'20mph for West Hove'

[jont]

Do you think an accident at 30mph is likely to be worse than one at 20mph? Yes or no?

Do you think that's a helpful question to answer? It's that sort of simplistic approach that stops real improvements in road safety being made. It's of the "so when did you stop beating your wife?" variety.

[drivingsteve]

Do you think an accident at 30mph is likely to be worse than one at 20mph? Yes or no?

Do you think that's a helpful question to answer? It's that sort of simplistic approach that stops real improvements in road safety being made. It's of the "so when did you stop beating your wife?" variety.

Yes I do. So what's your answer? Yes or no?

[drivingsteve]

Yes or no: Is an accident at 30mph likely to be worse than one at 20mph? Are you going to answer so we can move on?

The question is loaded in that it pre-supposes that the accident is inevitable and can only be mitigated by reducing the impact speed. I would prefer that the accident doesn't happen in the first place and that will require that the driver is competent and alert.

Which do you think is more likely to happen: an accident involving a driver that is awake and alert or one involving a driver that is complacent and bored?

Is an accident at 20mph likely to be worse than one at 10mph? Where do you draw the line?

The thing about the 20 limit across Brighton and Hove is that pretty much nobody obeys them. Not only are the newly introduced limits being ignored, the previous, sensibly placed 20 limits are now being treated with the same contempt. This has had, in effect, precisely the opposite of the intended consequence. i.e. inappropriate speed is now even more commonplace.

That isn't the supposition at all. I was trying to get jont to answer a straightforward question which would have enabled me to continue the convertion and talk him through some entirely logical reasoning. He has persistently refused to answer the question. Presumably this is because he feels insecure doing so as he knows, in all honesty, that speed is a significant factor in road safety.

The discussion regarding the consequences of an accident is different, albeit inextricably linked to that of how to prevent them.

As I've said before, I'm not in favour of indiscrimate 20mph speed limits, but they should be considered an option in certain places.

[TripleS]

....I'm not in favour of indiscrimate 20mph speed limits, but they should be considered an option in certain places.

Quite likely many will agree with you on that, as do I, but the unintended consequence of applying limits that are unnecessarily low, and applying them too widely, will not lead to improved behaviour from drivers. The whole approach is becoming increasingly ridiculous and falling even further into disrepute.

[martine]

As I've said before, I'm not in favour of indiscrimate 20mph speed limits, but they should be considered an option in certain places.

Unlike BRAKE who do want blanket 20 limits for urban areas and a blanket ban on overtaking on rural roads.

[Gareth]

I was trying to get jont to answer a straightforward question which would have enabled me to continue the convertion and talk him through some entirely logical reasoning. He has persistently refused to answer the question.

If you persist in asking loaded nonsense questions others will persist in ignoring you.

[TripleS]

I was trying to get jont to answer a straightforward question which would have enabled me to continue the convertion and talk him through some entirely logical reasoning. He has persistently refused to answer the question.

If you persist in asking loaded nonsense questions others will persist in ignoring you.

Aye, you might need to take account of that, Steve.

They'll either ignore you, or, as they do with me, suddenly come back and demolish you quite comprehensively from time to time.

I still keep coming back and making myself a pest though. Gives 'em summat to think about; briefly.

[GJD]

I wish we could do the contrary effectively, but do drivers need encouraging to disengage? I think many drivers are not sufficiently engaged with the driving process regardless of the limits.

I think you're probably right, and it seems perverse to me to encourage or pander to a failing that's already too prevalent. It's a vicious circle and I don't see where it ends. There seems to be a horrible democracy-in-action thing going on where, because enough people would apparently like to be able to use their cars to get about without having to be engaged in the driving task, the authorities are, with a staggering lack of responsibility, actually trying to make that wish viable.

Bowling ball driving worries me a lot and I find the idea of turning 30 mph bowling balls into 20 mph bowling balls of little comfort. In the sort of busy, heavily built up areas where driving at 30 is likely to be inappropriately fast, the last thing you want to do with someone who'd rather be thinking about other things while driving is to encourage them to believe that adhering to a lower limit is anything close to sufficient, because that sort of driving environment is just too complex for speed fixation to cut it. Whether they want to be engaged or not, the message that needs ramming home is that they have to be - that if they don't want to take it seriously they're not suited to the responsibility of piloting a tonne-plus of death machine down a street full of squishy innocents.

