|
But even if the road isn't suitable to actually do 60mph that doesn't mean authorities need to come in and change it. It means drivers should look at the road - rather than the sign- and drive accordingly. If they can't do this we're better off without them anyway.
|
|
It's another money making opportunity for th authorities, a few well placed speed traps will raise large amounts of cash for the treasury.
|
|
We live in a 30mph limit near to a school for 8-12 year olds. There are drivers who pass it doing 40+ during school hours.
We live 30 miles away from the Snake Pass - where there are more fatal accidents than anywhere else in the UK - mainly bikers. This has been reduced by massive police action using helicopters etc.. It is totally unrepeatable across the UK due to cost.
We should of course adopt teh US system of 20mph limits outside schools long before a 40 mph country roads limit.. Many of the reported deaths in country roads here are young drivers at 2am .. so a 40 mph limit will have zero impact.
It's like drug taking. If the Government (and I mean any Government) were really serious on "the war on drugs", they would jail high profile users to dissuade others. They don't so they are not serious.
As for claims of money raising - well if they made the minum fine for repeated speeding £1,000 deductble automatically from wages or benfits - I would think it might have a significant deterrernt impact. And then be serious in money raising.
And make fines automatic with no court appearances and no right of appeal.
|
We live in a 30mph limit near to a school for 8-12 year olds. There are drivers who pass it doing 40+ during school hours.
Surely it's not a problem when they're in school? It's school leaving time when that'd be an issue. 20mph is an achievement on the school roads near me after years of the council buckling every time a fussy hysterical parent complains about the smallest thing. So it's all sorts of undecipherable paint everywhere, signs here, traffic calming there, bollards etc. The whole lot. The kids move faster than the cars.
As for claims of money raising - well if they made the minum fine for repeated speeding £1,000 deductble automatically from wages or benfits - I would think it might have a significant deterrernt impact. And then be serious in money raising.
That would actually prevent them speeding so they wouldn't raise any money. The operating costs of speed cameras are very high, the margin of profit not as high as many think so they need to encourage repeat offending in order to make it worthwhile.
And make fines automatic with no court appearances and no right of appeal.
Not sure I agree with throwing out democracy, freedom and the magna carta just for going a bit too fast.
|
|
|
It's like drug taking. If the Government (and I mean any Government) were really serious on "the war on drugs", they would jail high profile users to dissuade others. They don't so they are not serious.
For once, I agree with you. The war on drugs is a pointless PR exercise that exists only for politricians to prove their "tough" credentials. Like most forms of prohibition, the war is a gangsters' charter, providing ample opportunities for criminals whilst inconveniencing the innocent. The ineffective enforcement is also extremely expensive: a high security prison runs at circa £30,000 p.a. Juvenile prison places run at well over £50K p.a. So locking up non-violent offenders is a pyrrhic victory. Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore et al. have the death penalty for drug trafficing; they still have a big drug problem.So getting 'serious' isn't the answer.
All we need to do is have the courage to ignore the shrill mimsers. legalise drugs and put taxes on them. Raise revenue, reduce costs and cut crime in one fell swoop. But we can't because mimsers won't admit that they're wrong.
We live 30 miles away from the Snake Pass - where there are more fatal accidents than anywhere else in the UK - mainly bikers. This has been reduced by massive police action using helicopters etc.. It is totally unrepeatable across the UK due to cost.
Utterly infantising waste of money. If the occasional biker comes a croppper and spreads his organs over a drystone dyke, is that really a problem for anyone else? Leave people alone!
|
|
" If the occasional biker comes a croppper and spreads his organs over a drystone dyke, is that really a problem for anyone else? "
Yes because somebody has to pick up all the pieces and go and tell his mum.
Volunteering?
|
|
There'a another dangerous mountain pass called Crib Coch. In a normal year about half a dozen hikers fall off the ridge and spread their organs over the valley below. Mountain Rescue have to pick up their pieces and go and tell their mums. Presumably you'd want that closed or access restricted or some otrher draconian measure?
Life is risky. Some people are reckless. 'twas ever thus.
Edited by unthrottled on 15/07/2012 at 15:14
|
There'a another dangerous mountain pass called Crib Coch. In a normal year about half a dozen hikers fall off the ridge and spread their organs over the valley below. Mountain Rescue have to pick up their pieces and go and tell their mums. Presumably you'd want that closed or access restricted or some otrher draconian measure?
