How (s)low can you get?

[chrisn7]

I too have sympathy with The Plotters point of view. This issue of reducing speed limits to reduce accidents is the same one as used to introduce additional speed cameras.

Whilst speeds are above walking pace then there will be accidents. Unfortunately out highways 'engineers' don't seem to heard about the law of diminshing returns, which is why these things keep getting foisted upon us.

Locally, a road had humps and a mini roundabout introduced at a T junction. The justification? Apparantly this stretch of road had seen 13 accidents in 5 years. OK, so 2.6 accidents per year- sounds bad- but how many journeys had taken place? I would suggest that the accident per journey % is already very low indeed, and therefore tinkering about is only likely to have a miniscule (if any) effect.

Yes, all types of motorist and pedestrians have responsibility to each other, but the highways people also have to curb their desire to festoon the place with unnecessary signs, street furniture and inappropriate restrictions.

 

[Steven_374224300]

As a child (one of 5) living on a main road in the 1960's, I asked my mother if any children were ever injured, hurt, involved in a accident with a motor vehicle, as far as she remembered, it never happened.

That was back in the days when the main road was as busy then, as most small thoroughfares are now.

Motor vehicles had a stopping distance of a couple of miles, but took half a day to reach speeds that modern vehicles achieve is less than 10 seconds.

The difference back then? Parents watched out for their children and taught them basic commonsense. Children were educated about road safety (Tufty just one example).

They did not rely on the nanny state that we have today.

How many times do you see youths of today, sauntering across the road as though tomorrow will do? It's not surprising that the younger children take notice of this and think, that's the way to cross the road.

As an example, a friend of mine was involved in a RTC with a young asian girl of around 8 years old.

She stopped at a pelican crossing and pressed the button. Without waiting until the bleeps sounded, just stepped out into the road. Lucky for her, my friend had seen the young girl, on her own and had slowed down. She suffered a graze to a knee.

She was clearly not educated in the use of a crossing of that nature, why not?

I was taught at school how to use a zebra crossing ( no pelican crossings in my childhood days).

If you can't rely on the schools to teach such matters, then what about the parents?

Oh I forgot, the nanny state teaches us everything these days!!!!

 

[ThePlotter]

Steven,well said you have put into words exactly my point.If you have someone working in a sawmill and he cuts his fingers of you don't ban bandsaws you address the cause,and train the person to behave differently.A little obscure I know but true never the less.

 

[RiaandJames_374303418]

On my way home yesterday, I witnessed a gaggle of unruly children exiting from their faith schools religeous lessons.

Any driver that had come along the road could have killed numerous children as they pushed and barged one another and ran pat one another in the busy road.

2O mph is far to slow, don't go playing with the traffic and you'll live longer I was taught as a family friends daughter was killed when she tried to run across a road following her young brother who was on his bike.It still applies now 40 some years later.

20mph is just another nanny state measure.

Ria

 

[ThePlotter]

Not quite sure of the relvence of 'faith school religious lessons'but you know I agree,there may be an argument that a speed limit of 20mph might make pedestrians fel they can take chances because cars are going slow.

 

[RiaandJames_374303418]

It just seemed strange to see children that had been for religeous tuition rampaging along pavement and road with no care for safety and themselves or others around them!

The only thing that may have saved them from a vehicle on the side of the road they were on may have been a man walking in front ot it with a flag.

Now that would be progress

Ria

 

[ThePlotter]

Thats the question would the man with a flag be progress or a retrograde step,answers on a postcard to The Plotter......

 

[Garfield]

For the side streets and quiet cul de sacs where children often play in the road, I support the 20 mph limit but not for any thoroghfare, residential or not, in reality, few sane people travel at more than 20 along these roads anyway.

 

[RiaandJames_374303418]

Children should not be playing on roads and pavements in any kind of road or cul de sac in the first place!

As children with a a front door that opened onto the street we were never ever able to play outside our door. Playing out was in the back yard ar at a local park in days long before 24/7 kids TV and the video age.

Ria

 

[IanP1]

The comment about children not playing on the roads and pavements, well im sure during your years of growing up as a child rita you must have played with your friends at some time or other on the pavement either outside your home or theirs, how else would you get to and from each others houses. Now I know your going to say that isnt playing but im sure you used to race back to see who got there first that is playing. Main roads no i dont agree with the speed reductions but for other areas im sorry i do agree with them.

Ok your saying people will take a risk if they want to cross the road but if the car is driving at 20 mph ( or should be how many stick to the 20mph not many) they have more chance of stopping in time before serious injury is done or even better avoided. Children that are of an age that are sensible have to learn to be aware of the roads and the dangers. But we do have an awful lot more drivers on the road that just dont care what speed they do on the quieter roads, im not saying any of you are those drivers but you know they are there.

Some people may not live near local parks or recreation gronds some people dont have a garden to play in. what do we do keep the kids locked up and not let them grow up. My children have not been going out long but they are street wise and very observent regarding road safety, accidents can still happen though I know that.

As drivers we have to be on our toes all the time when out in the car, we are driving a potential lethel weapon that can kill, so why not just slow down in those areas, they have had speed reductions put in place for a reason, if it be a rat run or an area where there is a lot of children it is not just to anoy drivers it is for safety.

 

[ThePlotter]

Who is Rita? )

I stand by my point that education of the pedestrian should be the priority not reduction in speed limits,the solution as I have put b4 if they will not see sense is make all sides roads pedestrianised that way they will be safe and nobody needs to take responsiblity for either themselves or teaching others.

If this was to happen then maybe we could increase the speed limit on all other roads as there is unlikely to be any pedestrians around.