The more that the environment presents drivers with opportunities to hurt people, the more that focussing on what the speed limit should be misses the point, because adherence to the limit is such a minor adjunct to what actually matters.

[PeterE]

The more that the environment presents drivers with opportunities to hurt people, the more that focussing on what the speed limit should be misses the point, because adherence to the limit is such a minor adjunct to what actually matters.

Absolutely - very well put.

[martine]

I still keep coming back and making myself a pest though. Gives 'em summat to think about; briefly.

You're the most polite (and subtle) troll I've come across Dave...more power to your elbow!

[drivingsteve]

....I'm not in favour of indiscriminate 20mph speed limits, but they should be considered an option in certain places.

Quite likely many will agree with you on that, as do I, but the unintended consequence of applying limits that are unnecessarily low, and applying them too widely, will not lead to improved behaviour from drivers. The whole approach is becoming increasingly ridiculous and falling even further into disrepute.

You're absolutely right, hence the need to careful consideration to ensure they're not being used unnecessarily. There's always going to be subjectivity as to where lower speed limits should be applied, but people who reject the possibility of 20mph limits outright are as at fault as those who want a blanket change without applying due consideration to individual cases.

As I've said before, I'm not in favour of indiscriminate 20mph speed limits, but they should be considered an option in certain places.

Unlike BRAKE who do want blanket 20 limits for urban areas and a blanket ban on overtaking on rural roads.

This is probably the main downfall of Brake. I think this organisation does some good work, but they perhaps need a more open minded and flexible approach to their campaign.

If you persist in asking loaded nonsense questions others will persist in ignoring you.

If you wish to label someone as talking nonsense because they dare to disagree with you, then I'm more than happy for you to ignore me. Diversity of opinions is fine, and makes for good forum based conversations. Offensiveness towards the views of others has no place in civilised discussion though.

[Gareth]

If you persist in asking loaded nonsense questions others will persist in ignoring you.

If you wish to label someone as talking nonsense because they dare to disagree with you, then I'm more than happy for you to ignore me.

Have you considered the possibility that you didn't get an answer because of the way you framed your question? Maybe it has something to do with the assumptions that are implicit in the phrasing you used, that others don't accept or recognise.

[drivingsteve]

If you persist in asking loaded nonsense questions others will persist in ignoring you.

If you wish to label someone as talking nonsense because they dare to disagree with you, then I'm more than happy for you to ignore me.

Have you considered the possibility that you didn't get an answer because of the way you framed your question? Maybe it has something to do with the assumptions that are implicit in the phrasing you used, that others don't accept or recognise.

Gareth, I have no intention of being drawn into an arguement with you. I was asking jont a perfectly reasonable question regarding the potential outcome of accidents at different speeds. It was onnly blown out of proportion due to his politician like refusal to answer me, whilst ironically, putting "loaded questions" my way.

Please feel free to continue to attempt to patronise me or belittle by opinions, however, I'm afraid I will not be offering further responses to you on this topic.

[jont]

Gareth, I have no intention of being drawn into an arguement with you. I was asking jont a perfectly reasonable question regarding the potential outcome of accidents at different speeds.

Ah, you see here I beg to differ. I don't think your question was "perfectly reasonable". It was a classic straw man tactic. And I hope you see the hypocrisy in calling my behaviour "politician like" before stating that you won't get drawn any further into a debate that doesn't seem to be going in the direction you hoped

[drivingsteve]

Gareth, I have no intention of being drawn into an arguement with you. I was asking jont a perfectly reasonable question regarding the potential outcome of accidents at different speeds.

Ah, you see here I beg to differ. I don't think your question was "perfectly reasonable". It was a classic straw man tactic. And I hope you see the hypocrisy in calling my behaviour "politician like" before stating that you won't get drawn any further into a debate that doesn't seem to be going in the direction you hoped

Like I said, I'm not going to get drawn into an arguement about it, and I have no time for people who are simply disrepectful of opposing opinions.