Government Could Raise Speed Limit

On Mar 15, 11:53*pm, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 15/03/2011 23:46, Phil W Lee wrote:

Seems to me that most drivers could do with some practice at keeping
the speed under 20mph. *It should be the default in built up areas
(where most pedestrians and cyclists can be expected).
It would be easily the most effective way of reducing road casualties
available, and would be virtually free to implement, if you went about
it the right way.

It's remarkable how often I find myself doing around 20mph in such
areas, just because there is so much information to process, not because
of any posted limit.


I hope I never have to follow you around in Reading town Guy. Maybe
all those bumps to your unhelmeted head has slowed your mental
processes down!

Phil Lee probably wants a 20mph urban speed limit to spite motorists
and because that is about as fast as he can pedal his bike on the
flat! Overtaking a bike in a car can take a lot longer and be a lot
more dangerous if there is not a reasonable speed differential between
the two.

"Just zis Guy, you know?" gurgled happily,
sounding much like they were saying:

Sadly Guy will not recognise that this comment is ironic. He thinks
that motorists riding fast are a massive problem (in that they may
actually be enjoying driving, which he apparently believes should be a
capital offence).

You appear to have fallen for Nuxx's repeatedly restated delusional
nonsense.

Not at all. I'm merely pointing out the strong echoes between you and
your nemesises. But thank you for proving the first sentence correct...

"BartC" gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

That means that many roads in town, which are not quite safe enough for
40mph, can have 35mph limits instead of 30mph (and getting a ticket for
36mph). And other roads can be 25mph instead of having to drop all the
way to 20.

If the road "isn't quite safe enough" for 40mph, don't DO 40mph on it.
That simple. Even if the limit is 70mph.

On 15/03/2011 23:46, Phil W Lee wrote:


Seems to me that most drivers could do with some practice at keeping
the speed under 20mph. It should be the default in built up areas
(where most pedestrians and cyclists can be expected).
It would be easily the most effective way of reducing road casualties
available, and would be virtually free to implement, if you went about
it the right way.

Seems to me that most cyclists could do with some practice in keeping
off the pacement, stopping at red lights etc.

--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
"BartC" gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

That means that many roads in town, which are not quite safe enough for
40mph, can have 35mph limits instead of 30mph (and getting a ticket for
36mph). And other roads can be 25mph instead of having to drop all the
way to 20.

If the road "isn't quite safe enough" for 40mph, don't DO 40mph on it.
That simple. Even if the limit is 70mph.

But that road will currently have a limit of 30mph.

--
Bartc

"BartC" gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

That means that many roads in town, which are not quite safe enough
for 40mph, can have 35mph limits instead of 30mph (and getting a
ticket for 36mph). And other roads can be 25mph instead of having to
drop all the way to 20.

If the road "isn't quite safe enough" for 40mph, don't DO 40mph on it.
That simple. Even if the limit is 70mph.

But that road will currently have a limit of 30mph.

Do you SERIOUSLY imagine that any local authority will ever _raise_ speed
limits in towns? Hello?

Cue every single political opponent crying "But think of the
chiiiiiildren!"

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 15/03/2011 23:15, Adrian wrote:
Sadly Guy will not recognise that this comment is ironic. He thinks that
motorists riding fast are a massive problem (in that they may actually be
enjoying driving, which he apparently believes should be a capital
offence).

You appear to have fallen for Nuxx's repeatedly restated delusional
nonsense. I had thought better of you.

You'll typically find that most posters in this uk.rec.driving group are in
favour of driving and most probably enjoy it.

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
"BartC" gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

That means that many roads in town, which are not quite safe enough for
40mph, can have 35mph limits instead of 30mph (and getting a ticket for
36mph). And other roads can be 25mph instead of having to drop all the
way to 20.

If the road "isn't quite safe enough" for 40mph, don't DO 40mph on it.
That simple. Even if the limit is 70mph.

If only the opposite were allowable - this road is perfectly safe at 90...

"BartC" wrote in message
...


"Clive George" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 14/03/2011 16:44, Jethro wrote:

Transport secretary Philip Hammond is considering raising the motorway
speed limit to 80mph in order to shorten journey times and boost the
economy.

Is it just me, or is this gesture politics of the cynical kind ?

Not just you. Nice easy way for the minister to get some positive
coverage, and he doesn't have to actually do anything - I rather doubt
he'll go ahead and do it.

Why not introduce something radical, such as speed limits that end in "5"?
(For speeds above 20mph anyway)

Most analogue speed measuring devices have solid lines at each 10 and only
small markings between the 10s.

That means that many roads in town, which are not quite safe enough for
40mph, can have 35mph limits instead of 30mph (and getting a ticket for
36mph). And other roads can be 25mph instead of having to drop all the way
to 20.

Otherwise, one can only assume that many speed limits are more-or-less
arbitrary: why exactly 40mph rather than 33, or 38? (But not 44, which has
to be rounded up to 50). While in Europe that 40mph limit would be 37mph
(60kph) or 43mph (70kph). (Having limits which are a multiple of 10kph
already allows Europe to have more finely tuned limits than we do. And if
we still used leagues, then our speed limits could only be 30mph or
60mph!)

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
"BartC" gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

That means that many roads in town, which are not quite safe enough
for 40mph, can have 35mph limits instead of 30mph (and getting a
ticket for 36mph). And other roads can be 25mph instead of having to
drop all the way to 20.

If the road "isn't quite safe enough" for 40mph, don't DO 40mph on it.
That simple. Even if the limit is 70mph.

But that road will currently have a limit of 30mph.

Do you SERIOUSLY imagine that any local authority will ever _raise_ speed
limits in towns? Hello?

Cue every single political opponent crying "But think of the
chiiiiiildren!"

The core problem really is why are the pedestrians (including children) in
the road? Cars and people shouldn't mix - there are crossings and islands to
avoid this. We need to educate the pedestrian, not the drivers - the drivers
already have to read a book, sit an exam to prove they understand the rules,
then sit a practical test before being allowed out on the road. The
pedestrians should be educated from an early age about road safety and the
use of pavements.