 

[chrisn7]

Ian

The thing is here that you write as a person who would drive sensibly and be generally law-abiding. When you say "drivers...just don't care" etc, this is the nub of the matter, as it doesn't matter what speed restriction or law you have, some people will always flout it. Its just the same with drink driving and mobile phones. In effect reducing a speed limit affects those who already drive sensibly and the severity of accidents will remain pretty much the same as they still involve the idiots...

 

[ThePlotter]

chris,you make a good point if drivers drove properly with proper observation and anticipation then even if somebody walks into the road without warning in virtually every case an impact will not happen,so somewhat naively if both drivers and pedestrians acted responsibly and were trained correctly accidents(no such thing)would be reduced drastically irrespective of the speed limit.As an ADI trainee that is my present view.

 

[Surfer]

Any weapon only becomes lethal when there are uneducated people involved. Until then it is totally harmless. People need education regarding road safety. How often have you come across people waking down a lane with their backs to the traffic. This type of person is a total numbskull and deserves to get knock down and the same applies in other circumstances. At the end of the day we can all agree to disagree but what is far more important is that children and adults are educated regarding road safety using their own common sense!

 

[ProfAlGoogle]

Man has walked the earth for millions of years, long before the arrival of the motor car, but all of a sudden the car is "King" but do not forget each and every one of us is a pedestrian, and who is that important that they must get every where at break neck speed? Certainly not me, I have witnessed to many times in my life the consequences of excessive speed, and had a couple of very near misses myself as a child, once on a bike, and once crossing the road on my way home from school. But forget about children for a moment and let's cast our thoughts towards the elderly, who are often confused, suffer from partial sight, hearing no where as good as it used to be, and the last thing they need to be confronted with as they cross the road in a residential area, yes residential, is a car taking a short cut down through a rat run, with the only thing on the drivers mind is to get a least two or three cars in front of the traffic he deviated from, and to achieve that goal he will go like a bat out of hell. Where has all the compassion gone in life? Does it really mater that you will arrive at your destination that bit latter? And if it is that important we could all try leaving that bit earlier. I have only ever attended a coroners court once in my life, as a witness and the look of grief on the family of a man who was knocked of his motorcycle & killed whilst on his way to work will haunt me forever, and if I can avert an accident by driving that bit slower then I am all in favour of that, every thing these days goes far to quickly, including life itself.

Allan & Gill.

 

[ThePlotter]

As I said best turn all roads into pedestrian areas and then we go back in time and use horse drawn carriages etc.30mph is hardly a break neck speed and kills or injures nobody if they learn to be responsible for their own safety and not expect others to do it for them.

 

[ProfAlGoogle]

"As I said best turn all roads into pedestrian areas" That's the best idea you have come up with so far, I think enough views have been exchanged on this subject, and any further comments will only degrade the topic even further, besides which you are intrinsically wrong, so there is absolutely no point in proceeding any further with your childish argument.

Allan & Gill.

 

[ThePlotter]

dummy out of pram nothing like seeing other peoples point of view you should be a politician.

 

[markemall]

Just thought you might like to know, Cambourne in Cambridgeshire has a speed limit of 19, yes 19 mph throughout and has had this since the place was built. (Its a new town, well newish now )

 

[chrisn7]

Alan & Gill I'm afraid you can't dismiss a perfectly valid point of view such as The Plotters in this way. You seem to be amongst the misguided people who believe that as soon as a law or regulation is introducd then everything will be be solved. Well it won't. Far from reducing accidents, it is quite likely that they may rise. After all, if the traffic is slower, its easier to take a chance dodging the traffic to cross the road isn't it? Unfortunately, this is the case with so many ideas like this-well meant, but likely to have the opposite effect

 

[ProfAlGoogle]

Your comments are taken on board, but they do very little to help the less able in our society, of Corse there is the minority that will flout any law, but in the whole the majority obey them, otherwise we would be living in a law less society, and we don't want that do we cris, woops, left the H of now whys that!

Allan & Gill.

 

[RiaandJames_374303418]

We are all road users and that includes pedestrians of all ages.

We should all use the roads with respect for other road users and drivers should not carry all the blame.

Roads are not a playground for drivers or children and 2Omph is un realistic in many areas where drivers have lives to lead as well.

As a child with far less traffic than today it was a fair distance to a small local park, we did not play on streets or even in the lanes to the rear of our houses as they were used by business vehicles.

To many parents just want their kids out from under their feet so they can get on and then expect drivers to pay for them dispensing with caring for their childrens well being.

Ria

 

[chrisn7]

I agree that the majority obey laws, and are therefore less likely to be the ones causing the problems with the existing speed limits. These same people are also likely to respect a reduced limit. as I said before,this is why a reduction is not likely to be as effective as authorities would have us believe.

Incidentally, the original thread involved pedestrians, who now seem have changed to "the less able".

Next time you're in town, observe the number of people who dodge across the road, jump over barriers, don't bother with the pelican crossings etc-perhaps this is why some are now less able?

 

[ProfAlGoogle]

What are the less able then if not pedestrians, cattle?

Care & consideration for all road users,especially those that are more vulnerable,as in the young and old, I'm sure that I do not need to quote the Highway code.

Allan & Gill.

 

[giovanni_5060838]

WOW, interesting thoughts......

Just wondered what peican crossings were for? and tucan crossing

are they not there for people to cross the road safely?

Its about time they made jay walking a crime here,rather than

have some put ALL the blame on the motorist.

I also find it disgusting that when some want to put a strong

piont across they always use the young, old or disabled!

I find it shamefull we ALL need protection and we ALL need to

be observant.. if not you need help and should ask for it...