National Speed Limit set to be cut

[Yojimbo]

Some interesting (or not) reading:

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/speedlimits.html

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/effects.html


http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/publications.../speed_review/

http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/publications...iew_Report.pdf

• The majority of motorists drive at a speed they consider reasonable, and safe for road, traffic, and environmental conditions. Posted limits which are set higher or lower than dictated by roadway and traffic conditions are ignored by the majority of motorists.

• The normally careful and competent actions of a reasonable person should be considered legal.

• A speed limit should be set so that the majority of motorists observe it voluntarily and enforcement can be directed to the minority of offenders.

Thanks for the pm's. I'll try and respond when I get a moment

[paulmariner]

Originally Posted by Yojimbo

If you get caught speeding, you are are guilty of having pretty awful observational skills anyway so should be slowing down. Cameras are usually bright yellow, and if you can't see them then you really should be paying more attention to what you are doing.


Again, chances are the vast majority of the public won't engage their own brains when risk assessing a stretch of road. Tell them it's NSL, and they'll assume that it must be safe to travel at NSL speeds; "The sign told me I could go this fast officer, therefore how can I be to blame for not reading the road and ending up in a ditch?"

I know the A140 well, and I know that it is perfectly safe to travel more than 50mph along parts of it. I also know there are some places where I will choose to do less. A lot depends on the traffic, the road conditions etc.



Again, in the right conditions, an increase in speed will only marginally increase risk. What you refer to here is someone in a hurry. To me, anyone in a hurry has increased stress. Stress will lower your ability to make accurate judgements, so you should not be travelling at speed. Travelling under stress is different to only travelling at speed.

Again, for some reason you are stuck in thinking that someone must be in a hurry/late for an appointment to travel at speed.

The vast majority of my riding is for leisure purposes. I, like thousands of people like me, ride bikes just for the sake of riding bikes and not because we have some prior engagement (although nodding respect to the despatch rider earlier in the thread).

The stress at having to get somewhere/stuck in traffic is not a consideration. Travelling at speed is only done when conditions allow it. This does not mean that the entire ride out will be at light speed.




Speed does not kill. Riding/driving recklessly for the conditions will be considerably riskier than simply travelling at speed.

No arguements here. I take the same line when I see drivers clumsily changing their car stereo station, or using their mobile phone or not checking their blind spots etc.

And................. I agree with a lot of what of what you say, however in the real world not all drivers are as observant, skilled, technically aware and as astute as you!

Hence the reason for speed limits!

They're not there for the perfect, they're there for those without your skills.


Maybe I've missed it but I still don't see where you offer an alternative to those not so perfect?

Perhaps scrap speed limits all together? Let the idiots take control?
Please enlighten?

[Greeners]

The trouble is in this country, you are taught to pass a driving test, and not taught how to drive........

[Yojimbo]

Originally Posted by paulmariner

however in the real world not all drivers are as observant, skilled, technically aware and as astute as you!

Yes, I fully appreciate how I've come over on this thread and that I'll be likely chased out of town on any future thread I contribute to, but a considerble amount of my 'point' was to counter the painfully enclosed and linear thinking of some (not you, despite your dig )

Hence the reason for speed limits!

I see a reason for speed limits, but more in an advisory role. I just don't agree that they have to be blindly followed (not least because someone will be out to re-allign karma and nick your stuff )

They're not there for the perfect, they're there for those without your skills.

That doesn't invalidate the argument that it's inappropriate speed that is the problem, not necessarily absolute speed (relative to arbitraty speed limits).

Maybe I've missed it but I still don't see where you offer an alternative to those not so perfect?

Why Ambassador, with these insults you are surely spoiling me. The link I offered just a couple of posts before this offer alternates. The thread itself has offered alternates.

Maybe you are right about missing the point. Were you to read at a universally agreed word per minute count, this would rule out future points being missed.

Perhaps scrap speed limits all together? Let the idiots take control?

They'd just be a different type of idiot.

[GreyGhost]

There have been some very valid points raised by all that have contributed to this thread and fortunately it has remained good humoured. Everybody is entitled to their opinion as with any subject of this type. That's one of the points that make this forum a good place to spend time and effort. Personally I have been enjoying the cut and thrust and would actively encourage this type of discussion so long as it remains civilised.

Thanks to everybody for the entertainment.

[Yojimbo]

Apologies for topping.


