martine wrote:RobC wrote:...As a professional driver trainer I don't have a problem with 20mph limits...
As a professional driver trainer, I do.RobC wrote:...if a single life is saved then the limits are worthwhile.
Really? So we'd best ban all vehicles then - that would probably save hundreds...sorry to be flippant but you get my point. Any road safety intervention is likely to be a balance and your statement above is too simplistic.
There is also the problem of distraction...at 20 there will be a bigger temptation for pedestrians to walk out without paying proper attention to their safety and ditto car drivers tempted to send that text whilst on the move. 2 wrongs don't make a right but I'm just trying to illustrate possible unintended consequences of imposing a low limit.
RobC wrote:Hi Alasdair
As I said earlier politicians can produce figures which support any argument. No survey or vote is representative of 100% of the population you either accept Rospa's figures or you don't.
What is IAMs stance on 20mph limits? I understand that the IAM commissioned a survey, but only the views of 1001 people of our total population of 60 million were represented.
http://www.iam.org.uk/images/stories/policy-research/iam%2020mph%20survey.pdf
Rob
revian wrote:RobC wrote:You cannot be serious With comments like that the forum is fast loosing credibility
Thank you for the stats as well as the wider explanation. I share the feelings of some (and I think nearly all) that improving the quality of life in a community is 'a good thing'. For me this includes 20mph limits. I believe the argument is being lost in some quarters because of a number of clearly inappropriate impositions of the limiting poor explanations. Councils are not known for their finessing of solutions to issues.
The tag public line gives a simple gathering point (20 is plenty) but hides the aim of quality in living and (I suspect) gathers to it the anti-car lobby which undoubtedly exists. How can you do a better job of public explanation and give a more positive image to driving? Or isn't that possible in your (your group not you personally) view?
Oh... Your quote at the top... That's unfair to the forum in my view. We are not a group in the sense of 'having a view' or 'a policy'. It's a forum of those with an interest in driving and is in opinions (and we have a few!) as varied as its members.
Kind regards
Ian
RobC wrote:Of course if there are figures to suggest that 20mph speed limits don't contribute to road safety. I'm always happy to reconsider my opinion.
RobC wrote:As responsible drivers and citizens we comply with the laws imposed by our society. The advanced groups are here not only to set an example but also represent their membership.
If the 20mph limits are being imposed inappropriately on a large scale and a large number of members of the advanced driving organisations think this is the case, It is up to their advanced driving organisations and other concerned driving organisations to lobby to get those speed limits reviewed.
The success of any representations would largely depend on the effect the 20 mph limits are having on road safety.
From my own point of view, my main concern is driver training and not legislation, although if the figures showed that the 20mph limits were having an adverse effect on KSI figures then I too would be very concerned.
Kind Regards
Rob
RobC wrote:The success of any representations would largely depend on the effect the 20 mph limits are having on road safety.
martine wrote:Over 5000 signatures against so far which means the council will be debating it sometime soon.
jont wrote:martine wrote:Over 5000 signatures against so far which means the council will be debating it sometime soon.
If they "debate" it in as informed a manner as South Glos "debate" speed limit reductions, you're stuck with it
akirk wrote:
This is very sad to see...
Yes, one might be law abiding - but just because a law is put in place doesn't mean that we should accept it at face value. Equally, we shouldn't accept the process that leads to those laws at face value either...RobC wrote:The success of any representations would largely depend on the effect the 20 mph limits are having on road safety.
So, Rob, do you believe that this is the right way to inact legislation:
- take the views of minority pressure groups
- impose as law
- wait for objections - and only then deal with it if there is enough outcry, or by 'proving figures in one direction' when they are seldom proved in the other at the point of instigation...
sadly a lot of our political system contains people who do not take an open view / balancing decisions etc. - yes, there are some great people working in politics - but a lot of people there have a personal agenda and believe therefore that the whole world should change to that perspective - arrogant and wrong...
Alasdair
jont wrote:I wonder how many 20mph zone supporters would continue to support them if they were required to have 20 mph speed limiters fitted to their vehicles which activate in these zones? I can't help but think the majority of supporters only want everyone /else/ to do 20mph, while they carry on much as before.
chrisl wrote:jont wrote:I wonder how many 20mph zone supporters would continue to support them if they were required to have 20 mph speed limiters fitted to their vehicles which activate in these zones? I can't help but think the majority of supporters only want everyone /else/ to do 20mph, while they carry on much as before.
I'd happily use something of a variation on that theme - a variable speed limiter that can be defeated in the same way as cruise-control. I could see myself using that much more than I would a real cruise-control. It would also address one of the criticisms of speed limit enforcement, that it forces drivers to pay undue attention to their speedometer than to the road ahead. My vehicles are always several years old - perhaps this is an option in new cars?
chrisl wrote:Thanks Alasdair, I rather had in mind something the driver could set manually. I expect in future an automatic system would be tied into GPS, bearing in mind the potential unreliability of technology reading dirty, bent and otherwise obscured signs!
chrisl wrote:Thanks Alasdair, I rather had in mind something the driver could set manually.
MGF wrote:I thought Rod had made it clear that he prefers a default speed limit of 20 mph instead of the current 30mph. He believes the interests of other road users such as pedestrians and cyclists and communities as a whole would be better served by the same. There is some force to that argument, I think.
Currently i'm scoring Rod 1 ADUK O,
Return to Advanced Driving Forum
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 85 guests