Nuxx:7dad057f-b5f9-474d-9389-70938a92ccf1@b2g2000prf.googlegroups.com

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!b2g2000prf.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <7dad057f-b5f9-474d-9389-70938a92ccf1@b2g2000prf.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: ABD Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 03:02:05 -0700 (PDT) Lines: 72 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.105.145.93 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1216375326 21966 127.0.0.1 (18 Jul 2008 10:02:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 10:02:06 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: b2g2000prf.googlegroups.com; posting-host=88.105.145.93; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.1) Gecko/2008070208 Firefox/3.0.1,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 4960 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:658120

I've read vague slurs against the ABD on this group. I would guess that the reason for such slurs is that their authors are anti- motorist, but since their authors deny any such thing, perhaps they would like to explain what is so wrong with this?

"The objective of the ABD is to provide an active, responsible voice to lobby on behalf of Britain's beleaguered drivers upon many issues, especially those where official policy in recent years has been to discriminate against drivers by means of mis-information, obstruction, restriction, delay, or taxation.

In particular, we campaign for a return to the 'Three Es' of road safety, which gave Britain the safest roads in the world - Education, Engineering and Enforcement. We favour intelligent road policing by properly trained police traffic officers rather than blanket automated enforcement of only certain types of offence.

We want everyone to have the freedom to choose the most appropriate form of transport for each journey. We believe that increasing the usage of public transport is best achieved by enhancing the standard of provision, not by penalising car use. We seek genuine integrated transport policies which recognise that the use of private vehicles is an essential part of the transport mix.

Topics upon which we campaign include:

a.. Improved standards of training for all road users. b.. Improvements in road and vehicle safety. c.. Recognition of the fact that roads are an essential part of the UK transport system; and that traffic is the lifeblood of the economy. d.. All of the taxes paid by motorists to be used to maintain and improve our road system to a safe and proper standard. e.. Realistic speed limits based upon road safety requirements not political correctness nor revenue generation. f.. An end to speed cameras being used inappropriately. g.. Environmental policies based upon sound science rather than politics and hysteria. h.. An end to the government using drivers as an inexhaustible source of stealth tax, specifically no road tolls, nor 'congestion charging'."

Even if you (hilariously and dishonestly) claim to disagree that drivers have been discriminated against in recent years, what is wrong with the "Three Es"? What is wrong with favouring intelligent road policing? What is wrong with people having the freedom to choose the most appropriate form of transport for each journey? What is wrong with recognising that private cars are an essential part of the transport mix? Surely only someone who was anti-motorist would have a problem with that.

Even if you (wrongly) think that speed cameras are not being used inappropriately, what is wrong with the other topics upon which the ABD campaigns? I can't see how anyone but a motorist-hater would object to the idea of speed limits being based upon genuine road safety requirements, for example.

It seems to me that most people in this newsgroup automatically oppose any organisation which is against speed cameras, no matter what else they say, and no matter how much sense they talk. Such an emotive and stubborn support of speed cameras could surely only be derived from a hatred of motorists. Why else would anyone want road "safety" policy to be so heavily biased towards cameras when they can only possibly address 5% of accidents (and that's before you take out the drunk drivers, joyriders etc, who should be addressed by other means, because taking a photograph of them isn't going to stop them endangering lives)?

I'd love to see some of the many "I'm not anti-motorist, honest" types explain why they have a problem with the ABD. And it would be great if they their posts were actually specific enough to mean something, i.e. not just "The ABD are a bunch of extremist petrolheads", which is about as useful to the discussion as "Speed kills".