Safe Speed Forums

More on this here:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/ ... article.do

As usual the arguments of "at 30 you kill x% of children whereas at 20 you only kill y% are being put forward.

_________________
Brian

There's nothing to stop them putting 20 mph limits on any road - all they need is repeaters.

And presumably the existing rules on signing of 20 mph zones and limits won't be changing.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

I thought that 20 limits had to be "self enforcing"... Speed bumps, chicanes etc... Bearing in mind that a speedometer isn't IIRC required by law to indicate any speed under 25mph, how else could it be?

_________________
"Politicians are the same the world over... We build bridges where there aren't any rivers." - Nikita Kruschev

20 zones have to be self-enforcing.

You can also have 20 limits, but those need repeaters.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Um...

You're right to question that. What they actually mean is, "Britain's annual 3,100 road death toll would be cut by two-thirds to around 1,000 a year if all residential areas had 20mph limits that were genuinely enforced."

Um...

Totally agree. Just like accident rates are much lower where they enforce temporary speed limits on motorway roadworks... oh, wait...

Oh how original. Using the roll-eyes smiley when you disagree with something. And what has temporary speed limits on motorway roadworks got to do with anything? Are motorways now in residential areas?

And what would you say when it completely fails to have any effect whatsoever on the number of accidents? I suppose then at least it succeeded in proving us naysayers correct

You can laugh out loud all you want but then you and other naysayers say that "the crackdown on speeding" has been a failure in reducing the number of accidents... without having the slightest clue that there has been no such thing. I will quite happily come on here and say how wrong how I was about this but ONLY if there is genuinely rigourous enforcement. What we have at the moment, in my opinion, is pretty much as far away from that as you can get.

Portsmouth was the test area for these 20 zones and when ever you ask if it worked they say it is too early to say.... so where is this evidence

[/b]

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

How would you define "genuinely rigorous enforcement"?

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

I get the impression he thinks average speed cameras all over the entire country (y'know, complete opression of the nations people - but whatever, as long as somebody will think of the children!) making sure no one can ever possibly creep over or some such complete and utter bollocks

What percentage of our total annual road deaths currently occur in "residential" areas?

I have to say I'm extremely sceptical about this (rather bold) assertion! Are we saying that currently 66% of ALL fatalities occur in "residential" areas AND that if a 20MPH limit were imposed and enforced this would drop to ZERO? Are we saying that MORE than 66% of our total road fatalities occur in "residential" areas?

2006 fatalities:

Urban 1058 (36%) - Half on "A" roads.
Rural 1704
Motorway 164

So - a load of sh*te as usual!

_________________
Wake me up when the revolution starts
STOP the Toll Tax http://www.traveltax.org.uk

Well certainly not what we've got at the moment, that's for sure! I would say: either the police pulling over everyone who breaks the speed limit (by more than 10% plus 2mph), and because so many people break the speed limit that would mean the police enforcing the limit on at least, say, a dozen roads in any borough at the same time, at least until the local population got the idea; or, average-speed cameras covering at least 50% of the road space.

By the way, I do concede that what The Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety says seems a bit OTT.

Ta. Thought so! I really am very surprised at the PACTS! This does their credibility no good at all!

What I didn't put in the above stats was that of the 3000 fatalities, only 539 took place in roads with a 30 limit.

Oddly enough there were 15 in 20 limits.

All "residential" areas would be included in this, as well as rural areas, so we now have an absolute maximum of 17%.

291 in total were killed due to road environment (including humps/chicanes) and 310 under the influence of drink/drugs.

Wouldn't you say that "a bit OTT" should be replaced by "utter sh*te"?
This is the same sort of sensationalist lies we get with the "speed kills" brainwashing campaign - seems to have worked on you though!

_________________
Wake me up when the revolution starts
STOP the Toll Tax http://www.traveltax.org.uk

The trouble being that it is easy to quote the [correct] figures on HERE, but getting them to people who have no knowledge of accident figures is not so easy. You cannot rely on the news media, the 'papers would see no sellable story. The BBC would rather go for testicular amputation before telling the truth and both local and national government prefer lies anyway.
SPEED KILLS is an easy-to-remember phrase.