Right or Wrong

[Dagenham Rover]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1353829/Axing-speed-cameras-caused-road-deaths-FALL.html

[Glyn_Wigley]

Typical selective presentation.

They talk about deaths and 'serious' injuries (but no definition given).

It doesn't give  you the whole picture, with total injuries, and no mention at all about total accidents. It doesn't take much to make the difference between one accident being a lucky escape or a scene of carnage.

It makes you wonder whether those figures don't fit in with the tone of the article somehow...

Also, it makes NO differentiation not only of areas that still have cameras against those that have now been switched off, and also doesn't bother to point out that a large slice of the data compared to previous periods was before they started being switched off - ie comparing like-for-like.

Also, I see in the comments bits, the old crap gets yet another airing:

\"Insurance companies will not release the details of 'shunts' ie, one vehicle driving into the back of another in the vicinity of these cameras as they know very well what causes the shunt.\"

The only way a 'shunt' is physically possible is if the following car is already exceeding the speed limit by a very large margin. If someone entering a 40mph zone suddenly slows down from 60mph to 40mph, the only way someone is going to 'shunt' them is by already tailgating them at 60mph. So they both deserve what they get. Well boo-f**king-hoo. But, oh no, the camera gets blamed, not the bloody drivers.

[RedJ]

What more could you expect of the Daily Fail though?