Safe Speed Forums

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/a ... ge_id=1770

20mph limit urged for urban areas

04:20am 4th May 2006

The present 30mph speed limits in urban areas should be replaced with 20mph ones, a transport conference will be told.

Teaching about the dangers of speeding should be a compulsory part of secondary school education, Mary Williams, chief executive of road safety charity Brake will say.

She will also argue for tough enforcement regimes to catch dangerous fast drivers. Ms Williams' comments will be made at a London conference about speed which is being organised by Brake.

She will say: "Getting speed limits right, without a doubt, means making them lower. It means 20mph limits, or lower, in high-risk areas where people, particularly children and older people, need to walk and cycle, for fitness and social interaction, without fear of death, in their own communities. The benefits for us all are enormous.

"The imagined inconvenience to the average, concerned driver is non-existent when weighed up against the reduced risk that that driver then poses to other road users, and consequently that driver's increased ability to spot hazards in time and their increased peace of mind and reduced stress levels. And lower speed limits do not always mean longer journey times."

Ms Williams will also say: "There must be no pandering to the pro-speed lobby. Reducing urban, village and rural limits while increasing motorway speeds would send drivers a message that is confusing and dangerous."

The conference is also due to hear about advances from Sweden on Intelligent Speed Adaptation (ISA) which can use a satellite positioning system to check the speed limit, and a computer to control a vehicle's throttle and brakes if the limit is exceeded.

Ms Williams will say that if ISA works and is implemented in Britain then speed cameras would become unnecessary.

But she will add: "There will still be an urgent need to reverse the shocking decline in traffic policing levels, and a need for a tightening up of the rules of the road relating to speeds allowable.

"Graduated Driver Licensing, requiring novice drivers to take several tests, can also be used to restrict novices to driving at low speeds, as well as restricting numbers of passengers (who they may kill) and hours at which they may drive (late at night being particularly high risk)."
========================

I'm working on a PR...

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Ahh - I've been wondering what the story was behind the tagline I heard on (Radio) Clyde 1. No mention of Brake, but the 'one-third lie' was cited and the 20MPH call reported.

With regards to ISA, the belief that sat-nav linked speed control is workable frightens the living daylights out of me. At best resolution GPS location is accurate to 3 metres (requires a clear view of the sky and a lock on multiple satellites). Most sat-nav systems compensate for inaccuracy by 'snapping to' the road nearest the position it thinks you are.

What a scary thought - your speed suddenly dropping to the 'new' 20 limit as you traverse a motorway fly-over!!!

Why is 20mph safe? Why not 10 mph - or 0 mph?

"Getting speed limits right, without a doubt, means making them lower..."

Complete rubbish.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

And yet major transport companies, who would stand to suffer a huge increase in costs, sponsor this organisation. Madness

_________________
"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

why don't they make it easier just BAN cars'n' bikes altogether from town's. I bet she doesn't even drive a car if so must be noddy's car.

_________________
born with nothing and still have most of it left

Safe Speed issued the following PR at noon today:

PR311: Blanket 20mph limits - dangerously misguided

news: for immediate release

According to the Daily Mail, a conference on 'speed' organised by Brake will
call for widespread 20mph speed limits to replace urban 30s.

Safe Speed warns that 20mph speed limits are only suitable for special places
and small areas.

* Maintaining 20mph requires too much driver attention. This is why the
Department for Transport - correctly - requires 20mph zones to be 'self
enforcing'.

* Brake is confusing safety objectives and social objectives. This is a
dangerous mistake because safety comes first. The risk is that well intentioned
policy based on social arguments will kill more people.

* We do NOT have a widespread safety problem caused by responsible motorists
driving too fast for the conditions. Crashes involving 'excessive speed' are
only about 12% of all injury crashes.

* Average impact speeds are already FAR below free travelling speeds. It is
likely that dumbed down driving will provide lower levels of attention and
planning and lead to higher average impact speeds.

* Reduced traffic speeds DO NOT give drivers more time to react. Time to react
is something that drivers routinely create for themselves with appropriate and
effective observation, anticipation and planning.

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign
(www.safespeed.org.uk) said: "Brakes proposals reveal a deeply flawed and
dangerous misunderstanding of the nature of road safety. Driving isn't a
behaviour to be controlled - it is a skill to be nurtured. We have the safest
roads in the world because we have, on average, the most skilled drivers.
Taking state control of drivers' choices is already slowly but surely
deskilling our drivers. I am certain that this is the main reason that we are
already 1,000 lives per year behind target."

"Policies like these fail to recognise the true psychological foundation of
road safety and would certainly lead to more dead people in the future."

"ISA is the worst of the lot. It will encourage people to drive at deadly
speeds trusting the technology to take responsibility. It is absurd to suggest
that a speed can be safe because it is posted at the roadside. Speeds are only
safe when aware drivers can stop comfortably within the distance that they know
to be clear. Even 20mph is a deadly speed if used without appropriate skill and
attention."

<ends>

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Spot on.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

Excellent. I really like that.



And that is a very good point.

Very good use of the political buzz-phrases too, Paul!

The difference between SafeSpeed and BRAKE! is the difference between respect and fear.

We drive with respect for our vehicles, our driving environment and our fellow travellers. The few members of BRAKE! who actually drive are filled with fear and loathing of the 'necessary evil' of travelling in their cars; consumed with political correctness, they derive no pleasure whatsoever from their vehicles and cannot see why anyone else should. I know, because I work with three of them, only one of whom actually drives (very badly).

These are sad, sad people and I pity them deeply.

_________________
Aquila



Licat volare si super tergum aquila volat...

If you can get evidence of their bad driving even better

Me too. I nicked it (with permission I think) from someone around here. To my shame, I've forgotten who.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

One of the reasons why we became ex-BRAKE members. Blanket 20 mph will not solve anything and what should be taught in our schools is road sense and polite manners.



As for ISA - well sat-nav ain't all it's cracked up to be. Speaking from experience - the sats do lose our cars from time to time so one of these gadgets potentially controlling the speed of the car is frightening - and it may not pick up on those aboslutely sudden hazards such as a child riunning out in fear of a wasp sting or dog bite. I do actually take a good look at the body behaviour when I see kids on pavements. IG's Observation advice of ages ago.

PS Paul - good PR message.

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.

Yes - frequently they get confused between roads very closely in parallel, or one above the other - such as a motorway and local road...

So either you come off a motorway, and still have 70mph available to you, or worse, you are say joining the motorway, and the "box" thinks you are still on the local road thereby limiting you to 30mph as you pull into the motorway traffic... The consequences must be obvious to any but the most extreme anti-motorist fanatic, or stupidest politician, and any belief that the technology will somehow be right is sticking the head in the sand and ignoring all evidence to the contrary.

It does not matter how good they can get ISA, it will not make the roads any safer!

Arguing about the accuracy or lack of it is pointless. ISA will foster so many bad driving habits it can only lead to an increase in casualties. The answer to that will of course be to lower the limits, and when that doesn't help.....