Forum poster from another forum had written to his local MP about the proposed reduction in the NSL. The poster is a long serving Policeman:


Initial letter has been paraphrased-

"Sir,
Your proposal shows a deep lack of thought and must be offensive to those who voted for you...etc etc etc

Stop wasting taxpayers money."


to which he received this reply:

Dear <>

Thank you for your recent correspondence to this Department regarding press reports about changes to the national speed limit. This has been passed to the Speed Management Branch and I have been asked to reply.

The Department for Transport keeps all speed limits under review. However, no decisions have been taken about the reduction of any speed limits. Any proposal to change the national speed limit would have to be based on robust evidence of the impact on casualties, emissions and journey times. It would also need to consider issues of enforcement and public acceptability. Any changes would be subject to widespread consultation.

In 2007 there were 2,946 deaths on our roads, with 1,973 of those being on rural roads. The proportion of fatal collisions on rural roads where speed was recorded as a contributory factor was 30%. Given the extent of the casualty problem on these roads, it is clearly vital that the Department looks at ways to reduce these casualties. We are doing this in developing our new road safety strategy, which will be the subject of public consultation in due course.

I hope this is helpful.

So he sent his own reply-

Thank you for your reply but I note just the same as your counterparts that you persist in using the same flawed argument.As a police officer I was well used to completing the HO stats forms for accidents and it annoys me to see the continuing use of the phrase
'speed was recorded as a contributory factor was 30%.' as if to imply that this is the same as the vehicle involved was exceeding the speed limit, which I am sure you are aware is NOT necessarily the case.'Speed to great for the prevailing conditions' could effectively be 15 mph on a snow covered road, nothing to do with the posted speed limit. In fact laziness and poor training in completion of the HO forms alone should ring alarm bells when using the stats to support any proposals.. The fact is, that EXCEEDING the Posted speed limit is in fact the case in a relatively small proportion of accidents and other forms of carelessness such as turning right or failing to give way are every bit as bad an are yet not subject to any concerted enforcement or education.
I look forward to hearing from the speed management branch in due course.

and today received this latest update from the departments robot;

Thank you for your further e-mail about speed limits. Your comments have been noted.

The Department for Transport has always been clear that both excessive and inappropriate speed are dangerous and data suggests that both types of speeding are major contributors to death on the roads. The Department’s road safety policies are based on a large body of evidence from research and from evaluation of interventions in the field. The evidence shows a strong link between speed and road collisions. Reduction in speed reduces the impact of a collision (and thus reduces the likely severity of any injuries resulting from it), as well as the probability of a collision. The evidence also shows that speed cameras are highly effective in reducing speeds, and shows substantial reductions in casualties at camera sites.

The Department recognise that safety cameras are not the only tool for casualty reduction, nor are they always the most appropriate one to use; and it is left to the discretion of individual safety partnerships what combination of measures they use to address the problem of casualties on their roads. The Department’s Road Safety Strategy ‘Tomorrow’s roads: safer for everyone’ focuses on a range of issues including driver behaviour, driver training and safer infrastructure.

Regarding your concerns about careless driving, the recent road safety compliance consultation put forward proposals to make this a fixed penalty offence. Further details can be found in Chapter 6 of the consultation which is available at: www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/closed/compliance/roadsafetyconsultation.pdf

Full details of road safety policy – including the strategy, research reports and guidance to local authorities - can be found in the Road Safety section of the Department for Transport web site at:
www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roadsafety/

Statistical information can be found at:
www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics/

Yours sincerely,

Ho hum.

[Raistlin]

Originally Posted by Yojimbo

Ho hum.

You appear so galvanised by this that it seems to me that you should be doing something active about it.

With no sarcasm whatsoever and with the utmost sincerity, why don't you turn your undoubted energies towards actions likely to produce more concrete results?

I know I harp on about "armchair philosophers" but I really think that you might have the stamina for the fight and the ability to inspire others.

Plan, organise, advertise, campaign, LOBBY.

If you've read my PM you'll know what I mean. You'd not be the first to take steps in that direction.

[Yojimbo]

Originally Posted by Raistlin

If you've read my PM you'll know what I mean. You'd not be the first to take steps in that direction.

Will check again. Apologies for not replying.

I believe there are people far more well versed than myself at putting these issues in to a language that doesn't sound so partisan.


Will give it a good go though.