Safe Speed Forums

I would sooner spend the money saving 24,000 old people than wasting the money on anti speed measures which wouldn't save that many lives so which is the more important? In my world it is the old people.

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

If old people are so special what about the queen mother?

She was a trooper and she never gave up. I remember one time she was visiting a school and I asked her if she would like to make a visit to the cloakroom before she left. 'No' she replied, 'I didn't give in to the Nazis and I won't give in to the bladder'. That's how she was, a fighter, who refused to be beaten by anything. She pissed herself later though, it was sickening.

and your point is??? Is it because that you have just left school/uni that you have no regard for older people?

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

Happy Noo Year people, I am off to drunkenly set off some high explosives in East London.

Stay safe.

Once again Oliver when faced with the truth does his disappearing act

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

I remember she came to visit us in the East End one time. She was so kind, so generous and so sweet. She whispered softly in my ear, 'You know its not true' she said, 'you don't smell of shit'. She was a wondrous person.

It depends on how you make the roads safer. If the roads are safer at lower or equal cost, and higher or equal satisfaction, then fine. If it costs more or satisfies less, then it's not fine. Zero tolerance is rejected because it is very dissatisfying.

Yes, have a good one, you wastrel

PS: don't forget to ask your chums if they love speed cameras.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmtran/355/7032102.htm

Seems the best safety route would be to increase the age limit for a licence to 25+

_________________
The world runs on oil, period. No other substance can compete when it comes to energy density, flexibility, ease of handling, ease of transportation. If oil didn’t exist we would have to invent it.”

56 years after it was decided it was needed, the Bedford Bypass is nearing completion. The last single carriageway length of it.We have the most photogenic mayor though, always being photographed doing nothing

Again, you sir are a liar.

Your point was to attempt to highlight some duplicitous deception on the part of SafeSpeed in the incorrect titling as a charity.

I welcome your input on road safety, but lets not be revisionist, eh.

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

I'll try again with my post.

I had drifted away some time ago, having come to the conclusion that IMO SafeSpeed was a fairly small subset of any road safety mix and therefore I found it hard to justify time here. I came back because I saw the charity bit and wondered what had changed. I was actually quite surprised at this thread. SafeSpeed is missing Paul greatly . This thread would never have happened in his time here, he would have politely discussed with oliver and I'm sure that he wouldn't have countenanced graball's aggressive and totally unnecessary approach.

However that isn't the main thing I see on my return. What I see is Claire being pushed to the front, made do be the spokesperson by dint of being Paul's partner. I'm actually very surprised that there have been virtually no press releases, and that the organisation is hardly ever mention in the media (my return here may well have been much speedier if it had been!) From my time here I remember a very vocal group of what I'd call 'senior members'; it seems astonishing to me that Paul's legacy is now some pages that haven't been updated for over a year and some rather nasty internet forum stuff. The forum is currently the only live and updated part of the site so it is the public face of SafeSpeed. Is this really how you want yourselves to be seen?

The senior members should be looking to themselves. It appears that hiding behind coat tails was your speciality.

Also, you should treat oliver and others with differing views with more respect. Currently this thread looks like a small collection of closed minds pointing at someone and shouting "He is not like us!".


There. Sorry it's not a great Nappy New Year post, but I hope it reflects adequately my astonishment at this thread.

Astonishment noted.

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

For those with blurry eyes, it does say "Nappy New Year" and it was meant to say Happy!

Gosh, I never had you down as a Londoner.

Fireworks are inherently unsafe as they contain explosives (if I've interpreted your remark correctly that explosives = fireworks. If you are in fact messing around with old hand grenades, I apologise).

One death from fireworks-related accidents is too many, so we should ban fireworks.

Obviously.



Having been rolling about in bed with a nasty cold since dinner time yesterday I've missed about eight pages of mad stuff; I guess I can't reply to all of it, so just one question:

Oliver: you believe that a blanket 20mph limit in all urban areas would save lots of lives, as so many accidents are caused by speeding.

If this measure was taken and it turned out to have very little effect on casualty rates, what conclusion would you draw, and what action would you propose next?

It's pretty much spot on this post and something i have thought for a long time. This is no longer a 'campaign' but a civil-liberty-erosion sounding board for I'd say less than 20 regular contributors. Unfortunately the road safety side died with Paul.

Oliver: you believe that a blanket 20mph limit in all urban areas would save lots of lives, as so many accidents are caused by speeding.


I've read the examples of Hull, posted upthread, and Sweden, again with evidence that backs up the claim that lower speeds save lives. the evidence is clear, research has demonstrated:

Fewer accidents with no displacement.

Fewer lives lost.

Fewer injuries.

Plus, as I said, an important side effect is that the environment is so much more pleasant. People take up cycling and walking, drivers themselves take to cycling and are therefore better placed to see how dangerous it is to pass too closely to a cyclist. There's less pollution, less congestion, and the financial benefits are considerable.

Don't take my word for it, the research is online, linked upthread..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7046200.stm

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tpm/tal ... tsandzones

http://www.livingstreets.org.uk/news_an ... php?id=361

The introduction of 20mph speed limits in residential roads should become routine, a leading public health doctor has said.

Stockport public health director Dr Stephen Watkins said a child hit at 20mph had a 5% chance of dying compared to 50% at 30mph.

He said not introducing 20mph zones was effectively "killing our children".


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7497813.stm

B Cyclist,
I'm sorry if you feel that my debating style is "agressive" but my posts are short and to the point, I was always told to call a spade a spade. I do not resort to "name calling" or endless waffle to try and bluster my way out of admiting that I have got it wrong and try and hide the fact, although if you read the whole post from the beginning, some people on there do resort to such tactics and belittlement.

I question his driving experience because as a driver of considerable experience I do see the problems that we do have on the roads on a minute by minute basis which is something that a lot of people who sit in offices all day don't.

In my opinion, speeding or excessively dangerous speed on the roads isn't that common, whereas bad driving is all too commonplace.

It is all too easy when you have a fixed viewpoint to only read what you want to read and assume that the other side are either being abusive or belittling.

I do care passionately about road safety and the detereorating standards, of both the road network and the "average british driver" and do feel strongly that this goverment is doing nothing to eradicate those problems.

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

So, graball, politely, why did you claimn only a five year old would support the Swedish initiative that, incontrovertibly, saves lives> You dismissed the idea out of hand when you finally understood the concept, you refused to say why or in what way the evidence was flawed. That to me indicates a closed mind, your unpleasant personal attacks indicate something much worse.

Apr 13, 2007
Sweden’s road safety vision catches on
by: David Wiles, editor of Sweden Today

A revolutionary way of thinking about traffic safety has helped Sweden significantly reduce the number of deaths and serious injuries on its roads. Ten years after it was introduced, the Vision Zero policy is being copied in countries around the world.

Zero tolerance for crashes
The basic idea behind the Vision Zero policy is this: serious injuries and deaths on the road should not be tolerated. Until recently, crashes and fatalities on the roads were seen as a necessary evil to be accepted in the interests of personal mobility.

Sweden has always been at the forefront of road safety – it was one of the first countries to require seatbelts for both front and rear passengers – but the results have still been astonishing. Central safety barriers have reduced head-on smashes by 80 percent, lowering speed limits in urban areas has reduced injuries to cyclists and pedestrians by 50 percent, and a new law requiring children under the age of 15 to wear helmets is expected to reduce this figure even further.