White Rose is a protest blog collective focusing on civil liberties in the UK.
It was set up to point a finger at the erosion of personal freedom in the UK.
Government's active measures introduce new means of control such as identity cards and surveillance cameras, the passive measures such as weakening of double jeopardy and presumption of innocence.


The arguments
The resistants
Gabriel Syme and Perry de Havilland of Samizdata.net to rally the Anglosphere behind the UK.
White Rose contributors are those bloggers and non-bloggers who oppose restrictions on personal liberties.

To find out how to become a White Rose contributor, please go here.
Tuesday, September 23, 2003
It's for the children
David Carr (London)
(0)   Surveillance

I really don't know how all these so-called 'civil libertarians' can possibly live with themselves. Don't they care about the children?

Children are frightened of speeding traffic and want more measures to make roads safer, a survey has suggested.

Three-quarters of children questioned said they wanted more speed cameras.

About 70% thought drivers should go slower near their school, with almost as many wanting drivers to slow down near their house.

Half of the 1,500 children surveyed wanted safer places to cross the road.

The findings of the survey of children aged 7-14 in city schools by road safety charity Brake were released to coincide with the annual Road Safety Week.

A good friend of mine who has been professionaly engaged in market research has provided me with chapter and verse on just how ludicrously easy it is to get the answers that the researcher wants. Quadruple the easiness when the views being solicited are those of children.

A 'road safety charity'?


Comments

This kind of stuff really winds me up...They've just put speed humps along a road near me, because, like many councils across the country, ours is obsessed with speed. Speed doesn't kill, bad drivers do. Speed should be adjusted to the prevailing conditions and hazards, not some blanket bureaucratic maximum set by people who have clearly not assessed the hazards and risks (and don't appear to realise that they vary).

If they wanted to be really intelligent, they would have variable risk-based limits across the country - recognising that in some cases, a higher limit is perfectly safe.

As for interviewing children to get the desired results, that is plain sick. They did something similar recently on the local television, putting motorists caught in a speed trap before a kangaroo court of handpicked school children....ugh!

Posted by: Mark Ellott on September 23, 2003 09:24 AM
Post a comment








    


    •