Let’s get this right:
Because he “
thinks” he was doing 20, all the limits everywhere must be 20?
What if he was doing 10mph and the child went under his wheel? Would he then call for the return of the ‘red flag’ act?
Would his calling for a jaywalking law be more effective in such cases?
Is a “near-fatal accident” one which results with “she and her nephew were both well … at home nursing some bruising”?
The child (and hence adult) ran out into the path of the car – was the guardian responsible? Does that child normally run into the road? How were the headlamps not seen?
Nick Foreman wrote:
The child had got out of a car in a side street and had run towards the main road; his aunt had screamed and run after him. Both had run into my path.
On what road did the collision occur: on the “side street” or on the “main road”?
If on the side street: what was his impact speed? Did he fail to anticipate or react in time? Should the door opening / door being wide open / child disembarking have given him a bit of a clue? A child doesn’t do all of those actions “ in an instant”.
If on the main road: is he really calling for blanket reductions to 20 on “main roads”?

Either way, something isn't entirely right with his argument.
Nick Foreman wrote:
a few speeding points on my licence don't seem quite so innocent. If you have any, you should also feel ashamed.
Do kids normally run out into the carriageway on a motorway? (where most of the non-compliance occurs)
Not all points are given from speed offences in built-up areas.
He should be ashamed for making such a stupid comment!
Johnnytheboy wrote:
Dorset "Safety" Camera Partnership wrote:
News article - The day I hit a child at 20mph – and realised the speed limit must be cut
Did the SCP really publish that? If so it would explain a lot....