|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Reducing speed to 20mph ‘created more deaths than injuries’ but council can’t afford to scrap them
On 18/12/2017 09:59, Bod wrote:
On 18/12/2017 09:41, Bod wrote: A council has said that 20mph zones recently introduced in its area will stay despite a rise in the number of deaths and injuries. Â*Â*Bath and North East Somerset Council spent £871,000 bringing in the 13 new speed zones just 12 months ago. Woman openly admits she loves her dog more than her only child But one year on, a report has found that the rate of people killed or seriously injured has gone up in seven out of the 13 new 20mph zones. The report, published in May 2017 by Bath and North East Somerset Council, says this is a national trend. Â*Â*The council suggests people are ‘less diligent’ when walking and crossing roads within the zones, because they think they are safer. Deputy council leader Councillor Patrick Anketell-Jones has admitted there simply isn’t the money available to reverse the 20mph zones. http://metro.co.uk/2017/12/18/reduci...8/?ito=cbshare The Council said "it would cost £800,000 to remove the signs" That's a ridiculous amount! It doesn’t surprise me. The liberals like to mollycoddle. It's obvious that when people feel safer they'll take more risks. Of course, the liberals will be thinking to lower the speed limit top 10mph, to prevent people being seriously injured or killed. I've noticed at crossings on busy roads, when people see the green man, they just cross without looking for any traffic, thinking that people that drive will always be alert and stop. I always look to see if anybody driving as seen the red traffic light. It's saved me from injuries a few times. At crossings on busy roads where there are traffic lights but not the red/green man for pedestrians, I'm always extra cautious before crossing. The best way for any person not getting run over, is for their survival instinct to be at the highest level. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Reducing speed to 20mph ‘created more deaths than injuries’ but council can’t afford to scrap them
On 18/12/2017 20:53, Woolly Jumper wrote:
On 18/12/2017 09:59, Bod wrote: On 18/12/2017 09:41, Bod wrote: A council has said that 20mph zones recently introduced in its area will stay despite a rise in the number of deaths and injuries. Â*Â*Bath and North East Somerset Council spent £871,000 bringing in the 13 new speed zones just 12 months ago. Woman openly admits she loves her dog more than her only child But one year on, a report has found that the rate of people killed or seriously injured has gone up in seven out of the 13 new 20mph zones. The report, published in May 2017 by Bath and North East Somerset Council, says this is a national trend. Â*Â*The council suggests people are ‘less diligent’ when walking and crossing roads within the zones, because they think they are safer. Deputy council leader Councillor Patrick Anketell-Jones has admitted there simply isn’t the money available to reverse the 20mph zones. http://metro.co.uk/2017/12/18/reduci...8/?ito=cbshare The Council said "it would cost £800,000 to remove the signs" That's a ridiculous amount! It doesn’t surprise me.Â* The liberals like to mollycoddle.Â* It's obvious that when people feel safer they'll take more risks.Â*Â* Of course, the liberals will be thinking to lower the speed limit top 10mph, to prevent people being seriously injured or killed. I've noticed at crossings on busy roads, when people see the green man, they just cross without looking for any traffic, thinking that people that drive will always be alert and stop. I always look to see if anybody driving as seen the red traffic light.Â* It's saved me from injuries a few times. At crossings on busy roads where there are traffic lights but not the red/green man for pedestrians, I'm always extra cautious before crossing. The best way for any person not getting run over, is for their survival instinct to be at the highest level. Except for cyclists, they rely on everyone else for their safety and take no responsibility at all. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Reducing speed to 20mph ‘created more deaths than injuries’ but council can’t afford to scrap them
On 18/12/2017 20:53, Woolly Jumper wrote:
On 18/12/2017 09:59, Bod wrote: On 18/12/2017 09:41, Bod wrote: A council has said that 20mph zones recently introduced in its area will stay despite a rise in the number of deaths and injuries. Â*Â*Bath and North East Somerset Council spent £871,000 bringing in the 13 new speed zones just 12 months ago. Woman openly admits she loves her dog more than her only child But one year on, a report has found that the rate of people killed or seriously injured has gone up in seven out of the 13 new 20mph zones. The report, published in May 2017 by Bath and North East Somerset Council, says this is a national trend. Â*Â*The council suggests people are ‘less diligent’ when walking and crossing roads within the zones, because they think they are safer. Deputy council leader Councillor Patrick Anketell-Jones has admitted there simply isn’t the money available to reverse the 20mph zones. http://metro.co.uk/2017/12/18/reduci...8/?ito=cbshare The Council said "it would cost £800,000 to remove the signs" That's a ridiculous amount! It doesn’t surprise me.Â* The liberals like to mollycoddle.Â* It's obvious that when people feel safer they'll take more risks.Â*Â* Of course, the liberals will be thinking to lower the speed limit top 10mph, to prevent people being seriously injured or killed. I've noticed at crossings on busy roads, when people see the green man, they just cross without looking for any traffic, thinking that people that drive will always be alert and stop. I always look to see if anybody driving as seen the red traffic light.Â* It's saved me from injuries a few times. At crossings on busy roads where there are traffic lights but not the red/green man for pedestrians, I'm always extra cautious before crossing. The best way for any person not getting run over, is for their survival instinct to be at the highest level. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus Agreed, I do the same....*never assume*. -- Bod |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Reducing speed to 20mph 'created more deaths than injuries' but council can't afford to scrap them