Fair point. Most bikers have a motorbike because they want to go fast and they have a death wish, they like 'living on the edge' and all that stuff. They use these roads because it's easy to get up to speed so if they want to kill themselves that's up to them. Their life is their responsibility, if they want to die and take themselves off the future state pension payroll then I'm all for it. It's not like these bikers don't know the risks before they take to the road.
I can get behind measures to stop children being run over by idiots but I don't see the point in wasting public money to stop adults on bikes killing themselves if they want to.
|
|
|
|
|
"Utterly infantising waste of money. If the occasional biker comes a croppper and spreads his organs over a drystone dyke, is that really a problem for anyone else? Leave people alone!"
Err .. there are other drivers on the road - not bikers. If bikers just killed bikers I would agree. But they tend also to crash into cars or cyclists... So common sense says :stop them..
(Persoanlly I would ensure teh bikers caught speeding apid a fine enough to recover the helicopeter costs: so that would bve £5k per speeding biker...And there bike confiscted until they pay.
Edited by madf on 15/07/2012 at 19:16
|
Err .. there are other drivers on the road - not bikers. If bikers just killed bikers I would agree. But they tend also to crash into cars or cyclists... So common sense says :stop them..
Common sense has been a stranger to motoring policy for years. Those 'other drivers on the road' also know that merely driving a vehicle carries a certain degree of risk, so does riding a bicycle and all other things. The question is what degree of risk and what death toll is acceptable given the widespread benefits of travelling. We shouldn't be telling anybody that travelling on the road is 100% safe because it isn't and never will be, if you can't handle that then don't drive, hide in your basement.
If a biker crashes into a car the chances are the biker will come off worse. Cycling is also a high risk mode of transport and you get onto the contraption in the knowledge you're more likely to die on that than in a car for instance.
A death toll of around 2,000 is perfectly acceptable collateral in my view. You're still more likely to commit suicide or die from poor hospital care than die on the roads.
Edited by jamie745 on 15/07/2012 at 21:41
|
A death toll of around 2,000 is perfectly acceptable collateral in my view. You're still more likely to commit suicide or die from poor hospital care than die on the roads.
But Jamie, one death is one too many, it must never be allowed to happen again, think of the innocent children etc etc. The glib cliche generator could churn out the BS forever.
Sometimes I get passed on a quiet motorway by a bike doing well over a ton. I smile and think: "I wish I was on that bike"
What is the point of life without a little fun? BTW, does anyone remember the nauseating sermons from John Whitworth, a former racing driver, who used to write in the Tele motoring section? After spending a lifetime going round in circles, getting 4 miles to the gallon, he decided to take up a retirement crusade against driving fast and carbon dioxide emissions. I couldn't concentrate on the articles for the sound of pots crashing into kettles.
|
But Jamie, one death is one too many, it must never be allowed to happen again, think of the innocent children etc etc. The glib cliche generator could churn out the BS forever.
The hysterical 'think of the children' shreik from the likes of Brake and Mumsnet has done more harm to a world once occupied by common sense than any wars or banking scandals. Usually the people going 'we need lower speed limits!' are the type who doesn't want anybody driving fast past their house where their precious brat plays, but are happy to drive fast past someone elses house.
We do seem to now live in a society where all forms of death are unacceptable and we should keep everybody alive for as long as humanly possible. Even if that means compromising on actual quality of life. One day we're told we die too young, the next day we live too long and can't afford the pensions.
Sometimes I get passed on a quiet motorway by a bike doing well over a ton. I smile and think: "I wish I was on that bike"
Today I drove at 75mph and nobody died. I also ran with scissors once and survived.
BTW, does anyone remember the nauseating sermons from John Whitworth
What about Damon Hill, the former Formula One world champion who wants the motorway speed limit lowered to 55mph?
|
|
More Government kite flying.
|
|
I believe in the Autobahn system, and of using your common sense....but is there enough left? Having now worked in the health and safety industry (albeit radiological) and education (try organising a school trip!) we've gone a bit mad, as a nation, and it's happened rather rapidly.
|
What about Damon Hill, the former Formula One world champion who wants the motorway speed limit lowered to 55mph?
