20 mph Zones

Discussion on Advanced and Defensive Driving.

Postby akirk » Fri Aug 14, 2015 4:36 pm


So to summarise a long thread:

Image

Image

Image

or perhaps most appropriate:

Image

Alasdair
akirk
 
Posts: 668
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 11:07 am
Location: Cotswolds

Postby martine » Fri Aug 14, 2015 4:37 pm


TheInsanity1234 wrote:...But y'know, feel free to ignore me...

OK will do...* :D






*actually I thought that was a very mature and considered post
Martin - Bristol IAM: IMI National Observer and Group Secretary, DSA: ADI, Fleet, RoSPA (Dip)
martine
 
Posts: 4430
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Bristol, UK




Postby chrisl » Fri Aug 14, 2015 5:50 pm


Has this debate not got a bit too polarised around the legislate:educate arguments? Surely the two are not mutually exclusive? I had a look back at Rod's earlier posts to see if he took a polarised view of it, but I don't think he did. Nor does the SWOV research he cited.

Rod said: "The claim that driver education is a bigger problem solver is not endorsed by evidence."

The evidence he cited was headed: "Misconception 1: man is the cause, therefore education is the solution"

That heading could be read in a polarised way, but it is open to more than one interpretation. That is confirmed later in the paragraph where it says: "Clearly, education also has an important role, but has limited scope."

What I take from that is that SWOV, and therefore Rod and 20's plenty, take the view that education is important but not the whole answer, and they are addressing the other bit. I don't see that as a threat to the value of education any more than a 30mph speed limit could be.

I haven't re-read the whole of both threads, but I don't recall anything else that Rod has said seeking to dismiss the obvious value of education and training. My understanding is that his campaign rests on two foundations: empirical study that has shown safety benefits, and the idea that the interests of all, including non-drivers, should be considered.

I personally do not see 20mph limits as a panacea, merely one tool in the tool box for increasing road safety. There are areas close to where I live where I would like to see them including the street where I live. Nevertheless, I haven't campaigned about it. I would like to see more education too, and when I'm good enough will probably devote my energies in that direction rather than the former.

I've sought to take a generous view of Rod's arguments. However, I don't know if my definition of residential area would agree with Rod's. His answers to the question about the A38 example suggest perhaps not. But I've no complaint with his overall objectives or manner of achieving them, which are open to democratic scrutiny and their implementation by local authorities possibly open to judicial review. He has chosen one aspect to campaign on, with some success it seems. Implementation does not have to be perfect to be of value.
chrisl
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 11:40 pm
Location: Essex

Postby akirk » Fri Aug 14, 2015 6:09 pm


Chris,

the problem is the contradictions in what he says - no-one on here believes that education alone is the answer (though conceptually it might be, but not in reality) - equally folks on here seem to suport 20mph limits - the issue is that he claims at one point that it is all about appropriate limits, but clearly at other points that they want a default 20mph approach - which is logically not sensible or practical...

I suspect that he started his campaign with a good idea - to look at encouraging more 20mph areas, however it doesn't appear to be a fully thought through campaign, and he seems at times to be lost in his own rhetoric... probably there is also a difficulty in stepping back from a very simplistic campaign to anything more thoughtful and detailed...

it is a shame really because to have that energy working with a little more logic to the application could be very constructive - it would be awesome to for example map the country with volunteers looking at a wide range of options to make communities safer and more usable for all users - from road furniture such as chicanes etc. to speed limits, to road design, to warning lights, etc. etc. - there is a whole range of options

however this campaign seems to think that the only option is to make the country 20mph - only... there is no interest in education, it is all about oppressive legislation, and is very anti car - in everything he discusses it is hypothetical and from a non motoring perspective... while that rosy 1930s dream is very aspirational it is not at all realistic - we have a world where the motorcar needs to be used, we have to balance all users' needs - yet he lives in a world of ervy residential street / urban area full of 75 year olds and children continually popping backwards and forwards across the road...

during this week I have been primarily sat at my computer with a window over a large stretch of the high street in our village, I have seen less than half a dozen children (school holidays and a very family based village) on the pavement in 5 days - and two on bikes (on the pavement)... as I look out now there is no traffic, no pedestrians, no horses, no 75 year olds, no children playing in the road, no cattle, no livestock, no wild animals, can't even see a snail crossing... yet his campaign would make the default speed limit 20mph - why?!

The only way he can answer that 'why' is to say that xyz might happen - reality need not be relevant...

Alasdair
Last edited by akirk on Fri Aug 14, 2015 6:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
akirk
 
Posts: 668
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 11:07 am
Location: Cotswolds

Postby jcochrane » Fri Aug 14, 2015 6:09 pm


Kimosabe wrote:
jcochrane wrote:"7 is heaven" gets my vote :lol:


Splitter! We were here first!! :wink:


I fear there is a competion to our campaigns from new pressure group "5 to stay alive" :roll: :lol:
Have you noticed how the maximum speed is dropping..."1 is fun" next?
jcochrane
 
Posts: 1877
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 2:52 pm
Location: East Surrey and wherever good driving roads can be found.

