Yorkshire people support the use of speed control safety cameras as a means to reduce casualties.
And almost as many appreciate that fewer accidents happen on roads where cameras are installed.
The big thumbs up to cameras comes from a public opinion poll carried out by West Yorkshire Casualty Reduction Partnership, the organisation responsible for the county’s roadside cameras, mobile camera patrols and red light safety cameras.
Since last spring, it’s been asking visitors to its website at www.safetycameraswestyorkshire.co.uk for their views, and people who’ve come to see the partnership’s work at shows and fairs, talks and presentations.
Straight away we can see that the results are unreliable as web surveys such as this are easily skewed, we have no details of the number who took part, this could have been a survey of 10 people!
Quote:
78% of respondents agreed that cameras are meant to encourage drivers to keep to the speed limit, not punish them. 78% recognised that fewer accidents are likely to happen on roads where cameras are installed, and nearly as many (73%) believed that cameras mean more “dangerous” drivers will be caught, not just speeders.
That is wholly at odds with what I understand to be the case. Anyone who drives for a living, drives to and from work or drives a lot at all thinks very differently. Cameras are seen as revenue machines, placed for the most part in locations that are not apparently accident black-spots and target motorists indiscriminately without taking into consideration any mitigating factors such as weather, traffic etc
Surveys such as this make my blood boil as they are simply there to justify their existence. Yes we all know that if we're caught we only have ourselves to blame but why are so many cameras in areas that do not appear to be accident black-spots?
I'm particularly annoyed as I may have acquired a ticket Friday. Driving to Devon along the A303 I was observing the limit, keeping my eyes peeled etc and regularly being passed my cars doing well in excess of the limit, 90+. On one stretch a car was attempting to join the dual from a side road. I pulled out to let him join and accelerated to match the speed of traffic in Lane 1. As I pulled back into Lanes 2 I looked in my mirror to check I was clear and on looking forward again saw the SCP van parked in the hedge. A quick glance at my speedo showed 72 as I decelerated.
I reckon I was doing about 75 on the speedo just before so if I was snapped I may have been borderline for a ticket assuming 3-4mph difference between actual speed and speedo. I'm a professional driver, Class 1, IAM, RoSPA and drive to the limits yet a bit of courtesy to a fellow driver may well see me with 3pts and a fine on an otherwise clean licence.
This was a straight stretch of dual carriageway with a NSL so is this a black spot or just a good spot for getting a load of customers? The van was on the database but having just upgraded to v8 I hadn't realised my warnings were trashed until I started the journey so never had the audible warning, sod's law I guess! _________________ Darren Griffin
I too don't believe that most of these surveys are worth the paper they are written on, percentages can be manipulated to suit the author.
However i feel that the 'street legal' cruise is a great idea and should be taken up around the country.
Some of these youngsters have spent a vast sum of money doing up their cars and proud of it, they have some great skills and enthusiasm, OK maybe some are a bit over the top and may not suit all of us, but I like to see the ideas and work put into it.
I for one along with my both my son's, who are both car nut's, would attend, although i'm an 'old codger' I love to see the work the youngsters put into it - even if the music can be loud, you have to accept we were all young once.
As for the worst age group, having started my early driving day's on a motorbike with NO National speed limit, then doing the same in a car, after all these years, i still find it very difficult not to get carried away with speeding and wish that i could find a 'lighter' foot!
I feel that some of the over 50's are worse than the youngsters we like to knock. _________________ TomTom Go 60
Garmin Nüvi 660, Firmware v4.90
Drive-Smart GPS with Loader v1.4.16
HTC Advantage X7500 MS 6.1 Tchart Speed Sentry
Satmap Active 10, Software v1.16
Fuzion 32 HUD Bluetooth GPS receiver
Joined: Apr 04, 2006 Posts: 10118 Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 7:59 pm Post subject:
gardenshed wrote:
make a retest mandatory at 65
You'd better change the age to 95 before DennisN gets hold of you, rips off your right arm and beats you over the head with the soggy end.
He is an aaaaaaard Northern git you know.
Joined: Mar 15, 2006 Posts: 3219 Location: Windlesham, Surrey
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 9:27 pm Post subject:
strumble wrote:
Quote:
make a retest mandatory at 65
As young drivers we might drive for pleasure but at 65 and older we drive out of necessity so why hit us 'oldies' with the re-test?
And which age group pays the lowest insurance premiums, and why? _________________ Anita
TomTom VIA 135 - App 12.075
UK map 1130.12368
Samsung Galaxy S21
Posted: Today Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising
We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Hi! We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
But as we’re losing ad-revenue from this then why not make a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in for private messages
Log in