Ah, another member of the I've-had-my-fun-and-now-everyone-else-can-buy-the-DVD club. Hateful. Nigel Mansell was better anyway.
|
|
Several problems with this.
1. Definition of "quiet road"? - a road that is quiet today could well become congested and "noisy" (read dangerous) next week.
2. Users of Sat Navs will over the long term (as the mapping catches up) programme their devices to select "faster" stretches of road (those with higher limits) which will simply displace the problem, leading to the situation where there are no "quiet" stretches of road left anywhere and, lo and behold, it's 40 mph everywhere. More congestion, more impatience, more thrills and spills.
3. What to do about signage? Do current road signs (of which there are far too many as it is) have any effect on the hard core of boy/girl racers anyway? I suspect that, short of 100% CCTV coverage and/or police enforcement, not a lot. A road sign warning of a bend(s) has the effect of making some drivers slow down and others the complete opposite (I've got active steering/4WD/ETC/ABS, I can take this next bend at 90 with my eytes shut, grew up round here, no need to slow down, blah blah...) Likewise the black and white chevrons, SLOW signs, double white lines, you name it.
Common sense would dictate a cheap, efficient, easily recognisable signing system (green centre lines, "40" roundels painted on the road, etc.) but as this might work too well and lead to higher compliance and reduced cash camera revenue, it is unlikely to be considered. Radar controlled traffic lights which do the job in Spain and Portugal would be expensive and might not raise yet more income, so, again, unlikely to be used.
A big problem with the English countryside is, simply, hedgerows, things of beauty that they are, and which are all but absent in other countries. Visibility or sometimes "telepathy" round the next bend is never guaranteed and as the statistics show, it's country roads where the most collisions occur. IIRC the last incarnation of the Vauxhall Vectra had its steering and suspension geometry tweaked with English country roads in mind, which again, "displaces" the problem, as for all I know Vectra "C" drivers might then have pushed their cars even further to the limit: it's a never ending vicious circle.
Edited by Bilboman on 16/07/2012 at 14:52
|
|
I have come round corners on the Congleton to Buxton road and been confronted with:
an Audi A4 coming straight for me on my side of the road, about 50 metres away... (No it was not passing, it was the only car on the road apart from me).
A Motorbike doing the same travelling at least at 70mph.
The road has a 50 limit.
Legislation does nothing about cases like that...
Edited by madf on 16/07/2012 at 15:38
|
|
I was once pushed off the road by a white van, coming straight for me in that manner, on a back road out in Cheshire. He was doing, in my estimation, about 50mph on a 30mph limit lane. I was lucky not to be hurt, and lucky that I stayed calm enough to get my car out of the ditch the van forced me into. I had to choose between a head on crash or the gulley!
|
|
You can't legislate for idiots, and depite trying for years you can't train them either, once an idiot always and idiot.
I avoid single track roads if at all possible for the very reasons the posters above have said, 40 mph is still too fast for a blind sngle track bend, but you'll find idiots attempting to take the bends at far more than that.
My mk 1.5 Golf was written off by a half wit in a pick up straightening out a blind narrow bend in the lake district, absolutely not a scrap of sense inside that thick head, you simply cannot legislate for people like that, all you can hope is that he goes into the front of a tractor and Darwins theory proved before he hurts someone else.
Edited by gordonbennet on 16/07/2012 at 16:52
|
, you simply cannot legislate for people like that, all you can hope is that he goes into the front of a tractor and Darwins theory proved before he hurts someone else.
Darwin takes too long. A bit of selective culling goes a long way :starting with Jaguar drivers I think.. most are either senile or nutters in my experience.. :-)
Edited by madf on 16/07/2012 at 18:51
|
|
Sir John Whitmore ISTR - he did bang on a lot whatever his name was! We already have hundreds of unenforced/unenforceable laws - why add more? Howmany Police Services even have a Traffic Department these days? Only ones with Motorways running through their patch I'd guess
|
|
It would be fairly simple if configured this way:
Your speed limit is 40 mph unless:
The road you're on is a motorway, and A road or B road.
The road you're on is subject to a speed limit of less than 40 mph.
|
|
|
|
|
|
