20mph limits coming

I don't read the dreadful rag, honest! I nicked this from the Cambridge
Cycling Campaign list. There is the usual gnashing of teeth in the
comments section

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/8506/20+MPH+Britain


20 MPH BRITAIN

Friday June 1,2007
By Jo Macfarlane

BRITAIN’S towns and cities face the introduction of an “impractical�
20mph speed limit for all vehicles, it emerged last night.

The drastic new restrictions on urban Â*driving could be imposed by all
councils across the country in a matter of months.

Portsmouth today becomes the first city in Britain to introduce the
tough new measures. And campaigners say it is only a matter of time
before the 20mph limit is rolled out across the nation.

Experts claim the imposed go-slow will help to save lives and protect
pedestrians and cyclists. But furious critics yesterday branded the move
as an escalation in the bitter war against Britain’s motorists. It was
even claimed that the new limit could increase the number of accidents.

Paul Smith, from campaign group Safe Speed, said: “It’s a knee-jerk
reaction and an ill-founded one. If you get to the point where a speed
limit feels unnatural, it affects a driver’s attention.

“It could be quite marked and it could be quite dangerous – we just
don’t know.�

The Government has given all local authorities the power to cut
residential speed limits to 20mph, and Liberal DemoÂ*crat-run Portsmouth
City CounÂ*cil became the first to take up the offer.

The £475,000 scheme was launched in the south-east of the city today,
with other residential roads to follow by the end of the year.

The new limit will eventually affect 187 miles of roads within the city.

Coun Alex Bentley, executive member for traffic and transportation,
said: “This is a bold step for a council to take but it’s a vital safety
measure and we make no apology for bringing it in.

“Portsmouth is a crowded city and on most of our residential streets
it’s not safe to drive at more than 20mph.

“Twenty is plenty. A pedestrian hit by a car travelling at 20mph is
likely to suffer slight injuries but at 30mph they are likely to be
severely hurt. At 40mph or above they are likely to be killed. I’m sure
this scheme will save lives.�

But even council officials admit the move is “controversial� and there
has been huge opposition.

Hugh Bladon, from the Association of British Drivers, said: “The council
has gone completely bananas.

“This is absolutely unenforceable, impossible and impractical and will
bring all speed limits into disrepute.

“This war that is being waged against the nation’s motorists has got to
stop.�

Coun Jason Fazackarley, Portsmouth’s Labour council spokesman on traffic
and the environment, said he expected the decision to cause congestion
problems, particularly at rush hour.

He added: “In principle, I agree with the concept for road safety
reasons but I am sceptical about how it will work and I am cynical about
how it can be enforced.

“We are the first authority to go this far so I suspect other cities
will watch what happens with interest.�

Critics also point out that a 20mph limit is unnecessary in many urban
centres where traffic already travels very slowly.

In Portsmouth the average speed on residential roads is only 24mph,
while in London the average is just 10mph – the same speed as
horse-drawn carriages a century ago.

But several road safety groups welcomed the 20mph limit. Dianne
Ferreira, of road safety charity Brake, said: “It’s absolutely fantastic
news. We’d like to see this rolled out across the country.

“Implementing this limit will save lives, and drivers will need to
respect it for that reason.�

A spokeswoman for the Royal Society for the PreÂ*vention of Accidents
said: “A reduction to 20mph could reduce the accident rate by 74 per cent.�

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

Tony Raven wrote:
Paul Smith, from campaign group Safe Speed, said: “It’s a knee-jerk
reaction and an ill-founded one. If you get to the point where a speed
limit feels unnatural, it affects a driver’s attention.

but

Critics also point out that a 20mph limit is unnecessary in many urban
centres where traffic already travels very slowly.

In Portsmouth the average speed on residential roads is only 24mph,

So we're to believe that the limit is dangerous because it will make
people drive too slowly, at the same time as being unneeded because they
drive nearly that slowly already. So why, then, is it not dangerous
until a law is introduced to make it a requirement?

I suspect that the morons who can't pay attention to their surroundings
at 20 mph are the same ones who'd be unsafe at any speed (change down a
gear, open a window, it really isn't hard) but that's just a hypothesis.
There's nothing "natural" about travelling more than about 12mph:
everything else is learned and can therefore be unlearned.


-dan

"Tony Raven" wrote in message
...

Paul Smith, from campaign group Safe Speed, said: “It’s a knee-jerk
reaction and an ill-founded one. If you get to the point where a speed
limit feels unnatural, it affects a driver’s attention.

“It could be quite marked and it could be quite dangerous – we just
don’t know.�


Why does this berk get so much press coverage? He's even in our local rag
saying that speed cameras that *don't" flash make speeding drivers more
uncertain and uncertain drivers are unsafe drivers.
Jeez.

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net

Tony Raven wrote:

I don't read the dreadful rag, honest! I nicked this from the Cambridge
Cycling Campaign list. There is the usual gnashing of teeth in the
comments section

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/8506/20+MPH+Britain


20 MPH BRITAIN

Friday June 1,2007
By Jo Macfarlane

snip

The Government has given all local authorities the power to cut
residential speed limits to 20mph, and Liberal Demo?crat-run Portsmouth
City Coun?cil became the first to take up the offer.

snip

Hugh Bladon, from the Association of British Drivers, said: "The council
has gone completely bananas.

"This is absolutely unenforceable, impossible and impractical and will
bring all speed limits into disrepute.

