If you're a genuinely decent, nice person who (however misguidedly)
really does believe that cameras save lives, and you thus support them
for that reason, then *surely* you must have misgivings about some of
the more prominent camera advocates on the Internet. Do you really
think that Spindrift is a good ambassador for your cause? Do you
really think that Chapman is? Presumably you would like to think that
those who speak on your behalf are decent, and support cameras wholly
because they think they save lives, like you. Presumably you would be
against those who hate motorists, and/or gain personally from cameras,
muscling in on your cause and pretending that they care about saving
lives, when really they don't at all and they're just out for
themselves. Again, you surely don't believe that those sorts of
people (who *undoubtedly* exist) are the best mouthpieces for your
campaign.
If you support cameras, but you think Spindrift and/or others who
speak out in favour of cameras are doing harm to your cause, please
have the guts to say so. I'm sure that if there are any decent-minded
camera supporters left on the Internet, some of them must feel that
way. People have seen Spindrift's posts, they've seen Chapman's
posts, and it is amply evident that they are extremely unpleasant and
anything but altruistic. I can't believe that (assuming any exist)
every, or indeed any, decent-minded camera supporter is happy with
Spindrift's conduct. He has more than earned his bad reputation, and
camera supporters who really think that cameras save lives would be
doing themselves a huge favour by disowning him and his ilk.