You're right that speed cameras and lowered speed limits are an excellent way of taking the glamour out of motoring, and I fully support them for that reason despite the temporary rise in accidents that they cause.  In the long run, as people are made to use sustainable, safer transport, this policy will save far more lives than it costs, and so I can't see how anyone but the most militant, reckless petrolhead would oppose it.

I'm too busy to pool resources for the moment, but I will be adding some pages to my site in the near future about this important topic, and I will announce here when I have done so.  I am also thinking about setting up a separate campaign site to make people aware of this often-overlooked benefit of cameras and other anti-car measures.  But we need to be careful because as you say, it's necessary to operate in "stealth mode" for the moment and pretend that the cameras/limits/etc are for short-term safety in order to stop Daily Wail readers and selfish cagers from moaning about being endangered by them (their deaths would arguably be beneficial to humanity, but that's another discussion).

I would also encourage you to subscribe to uk.rec.cycling.moderated, which has been set up in part to stop cagers from pointing out the dangers presented by cameras (although technically correct, such arguments are disallowed on URCM in the interest of long-term road safety, which is clearly a good thing; it was difficult to oppose those arguments on uk.rec.cycling, which frustrated some of us, hence the need for uk.rec.cycling.moderated in order to suppress them). Guy ()