Impractical? When I drove a manual, it was easy: second gear for speeds
up to 20 mph, third for speeds up to 30. Fourth for speeds over 30.

Now I drive an automatic, it's a little harder but I seem to manage in
the many 20 mph zones around here.

I think Hugh Bladon meant to say, "My organisation brings all drivers
into disrepute."

Cheers,
Luke

--
Lincoln City 0-2 Southend United (AET)
Swansea City 2-2 Southend United
We went up twice with Tilly and Brush

On 2007-06-01, Daniel Barlow wrote:
Tony Raven wrote:
Paul Smith, from campaign group Safe Speed, said: ?It?s a knee-jerk
reaction and an ill-founded one. If you get to the point where a speed
limit feels unnatural, it affects a driver?s attention.

but

Critics also point out that a 20mph limit is unnecessary in many urban
centres where traffic already travels very slowly.

In Portsmouth the average speed on residential roads is only 24mph,

So we're to believe that the limit is dangerous because it will make
people drive too slowly, at the same time as being unneeded because they
drive nearly that slowly already. So why, then, is it not dangerous
until a law is introduced to make it a requirement?

I suspect that the morons who can't pay attention to their surroundings
at 20 mph are the same ones who'd be unsafe at any speed (change down a
gear, open a window, it really isn't hard) but that's just a hypothesis.
There's nothing "natural" about travelling more than about 12mph:
everything else is learned and can therefore be unlearned.

They made what I think is a good point in that article, which is that
20mph limits will erode respect for speed limits generally.

It's foolish to make laws that significant numbers of people will think
are silly. They will just break them, unless you enforce them like mad,
and excessive enforcement is not appropriate in a civilized country.

I already respect speed limits much less than I used to. It's getting to
the point where one just ignores most of the road furniture except the
cameras.

Ben C wrote:

On 2007-06-01, Daniel Barlow wrote:

I suspect that the morons who can't pay attention to their surroundings
at 20 mph are the same ones who'd be unsafe at any speed (change down a
gear, open a window, it really isn't hard) but that's just a hypothesis.
There's nothing "natural" about travelling more than about 12mph:
everything else is learned and can therefore be unlearned.

They made what I think is a good point in that article, which is that
20mph limits will erode respect for speed limits generally.

Why? It's easy to drive at 20 mph and quite appropriate for drivers to
travel slowly down residential streets.

Cheers,
Luke


--
Red Rose Ramblings, the diary of an Essex boy in
exile in Lancashire http://www.shrimper.org.uk

Ekul Namsob wrote:
Ben C wrote:

On 2007-06-01, Daniel Barlow wrote:

I suspect that the morons who can't pay attention to their surroundings
at 20 mph are the same ones who'd be unsafe at any speed (change down a
gear, open a window, it really isn't hard) but that's just a hypothesis.
There's nothing "natural" about travelling more than about 12mph:
everything else is learned and can therefore be unlearned.
They made what I think is a good point in that article, which is that
20mph limits will erode respect for speed limits generally.

Why? It's easy to drive at 20 mph and quite appropriate for drivers to
travel slowly down residential streets.

Maybe, but that isn't what'll happen. 20 mph limits are like cycle
farcilities in that they allow some council jobsworth to tick a box
marked 'job done, budget spent' while making sod all difference really.

Ben C wrote:
They made what I think is a good point in that article, which is that
20mph limits will erode respect for speed limits generally.

There's already very little. For me, the question is, how can we best
achieve a reduction in actual driving speeds? The imposition of 20mph
limits tends to produce a reduction, but not to anything like 20.

It's foolish to make laws that significant numbers of people will think
are silly. They will just break them, unless you enforce them like mad,
and excessive enforcement is not appropriate in a civilized country.

Is it better to achieve speeds in the late 20s by setting a limit of
20 and not enforcing it, or by setting a limit of 30 and enforcing it
strictly? Which will bring the law into less disrepute?

I wish more drivers understood that the best way to reduce the
pressure for 20mph speed limits and traffic calming would be to obey
30mph speed limits.

Lower actual speeds are a high priority. They make crossing the road
easier, and reduce noise, pollution, and unsafe overtaking of
cyclists. Hence they tend to promote sustainable transport.

I already respect speed limits much less than I used to. It's getting to
the point where one just ignores most of the road furniture except the
cameras.

Hide the cameras!

Colin McKenzie


--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at
the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as
walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.

"Colin McKenzie" wrote in message
...

Lower actual speeds are a high priority. They make crossing the road
easier, and reduce noise, pollution, and unsafe overtaking of cyclists.
Hence they tend to promote sustainable transport.

I'm not so sure about the safer overtaking - My daily commute has a half
mile long 20mph section and vehichles tend to hover about alongside me when
overtaking rather than passing normally like in a 30. Traffic seems to
average 25-30mph as when my (calibrated) speedo reads 20-25 vehicles seem to
pass doing about 5mph more than me (at a guess). This is a long straight
section with few junctions so I'm not sure why the 20 limit was put there.

Ben C wrote:

It's foolish to make laws that significant numbers of people will think
are silly. They will just break them, unless you enforce them like mad,
and excessive enforcement is not appropriate in a civilized country.

We already have plenty of laws like that. The law hasn't stopped
millions of folk smoking pot or sharing copyrighted stuff over the
internet. Whether most drivers will actually obey a 20mph limit won't
figure in any local authorities decision to introduce one.