20mph - latest thoughts?

[ufkacbln]

In Warrington the police have said that the 20mph speed areas are advisory only as some law needs to be amended but hasn't been. Complete waste of time because everyone ignores them.

This is my issue

There is very little enforcement, that makes it pointless unless there is an engineered design that makes more than 20mph impossible

 

[Drago]

Build speed cameras into the cats eyes.

 

[martint235]

But is that the same as a need to be going slower? As per the OP, the primary reasons for 20 zones are to reduce casualties and emissions, neither of which cyclists are currently responsible for in any meaningful number.

Given that there is no legal requirement for cyclists to use a speedometer, I suspect it would be unenforceable too.

No it isn't. I accept that a cyclist at 20 poses much less of a threat. However we are governed largely by consensus and to widen the law expresses that.

I suppose the principle is "Everyone must.....unless" rather than "Only these people must ......."

 

[Incontinentia Buttocks]

All limits should be enforced, 20MPH ones especially so because of their introduction in the first place to protect pedestrians and cyclists. If it were up to me (sadly, it isn't) all motor vehicles would have GPS speed limiters which make compliance 100%.

You should well know speed doesn't kill, inappropriate speed kills. Use of mobile phone, inattentiveness and just shoot driving is the main cause, speed is an aggravating factor.
Most of the rtc's i go to are due to totally shoot driving at the the speed limit or below it, very few except fail to stops are speeding.

 

[Drago]

I never said speed kills, have never said speed kills, have never even intimated it. It's a nonsensical statement designed as a memorable soundbite for the heavy of right foot and short of intelligence.

 

[Incontinentia Buttocks]

I never said speed kills, have never said speed kills, have never even intimated it. It's a nonsensical statement designed as a memorable soundbite for the heavy of right foot and short of intelligence.

You've lost me, you want 100% compliance to speed limits that were set decades ago, yet you say you don't subscribe to the speef kills manta, which is actually used by safety campaigners not the heavy foot brigage. What annoys me is the instance that lowers speeds are safer, hence nsl becoming 50 zones, its utter rubbish. This doesn't make anyone safer its just a sop to make people ferl better.
If we want to make roads safer raise standards or driving, increase the now non existent RPU's and increase punishments, I'm all in favour of bans for mobile phone use and life bans and jail for drink drive and disqual drivers.

 

[Spinney]

You should well know speed doesn't kill, inappropriate speed kills. Use of mobile phone, inattentiveness and just shoot driving is the main cause, speed is an aggravating factor.
Most of the rtc's i go to are due to totally shoot driving at the the speed limit or below it, very few except fail to stops are speeding.

Yes, but if you are inattentive for, say, 2 seconds, you travel further in that 2 seconds if you are going faster, and so have less time to react if something happens in front of you. And it takes you longer to stop.

 

[Drago]

Because in the case of our 20MPH zones excessive speed is annoying, inconvenient, off putting, and even frightening to vulnerable road users. If that should continue many would go back to driving the kids to school, taking the car to work, which simply compounds the problem. The car should be subservient to humans, and humans not in cars should take priority in human dominated and oriented environments, such as residential streets, outside schools etc.

The dangers of rising velocity is another discussion for another forum.

 

[martint235]

You should well know speed doesn't kill, inappropriate speed kills. Use of mobile phone, inattentiveness and just shoot driving is the main cause, speed is an aggravating factor.
Most of the rtc's i go to are due to totally shoot driving at the the speed limit or below it, very few except fail to stops are speeding.

20mph limits are usually there for a specific reason: school nearby; small village; parking interfering with lines of sight. In these instances driving above 20 is driving at an inappropriate speed

 

[Incontinentia Buttocks]

A qualifier to my earlier statement, you are quite correct about the 20mph limits, it's just the total bollocks around speed that grips me. Sorry i didn't mean to derail the thread. Long shitty week at work.

 

[martint235]

A qualifier to my earlier statement, you are quite correct about the 20mph limits, it's just the total bollocks around speed that grips me. Sorry i didn't mean to derail the thread. Long shitty week at work.

Fair point and agreed. The best way would be to have fluid, variable limits dependent on conditions as I believe happens in Germany. However you just have to watch British drivers in fog to realise that's not going to work

 

[smutchin]

You should well know speed doesn't kill...

Oh god, I thought Paul Smith died years ago...

 

[smutchin]

I suppose the principle is "Everyone must.....unless" rather than "Only these people must ......."

Can't agree with that. I don't like to be thought of as an exception to the rules regarding one set of road user rather than a member of a separate category of road user in my own right, with my own rules.

 

[mjr]

20mph limits are usually there for a specific reason: school nearby; small village; parking interfering with lines of sight. In these instances driving above 20 is driving at an inappropriate speed

However, I'm quite keen to see them even where the reason is only "residential street where non-access traffic probably ought to farking well use the A/B-road through routes instead".

As for the effect of speed as an exacerbating factor: is it still the case that it's 50-50 whether someone survives being hit by a car at 30mph, while it's more like 95-5 at 20mph? 20mph seems like it makes mistakes less likely and also makes it less likely that a mistake will be a death sentence for someone - and often that's not the person who made the mistake.

 

[mjr]

Given that there is no legal requirement for cyclists to use a speedometer, I suspect it would be unenforceable too.

Doesn't seem to stop them in the Royal Parks