Safe Speed Forums

No, they will just do what they have done round here and trade their saxos for quadbikes. And they will then compete to see who can do the longest/highest jumps. I assure you they are much more annoying than tin-can exhausts.

jonsher, don't you think if the road is not safe at 30m.p.h. the authorities should put up a sign saying 20 m.p.h.
Or would you prefer a sign saying 0m.p.h. Let's go back to walking everywhere.
Am I getting the wrong idea of you?t"?

You're falling into the trap ws.
Just because one or two idiots decide to drive like maniacs does'nt mean that all the rest of us should suffer his /their punishment.
If the enforcement officers were doing their job they would catch these people with ease.
Of course they are never caught because the last thing they have is a valid reg or address.
So they go on taking the p and the rest of us pay for it while the authorities say 'look how well we are doing- millions fined- that should do the trick.

no, why should they do that? The sign means that the maximum is 30, it doesn't tell you the safe speed to drive at which obviously changes according to the conditions.
I guess your next suggestion will be to remove all the NSL signs on, let's say hairpins for starters, and replace them with 10mph signs.

With apologies jonsher.
The way I read your post made me think you were suggesting something that you obviously were not.
I see your point and agree completely.

*sigh* But if the road is regarded as fit and safe for 30, why on earth is a council putting in speed humps that prevent that speed from being done.

It's not a question of circumstances arising which make the road unsafe at 30: it's the result of an affirmative act by the council.

I have long wondered why there appears to be so little consistency in the size/aggressiveness of speed humps: I've encountered many humps which are unusable at speeds of any greater than 10mph. Surely, if that is the maximum speed the council feels we should be doing, they should have the courage of their convictions and get a 10mph limit put in, and signed properly.

_________________
--
For your comfort and convenience, please stop reading now.

Because they wish to make using a car as annoying and frustrating as possible, and generally artificially congest the roads, in order to encourage us all to opt for using buses & trains. Yeah, like that's gonna happen...

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

And in doing so they’re making the roads more dangerous for everyone

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

Most definitely! One road in particular, near me, has shops, heavily residential, hundreds of kids etc., and the LA has put in about 15 humps. In the past, I drove down that road concentrating on what was going on around me, looking under parked cars etc. for any clues as to kids running out etc., but these days my eyes are firmly fixed on trying to minimise damage to my car, by negotiating these humps, and not on my surroundings...

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

There's a road near me very similar - residential with lots of shops and parked cars. Except instead of just speed bumps they've also put in chicanes blocking the road. Meaning you have to veer across to the other side (facing oncoming traffic) where there is also a speed bump to negotiate. How does placing dangerous obstacles in the path of traffic, forcing them across the road to face oncoming traffic and driving over an object that damages cars contribute to road safety? It's madness!

_________________
Why can't we just use Common Sense?

It's LA's & Councils for you! I really do think that the authorities have lost their way, a bit with all this. They seem to have forgotten that they're there to serve us and not blight our lives...[/b]

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

A bit like these I would imagine.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

Yep exactly like them - for a good two mile stretch of road, with chicanes on alternating sides. The road near me also appears a good deal busier than that one.

_________________
Why can't we just use Common Sense?

[quote="BottyBurpBecause they wish to make using a car as annoying and frustrating as possible, and generally artificially congest the roads, in order to encourage us all to opt for using buses & trains. Yeah, like that's gonna happen... [/quote]



So how do we get from the bus stop/ train station etc to our house - ok, some of the time it's hot/other times it's dry - but this is Britain- MOST TIMES it's wet / yuppy weather -what then . (oooh , sORRY ,SAYS MR COUNCIL EMPLOYEE - we hadn't taken that into account)

Trouble is that most Govt employees / Council employees live in the land of the CUCKOO (or with head up rear of next official in upward ladder)

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

_________________
Too much of our money is being wasted on supposed road safety improvements that are actually making driving more dangerous.

_________________
Too much of our money is being wasted on supposed road safety improvements that are actually making driving more dangerous.

Actually I dont mind humps that much! as long as they are done "Properly"

Indeed, I will often choose to use a Humped route over an un-humped one (Traffic tends to be lighter and freer flowing, possibly even quicker!)

I "Like" the Pillows (Especially as my "Track" allows me to go both over and arround them at the same time IYSWIM )

I also "Like" the Tables (These are recomended by TRL and are the ones you sometimes see at juctions. Ramp up, 4M (Min) flat top and then ramp down)

I "Dislike" chicaines, Pinch points and those deadly "Down to one lane" thingies!

I also "Dislike" the ramps that go all the way accross and are taken by pedestrians to be crossing points! (Very dangerous! If you *Have* to have this type of hump I really think they should be blocked by barriers at each end to stop people from crossing on them!)

I find that 25-30 is actually perfectly possible on pillows. "Tables" do force you to slow below this, But if they are only used at junctions and similar "specific" locations where slowing below 30 may be desirable then there is no harm done.

Generally provided humps are only put in where there is a history of people "Significantly" exceeding the in residential areas. Again, No harm done.

Excessive speed in these sort of locations can be a real problem for the people who live there but you NEVER see a because although there is a problem there iare not enough "Incedents" to make one pay! (You only see scamvans round here on the urban DC's with absurdly low speed limits. Yah! Its all about safety isnt it OOOhhh Yessss)

(The other excuse used to explain why there has never been a speed trap in my Village to catch the Waitrose lorries thundering down the hill at 50MPH (In a ) is that "It would be too dangerous for the operators!"

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

wa have speed humps on the road outside a local school and there is also a 20MPH limit and i wondered if in the school holidays the humps should notbe removed, and replaced again term time as they serve no purpose during holidays do they?

Do you have "Humps" or "Pillows"?

"Humps" are a complete PITA.

"Pillows" simply restrict you to 25-30 (which is not unreasonable for an urban/residential area)

I know it would be pricy but I am sure I remember **Years** ago seeing the sugestion of "Adapatable" humps that could be raised or lowererd depending on whether they were "Needed" or not!

In an ideal world this might be the best of all worlds

Assuming it was applied intelegently!

And I guess that is a BIG assumption!

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

So we can't leave it to the LA's then. Same as speed limits really...

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus