Safe Speed Forums

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/d ... 612262.pdf

I have to pull this to bits asap. Any comments appreciated.

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

IIRC 20mph limits are unenforceable as speedos do not have to register an accurate speed under 25mph?

[edited to add]

ah yes, found it: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2001/20010025.htm#sch3



actually I'm not sure if this backs up my argument or disproves it?

_________________
COAST Not just somewhere to keep a beach.

A young loner on a crusade to champion the cause of the innocent, the helpless, the powerless, in a world of criminals who operate above the law.

Where is the EVIDENCE that any of these reduced limits will work

_________________
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

page 13: states that 20limits need approval from the secretary of state, I thought that had been passed down to HA's

_________________
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

page 32 "Quiet lanes statutory instrument" All this has been drawn up in secret without consultation
well first I have heard of it! but then I found it here... &... found sign here

_________________
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

On page 11, point 35 it states:



A couple of things with that quote. Firstly, what evidence? Secondly, how does a lower speed limit suddenly mean that we're all going to be driving at a constant speed? Infact introducing limits on certain parts of roads as they're proposing is going to cause people to slow down thus resulting in speeds that are not constant.

I don't see the problem with this document, at all. Looks like common sense (for once).

Paragraph 36 re changing from using 85th percentile to mean speeds:


One interesting point is that the document accepts that where correct speed limit signs are not present, no offence of speeding is committed - people are not "getting off on a technicality":


One particular concern is that by applying a speed assessment framework that looks at casualty rates, we will end up with inconsistent limits on rural roads as roads of similar physical characteristics may well have different accident rates.

It also says "Lower speeds benefit all urban road users". Er, how do they work that out?

_________________
"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

Because if a cyclist rides across your path or a pedestrian jumps out from behind a car, if you hit them at a lower speed, you're going to do them less damage than the brigade who make you fear for your life as they pass you with inches to spare at 40mph.

I've already given quotes to the Mail and the Express and issued the following PR at 17:29 this afternoon:

PR341: New speed limit advice: flawed and deadly

news: for immediate release

Initial reaction.

Department for Transport has released today their guidance for setting local
speed limits. Safe Speed called the guidance 'flawed and deadly' because it is
founded on bad science and tends to de skill driving.

* Basing speed limits on average traffic speeds as suggested in the new advice
tends to put around half of all drivers outside the law.

* At the foundation of the new guidance is the idea that reducing speed by 1mph
leads to 5% fewer crashes. The science employed is just plain wrong and the
claimed speed accident relationship does not exist.

* Reduced speed limits, where they are unnecessary, de skill driving, and if
our drivers employ less skill, more of us will die on the roads.

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign
(www.safespeed.org.uk) said: "The new guidance is based on faulty foundations
and will ultimately cause road deaths to increase. If we want safer roads we
must look at the psychological factors that underlie crashes. By tending to de
skill driving these proposals will make road safety worse."

"Department for Transport is clearly blinded by its own 'speed kills'
propaganda and is not fit for purpose. It does not understand the process of
safe driving and as such is not competent to devise road safety policy."

<ends>

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

But surely that is covered by "travelling at or below 30 mph in areas with restricted visibility and many pedestrians and cyclists benefits all road users".

If traffic is already travelling at or below 30 mph, will lower speeds still benefit all road users? What about 29 mph?

It's a demonstrably nonsensical blanket statement.

_________________
"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

My my current car (Passat TDI auto), will not change into 3rd gear until about 22 mph.

So, given this means higher RPM for less distance travelled, I don't get how reducing a limit to 20 from 30 (for example), will result in less C02 emissions and quieter roads.

Or am I just missing something ?

It's not really nonsense. Lower speeds generally generate a much nicer environment. Particularly in cities and town centres, which they are talking about.

Again, tonight when driving at a reasonable speed between 20-30 indicated on a 30 limit (slower past parked cars on one side, and approaching traffic on the other, children playing on bicycles on the pavement) yet again I get a numpty in a Vectra tailgating me having bombed it up behind me which took up more of my attention than I wanted to give in the situation.

They're all over the place, and they're not "reasonable people obeying the spirit of the law" - they're dangerous idiots who don't give a toss. That's why we need to make people drive slower and less aggressively.

We state we want more people to drive to IAM standards/RoSPA, etc. What happens if you exceed the speed limit when taking an assessment for these accreditations? You fail.

He was probably trying to drive at exactly 30mph. Seriously. There are millions of them now - and it's getting much worse.

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

... and won't take a blind bit of notice of any newly changed limits thereby rendering them pointless.

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

so does that mean you now accept my claim that the majority of people are attempting to drive down my "narrow street with parked cars either side" at 30mph?

Was that the claim? I remember it as something like 'the majority drive like nutters'. I don't have time to dig it out right now.

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

well that's the fine print. What I said was that most people seem to be attempting to drive down quiet, narrow, low visibility residential roads (in my area) at 30mph.

No, you're completely missing the point. If existing speeds are irresponsible or dangerous, then lower speeds may benefit all road users. If existing speeds are already appropriate, then lowering them will bring an overall disbenefit. To make a blanket statement, without qualification, that "lower speeds benefit all urban road users" is 100% unmitigated cack.

If existing speeds are 2 mph, will people benefit from reducing them to 1 mph? Of course they won't.

In fact, I would have said that so long as it can be achieved without compromising safety and producing unacceptable noise levels, higher vehicle speeds would benefit all urban road users by allowing journeys to be completed more quickly.

_________________
"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

Hmm, anti-car traffic light policy in Southampton means that average speeds are low, but I wouldn't say that a queue of idling cars creates a nice environment, or maybe they are talking about the centre of traffic light junctions which are all too often empty thanks to excessively long intergreens.