MrCheerful wrote:
On 18/12/2017 20:53, Woolly Jumper wrote: On 18/12/2017 09:59, Bod wrote: On 18/12/2017 09:41, Bod wrote: A council has said that 20mph zones recently introduced in its area will stay despite a rise in the number of deaths and injuries. Bath and North East Somerset Council spent £871,000 bringing in the 13 new speed zones just 12 months ago. Woman openly admits she loves her dog more than her only child But one year on, a report has found that the rate of people killed or seriously injured has gone up in seven out of the 13 new 20mph zones. The report, published in May 2017 by Bath and North East Somerset Council, says this is a national trend. The council suggests people are 'less diligent' when walking and crossing roads within the zones, because they think they are safer. Deputy council leader Councillor Patrick Anketell-Jones has admitted there simply isn't the money available to reverse the 20mph zones. http://metro.co.uk/2017/12/18/reduci...8/?ito=cbshare The Council said "it would cost £800,000 to remove the signs" That's a ridiculous amount! It doesn't surprise me. The liberals like to mollycoddle. It's obvious that when people feel safer they'll take more risks. Of course, the liberals will be thinking to lower the speed limit top 10mph, to prevent people being seriously injured or killed. I've noticed at crossings on busy roads, when people see the green man, they just cross without looking for any traffic, thinking that people that drive will always be alert and stop. I always look to see if anybody driving as seen the red traffic light. It's saved me from injuries a few times. At crossings on busy roads where there are traffic lights but not the red/green man for pedestrians, I'm always extra cautious before crossing. The best way for any person not getting run over, is for their survival instinct to be at the highest level. Except for cyclists, they rely on everyone else for their safety and take no responsibility at all. They rely on everything and everybody. This is known as sponging. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Reducing speed to 20mph created more deaths than injuries
Brian Reay posted
On 18/12/2017 09:59, Bod wrote: On 18/12/2017 09:41, Bod wrote: A council has said that 20mph zones recently introduced in its area will stay despite a rise in the number of deaths and injuries. Â*Â*Bath and North East Somerset Council spent £871,000 bringing in the 13 new speed zones just 12 months ago. Woman openly admits she loves her dog more than her only child But one year on, a report has found that the rate of people killed or seriously injured has gone up in seven out of the 13 new 20mph zones. The report, published in May 2017 by Bath and North East Somerset Council, says this is a national trend. What a pity the report doesn't cite the actual numbers of accidents. Perhaps they are so insignificant that no inferences can be drawn. Perhaps in the wards where accidents increased, they increased by only one each, while in the ward where they decreased, they decreased by 10 each. Perhaps the annual variations in accident numbers were large *before* the 20mph limits were introduced, perhaps much larger than the variations after introduction. Which would suggest that several more years of data are needed. Â*Â*The council suggests people are ‘less diligent’ when walking and crossing roads within the zones, because they think they are safer. Deputy council leader Councillor Patrick Anketell-Jones has admitted there simply isn’t the money available to reverse the 20mph zones. http://metro.co.uk/2017/12/18/reduci...ed-deaths-inju ries-council-cant-afford-scrap-7167628/?ito=cbshare -- Jack |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Reducing speed to 20mph ‘created more deaths than injuries’ but council can’t afford to scrap them
On 18/12/2017 23:38, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 20:53:10 -0000, Woolly Jumper wrote: On 18/12/2017 09:59, Bod wrote: On 18/12/2017 09:41, Bod wrote: A council has said that 20mph zones recently introduced in its area will stay despite a rise in the number of deaths and injuries. Â* Bath and North East Somerset Council spent £871,000 bringing in the 13 new speed zones just 12 months ago. Woman openly admits she loves her dog more than her only child But one year on, a report has found that the rate of people killed or seriously injured has gone up in seven out of the 13 new 20mph zones. The report, published in May 2017 by Bath and North East Somerset Council, says this is a national trend. Â* The council suggests people are ‘less diligent’ when walking and crossing roads within the zones, because they think they are safer. Deputy council leader Councillor Patrick Anketell-Jones has admitted there simply isn’t the money available to reverse the 20mph zones. http://metro.co.uk/2017/12/18/reduci...8/?ito=cbshare The Council said "it would cost £800,000 to remove the signs" That's a ridiculous amount! It doesn’t surprise me.Â* The liberals like to mollycoddle.Â* It's obvious that when people feel safer they'll take more risks.Â*Â* Of course, the liberals will be thinking to lower the speed limit top 10mph, to prevent people being seriously injured or killed. I've noticed at crossings on busy roads, when people see the green man, they just cross without looking for any traffic, thinking that people that drive will always be alert and stop. I always look to see if anybody driving as seen the red traffic light.Â* It's saved me from injuries a few times. At crossings on busy roads where there are traffic lights but not the red/green man for pedestrians, I'm always extra cautious before crossing. The best way for any person not getting run over, is for their survival instinct to be at the highest level. At lights?!Â* Round here they just walk blindly across at any point on the road then are surprised when they hear my horn. LOL --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Reducing speed to 20mph created more deaths than injuries