Postby jont » Fri Aug 14, 2015 6:41 pm


jcochrane wrote:"7 is heaven" gets my vote :lol:

I'll remind you of that next time I see you in the Caterham :lol:

/apparently there's a sign a friend reported seeing around the Glos area saying "50s nifty" :lol:
User avatar
jont
 
Posts: 2990
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 9:56 pm
Location: Cambridgeshire

Postby akirk » Fri Aug 14, 2015 7:06 pm


jcochrane wrote:
Kimosabe wrote:
jcochrane wrote:"7 is heaven" gets my vote :lol:


Splitter! We were here first!! :wink:


I fear there is a competion to our campaigns from new pressure group "5 to stay alive" :roll: :lol:
Have you noticed how the maximum speed is dropping..."1 is fun" next?


nought OR caught :D

Alasdair
akirk
 
Posts: 668
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 11:07 am
Location: Cotswolds

Postby hir » Fri Aug 14, 2015 7:22 pm


jcochrane wrote:"7 is heaven" gets my vote :lol:



For the really enthusiastic do-gooder, someone like myself for example , I'm going for:

... "1 or none!"
hir
 
Posts: 436
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 9:20 am

Postby chrisl » Fri Aug 14, 2015 8:07 pm


Alasdair,

Thank you for your thoughtful reply. Hope you don't mind me interspersing answers?

the problem is the contradictions in what he says - no-one on here believes that education alone is the answer (though conceptually it might be, but not in reality) - equally folks on here seem to suport 20mph limits - the issue is that he claims at one point that it is all about appropriate limits, but clearly at other points that they want a default 20mph approach - which is logically not sensible or practical...

At the moment, the default is 30mph and we argue about appropriateness from that point. Rod is arguing that the default should be 20 and we start the argument about appropriateness from there. This was confirmed earlier in the thread when I put it to Rod that his term "redefining the reference point" meant setting up a rebuttable presumption. That is not the same thing as a blanket policy, which of course would imply unchallengeable. Rod has also confirmed elsewhere that his use of the word "default" is deliberate and in contrast to the word "blanket." Unless he is truly acting in bad faith I think we should accept that he is using those terms as he claims.

I suspect that he started his campaign with a good idea - to look at encouraging more 20mph areas, however it doesn't appear to be a fully thought through campaign, and he seems at times to be lost in his own rhetoric... probably there is also a difficulty in stepping back from a very simplistic campaign to anything more thoughtful and detailed...

I don't think Rod has denied being focused on the issue of 20mph limits, but as I said above I don't think that is to the detriment of other potentially helpful things. Favouring a particular policy does not mean inevitably opposing others or that one is acting to their detriment.

it is a shame really because to have that energy working with a little more logic to the application could be very constructive - it would be awesome to for example map the country with volunteers looking at a wide range of options to make communities safer and more usable for all users - from road furniture such as chicanes etc. to speed limits, to road design, to warning lights, etc. etc. - there is a whole range of options

I agree a holistic approach would be beneficial. No one element has all the answers, but then focusing on one element does not imply the others have no value.

however this campaign seems to think that the only option is to make the country 20mph - only... there is no interest in education, it is all about oppressive legislation, and is very anti car - in everything he discusses it is hypothetical and from a non motoring perspective... while that rosy 1930s dream is very aspirational it is not at all realistic - we have a world where the motorcar needs to be used, we have to balance all users' needs - yet he lives in a world of ervy residential street / urban area full of 75 year olds and children continually popping backwards and forwards across the road...

That's one perception of Rod's campaign. I don't share it, but there may be ways that it could be expressed that would diminish the likelihood of that impression being formed.

during this week I have been primarily sat at my computer with a window over a large stretch of the high street in our village, I have seen less than half a dozen children (school holidays and a very family based village) on the pavement in 5 days - and two on bikes (on the pavement)... as I look out now there is no traffic, no pedestrians, no horses, no 75 year olds, no children playing in the road, no cattle, no livestock, no wild animals, can't even see a snail crossing... yet his campaign would make the default speed limit 20mph - why?!

Possibly. It depends on the definition of residential area, which I'm unclear on myself. Nevertheless, the framework that Rod has outlined leaves the default open to challenge. The practical possibility of that would be down to the local authority's policy on consultation, ultimately backed up at the voting booth next time or by judicial review.

The only way he can answer that 'why' is to say that xyz might happen - reality need not be relevant...

Collision and injury stats have formed one of the major planks of Rod's campaign. I realise in some of the answers above he was talking about strictly hypotheticals, but effectiveness or otherwise of limits, engineering, enforcement cameras and other interventions can only be extrapolated from previous results, but at least they do have some basis in reality.

Chris
chrisl
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 11:40 pm
Location: Essex

Postby revian » Fri Aug 14, 2015 8:31 pm


jcochrane wrote:
Kimosabe wrote:
jcochrane wrote:"7 is heaven" gets my vote :lol:


Splitter! We were here first!! :wink:


I fear there is a competion to our campaigns from new pressure group "5 to stay alive" :roll: :lol:
Have you noticed how the maximum speed is dropping..."1 is fun" next?

Just drive in reverse. Backwards is best
Wirral
revian
 
Posts: 509
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 6:37 pm

Postby WhoseGeneration » Fri Aug 14, 2015 9:19 pm


revian wrote: Backwards is best


Good one, in the context of the mirth being exhibited in this thread, though I doubt you would have ever used that as a theme for a sermon, however a good theme would have been responsibility towards others when driving, using appropriate Biblical references.
Perhaps you did do something along such lines?
It's about getting folks to understand responsibility in all areas of life, is it not?
Always a commentary, spoken or not.
Keeps one safe. One hopes.
WhoseGeneration
 
Posts: 914
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:47 pm

Postby WhoseGeneration » Fri Aug 14, 2015 10:20 pm


StressedDave wrote:I think we're missing a solution here... if we bring back the red flag act we would increase the safety and eliminate adult unemployment too.


Bloody Socialist, red flag with all its connotations.
Nah, it'd have to be politically neutral, so not blue yellow or purple either, how about white. White to symbolise a final surrender to the pandering to the lowest common denominator, Idocracy.
Always a commentary, spoken or not.
Keeps one safe. One hopes.
WhoseGeneration
 
Posts: 914
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:47 pm

Postby akirk » Fri Aug 14, 2015 10:26 pm


Chris,

I see where you are coming from and your post is very reasonable - but it doesn't tie in with the perception I am seeing of the 20 is plenty campaign...

if they are simply saying start from 20, with the option of 30 (instead of the current the other way around) we have to ask why - there is no need to change to that presumption, we have the ability to impose 20 mph limits currently we don't need to change the law to provide 20 where it should be... in my view politics & legislation should be about being as open / free / flexible as possible and then restricting when necessary - rather than his approach of restricting by default and only making it more flexible when forced - that is a fundamental reversal of what British law has stood for through the decades... I appreciate we are going more that way across the whole of society, but it is exactly because of organisations like this who set out to restrict everyone to suit their view of society...

my approach offers no negatives to his core argument, I vote that we stay as we are - but use intelligence and logic / accurate analysis and genuine understanding of local situations to set speed limits accurately. I suggested that this would even mean some areas needing to be below 20mph - we all know those streets where to be honest more than 10-15 is not safe... but that is not the driver for his campaign - on the one hand it is too logical, on the other it sweeps out from underneath his feet his argument that we must control all urban and residential areas... it would seem that he would be happy to not have some areas at a more appropriate and slower speed, giving that up to have the power / control / etc. of everything as 20mph...

at no point has he explained any logic or shown any argument which stands up as to why we should start from a default position of 20 for all urban and residential (which lets be clear is his intention) - because there is no logic / no argument... It is dressed up with lots of pretty reasons, but none of them need any more than the ability we already have to select 20mph areas where necessary, and to continue to educate drivers to be flexible in their approach to speed in 30mph areas...

also, do you really think that is his end goal? if he were able to persuade the government that all urban and residential should be 20mph by default, do you think the campaign will stop there / fold its tents and toddle off...? unlikely, it will either continue to pressure all exceptions to be pushed back to 20, or it will move to the 15 is clean campaign and gradually push the whole lot down...

I would love to live in a world where urban / residential areas could be car free and idyllic, but I am a realist, with the way in which we work / live / etc. in this country we can't throw the motor car out until we have alternatives, and his campaign won't hurt the person in a city with buses or trains, or able to walk to the shops - it will start by hurting the millions who live in rural areas, who like us have one bus a week which takes 90 minutes to travel 12 miles, waits only an hour and then returns - usually empty because it is useless - there is no way that I or those elsewhere in the country can live without cars, and yet there is this constant war against them...

sorry, but I don't think that the motives or intentions are at all honest any longer, even if that is where they started - if they were (as he claims) about making speed limits appropriate then we have the ability to do that now and his campaign has little purpose, that is clearly not his motivation...

Alasdair
akirk
 
Posts: 668
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 11:07 am
Location: Cotswolds

Postby revian » Fri Aug 14, 2015 10:43 pm


WhoseGeneration wrote:
revian wrote: Backwards is best


Good one, in the context of the mirth being exhibited in this thread, though I doubt you would have ever used that as a theme for a sermon, however a good theme would have been responsibility towards others when driving, using appropriate Biblical references.
Perhaps you did do something along such lines?
It's about getting folks to understand responsibility in all areas of life, is it not?

Oddly, or maybe not, I've not been over-prescriptive about 'How to drive' in my preaching... :lol: ...one could look up Jehu.

Though 'go backwards when observing a danger' has biblical text... Cruising towards such, even below 20mph, can be disastrous... :wink: . Taking the long view is another text-rich scenario.

I'm not known for po faced preaching.... Though it's always, of course, serious... :D
Wirral
revian
 
Posts: 509
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 6:37 pm

Postby chrisl » Sat Aug 15, 2015 9:21 am


Alisdair,

Thank you for the discussion, I'm content to leave it there if you are - agree to disagree?

Best regards,

Chris
chrisl
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 11:40 pm
Location: Essex

PreviousNext

Return to Advanced Driving Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


cron