"redtube" wrote in message
...

"loobyloo" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 12:43:19 +0000 (UTC), Paul Scott wrote:

I suppose one radical solution would be to obey the road traffic laws.

--
Cliff Laine, The Old Lard Factory, Lancaster http://www.loobynet.com
* remove any trace of rudeness before you reply *

Arrrgh listen to old self righteousness Lardface out there, - Obey the
road
traffic laws? oh sure and thats why the overwhelming majority of us *real*
people out there find the wretched things things anything but a safety
measure and purely as a device to earn revenue? Easy money in other words.
Most Dual Carriageway speed limits should be removed anyway cos no
pedestrians are involved usually most are barrier proofed with footbridges
or traffic lights these days. So why even HAVE a 50 say for instance
suddenly turn into a 40 or even 30 on a Dual Carriageway with perfectly
good
barriers to safeguard the pedestrians? Reason? to catch the motorists out,
thats what.

Yes, a lot of main roads near where I live (Oxfordshire) have recently been
downgraded to 50 (or are about to be downgraded) "to reduce the number of
traffic accidents". This is solving the right problem in the wrong way: to
avoid collisions, you need to penalise the person who *causes* the accident,
typically a driver who is on a minor road who pulls out into fast-moving
traffic without assessing its speed or the pedestrian who crosses the road
without regard for the traffic, rather than penalising (by imposing a
draconian speed limit) the driver who is in the right and who has priority.

Children are a special case, and a 40, 30 or even 20 limit is sensible (with
the level set according to the amount of segregation between pavement and
road) but otherwise the onus is on the pedestrians or the drivers on side
roads to make sure that they do not cause accidents. Any fool can reduce
*the effect of* accidents by cutting speed limits, but driver/pedestrian
training is the clever solution.

The A44 Oxford-Evesham road and the A329 Stadhampton to Thame road are cases
in point: the main road where it's safe to do 60 or 70 on the straight carry
a 50 limit, whereas the narrow twisty country lanes leading off on either
side, where it's often not safe to go above 40, carry a 60 limit.

The A415 Abingdon to Berinsfield road has a 30 mph limit almost all the way
from Clifton Hampden to Berinsfield, where I would judge 40 on hte bends and
60 on the straights is sensible. There are long-term road-works further west
while a cycle track is being made which mostly merit a reduction from 60 to
40 at worst (apart from the rare times when half the road is coned off) but
a blanket 30 limit has been imposed. Driving at 30 on a road that previously
carried a 60 limit is very hard. Try as I might, I can't keep much below 40
and that feels as if I'm crawling along.

Speed limits should be set according to the highest speed that it is safe to
drive - a 60 limit on a single-track road with harepin bends is simply
taking the ****.

I reckon that the speed limit should be set at the speed that a mythical
"safe, competant driver" would choose to drive at if there were no speed
limits: it's when that driver would choose to drive at 20 mph or more above
the actual limit that you get problems with non-compliance. Penalise the
serious offenders who think it's safe to drive at 100 on a single
carriageway or 60 in a built-up area with parked cars and the likelihood of
children emerging from behind them; don't penalise those who drive at 40 in
a 30 zone where there is good visibility of hazards.