On 19/12/17 09:25, Handsome Jack wrote:
Brian Reay posted On 18/12/2017 09:59, Bod wrote: On 18/12/2017 09:41, Bod wrote: A council has said that 20mph zones recently introduced in its area will stay despite a rise in the number of deaths and injuries. Â*Â*Bath and North East Somerset Council spent £871,000 bringing in theÂ* 13 new speed zones just 12 months ago. Woman openly admits she lovesÂ* her dog more than her only child But one year on, a report has foundÂ* that the rate of people killed or seriously injured has gone up inÂ* seven out of the 13 new 20mph zones. The report, published in May 2017Â* by Bath and North East Somerset Council, says this is a national trend. What a pity the report doesn't cite the actual numbers of accidents. Perhaps they are so insignificant that no inferences can be drawn. Perhaps in the wards where accidents increased, they increased by only one each, while in the ward where they decreased, they decreased by 10 each. Perhaps the annual variations in accident numbers were large *before* the 20mph limits were introduced, perhaps much larger than the variations after introduction. Which would suggest that several more years of data are needed. Quite. If the death rate was so high that it is possible to notice a change just one year after the alterations, it seems that they had a much bigger problem to solve than putting in 20 limits. Even if they can find something statistically significant after just a year, perhaps it is because it takes time for people to adjust to the changes. For instance, perhaps they find their old crossing points are no longer convenient or optimum and they have to find new ones. But is 20mph the only change that has been introduced? How about changes outside the zones that have moved traffic into them? Light controlled crossings, perhaps? - these encourage risk taking amongst people that don't want to stand and wait. But if the changes make people *feel* safer to be out and about, then in one respect, it must be considered a success. Residential roads that feel intimidating can't be a valid safety measure. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Reducing speed to 20mph ‘created more deaths than injuries’ but council can’t afford to scrap them
On 18/12/2017 17:36, Nightjar wrote:
They are talking of 20mph zones. A 20mph speed limit can be reversed simply by issuing the necessary traffic order and removing the signs. A 20mph zone has to be designed to be self-enforcing, which means lots of traffic calming measures. It doesn't have to be: all of the recent 20mph zones in Lancashire just have new signs on poles. Those would also need to be removed and the roads restored to their former condition to reverse a 20mph zone. ... and some stretches of roads reverted to 30mph after the locals complained. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Reducing speed to 20mph ?created more deaths than injuries? but council can?t afford to scrap them
On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 18:22:23 +0000, Nick Finnigan
wrote: On 18/12/2017 17:36, Nightjar wrote: They are talking of 20mph zones. A 20mph speed limit can be reversed simply by issuing the necessary traffic order and removing the signs. A 20mph zone has to be designed to be self-enforcing, which means lots of traffic calming measures. It doesn't have to be: all of the recent 20mph zones in Lancashire just have new signs on poles. Where I live we have loads of 20MPH zones and it too has just been done with signs and some road markings. Those would also need to be removed and the roads restored to their former condition to reverse a 20mph zone. ... and some stretches of roads reverted to 30mph after the locals complained. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Reducing speed to 20mph ‘created more deaths
On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 18:22:23 +0000
Nick Finnigan wrote: On 18/12/2017 17:36, Nightjar wrote: They are talking of 20mph zones. A 20mph speed limit can be reversed simply by issuing the necessary traffic order and removing the signs. A 20mph zone has to be designed to be self-enforcing, which means lots of traffic calming measures. It doesn't have to be: all of the recent 20mph zones in Lancashire just have new signs on poles. Those would also need to be removed and the roads restored to their former condition to reverse a 20mph zone. ... and some stretches of roads reverted to 30mph after the locals complained. I doubt anyone expects cars to stick to 20 anyway. I imagine the thinking behind it is that at 30 cars do anything up to 40 so put 20 signs up and they'll do 25-30 which is acceptable. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
20mph speed limits | Bertie Wooster | UK | 82 | January 2nd 12 12:31 AM |
CTC Supports Reducing Speed Limits to Discourage Motoring | Nuxx Bar[_3_] | UK | 0 | July 19th 11 10:39 AM |
20mph speed limits | Tom Crispin[_4_] | UK | 19 | September 19th 10 10:14 AM |
Reducing Fuel use and Increasing your car speed with FFI MPG-CAPS | sexy girl | Social Issues | 0 | February 23rd 08 05:44 AM |
No safety benefit in reducing CBD speed limit to 40km/h | Russell Lang | Australia | 11 | July 24th 06 06:22 AM |