Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Mon Dec 18, 2017 13:25

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 94 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 16:59 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 02:50
Posts: 2868
Location: Dorset
pogo wrote:
Shame that virtually all planning authorities now restrict the number of garage spaces and off-road parking spaces allocated to new builds to something like 50% of those actually needed. :-(

Most of which have decriminalised parking enforcement so it is in their interests to create as many "parking offences" as possible.

_________________
Andrew.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 17:39 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 16:12
Posts: 1040
Location: West Midlands
Blame Prescott - it was the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister that came up with the Restricted Parking Spaces rules that Planning Departments have to obey.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2006 00:26 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
mpaton2004 wrote:
... and by the same token, prevent them from making bad choices.


You can't. It isn't possible.

If you start to 'take control' (like ISA, where we came in) then the driver's risk management goes out of the window and we're embarking on a 100 year development programme of an entirely different road safety system.

The current system is amazing and well developed. We MUST NOT start on replacing it, instead we must improve it.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2006 00:30 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9230
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
SafeSpeed wrote:
mpaton2004 wrote:
... and by the same token, prevent them from making bad choices.


You can't. It isn't possible.

If you start to 'take control' (like ISA, where we came in) then the driver's risk management goes out of the window and we're embarking on a 100 year development programme of an entirely different road safety system.

The current system is amazing and well developed. We MUST NOT start on replacing it, instead we must improve it.


Best prevention cure -- EDUCATION ,NOT CONTROL.

CONTROL REMOVES THE IDEA OF CHOICE AND DECISION MAKING.

EDUCATION MAKES THE DECISION PROCESS SUCH THAT BAD CHOICES ARE REMOVED

(Sorry about shouting - felt that it was needed in this case )


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Sat May 03, 2008 19:00 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 11:11
Posts: 194
Location: Kent
mpaton2004 wrote:
Yeah, think of the kiddie who dashes to get his football (because you know all kids have a rational mind when they're excited and playing football). It'll be alright that a driver knocks him over at 30mph because "He should have known the Green Cross Code!" and roads are for cars and drivers to do whatever they want on as they know best, regardless of the environment it creates for the residents.

People have to make a reasonable effort to stay out of danger. I don't straddle cycle lanes when I walk just for the hell of it. If I have to cross past one I make sure there are no bikes coming. Edit: Also, how would you restrict cyclists with your draconian measures?

_________________
Currently undergoing training with the I.A.M.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 03, 2008 19:48 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
you are asking a question on a thread that is HOW OLD? :D

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 04, 2008 09:32 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 11:11
Posts: 194
Location: Kent
Oh yeah sorry I was just browsing it initially and simply had to reply I forgot the date :oops:

_________________
Currently undergoing training with the I.A.M.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 04, 2008 11:07 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 18:17
Posts: 794
Location: Reading
(I know it's an old thread but I hadn't seen it before, and the initial idea was so absurd that I couldn't pass up the opportunity to comment.)

I love it the way the zealots make out that car drivers are fundamentally irresponsible people who can't be trusted to set a safe speed for the conditions. It's just so utterly and obviously ridiculous. If it was true then you'd get people slamming into the back of queues at traffic lights all the time, coming off at bends, going straight over roundabouts (literally), and all manner of other things which happen extremely rarely in the general scheme of things. They happen rarely because drivers are very, very good at setting the correct speed, and statistically, they manage it very close to 100% of the time. Zealots, control freaks and the self-righteous may not be comfortable with that idea, but that doesn't make it any less true.

It is a cast iron fact that adapting your speed to the conditions is an essential, integral, fundamental part of driving which absolutely cannot be removed, and nor should people be trying. The only way of stopping people being responsible for setting an appropriate speed is to stop them driving altogether (which of course is what some of the zealots want, not that they're keen to admit it). If you're going to give people the responsibility of driving at all, you simply have no option but to let them decide on which speed is safe. Interfering with that can only make things worse, and those who enjoy interfering for its own sake should really interfere with something else instead, because interfering with drivers is costing lives.

If you accept that people are going to drive at all, you also have to treat them like responsible adults and leave the setting of a safe speed to them. You can't have one without the other. You can educate them, so that they choose the right speed even more of the time than they already do, but if you're going to give them a licence at all, you have to let them set a safe speed for residential roads like the one pictured above, because that's what driving is. We don't need to change the system of drivers setting safe speeds, because they're already extremely good at it; we just need to make them even better by educating them. End of story.

_________________
Paul Smith: a legend.

"The freedom provided by the motor vehicle is not universally applauded, however: there are those who resent the loss of state control over individual choice that the car represents. Such people rarely admit their prejudices openly; instead, they make false or exaggerated claims about the adverse effects of road transport in order to justify calls for higher taxation or restrictions on mobility." (Conservative Way Forward: Stop The War Against Drivers)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 20:07 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9230
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
[quote="mpaton2004

Is it such a bad idea?[/quote]

In a word ,YES

(ps -look at the bit above where I quoted the boredom factor in truck accidents )

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 18, 2008 20:36 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 14:47
Posts: 1659
Location: A Dark Desert Highway
I've not read the whole thread, so shoot me down in flames if you like...

One problem with limiting the maximum speed is emergency vehicles. What most people do when an emergency vehicle approaches from the rear is to freeze, which makes their job that much more difficult. What they should be doing is briskly moving on to a wider area in the road to allow the blue flashy lights to race to the scene unimpeaded. I can out drag a Transit ambulance or a fire truck and can soon find a pull in. Tricky when I am limited to a speed of a digger...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 22:32 
Offline
Suspended
Suspended

Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 18:57
Posts: 74
Flynn wrote:
Also, how would you restrict cyclists with your draconian measures?


Cyclists tend not to cause the same carnage as a 1 ton vehicle hitting someone at 30mph.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 21:56 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9230
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
mpaton2008 wrote:
Flynn wrote:
Also, how would you restrict cyclists with your draconian measures?


Cyclists tend not to cause the same carnage as a 1 ton vehicle hitting someone at 30mph.


I know :trolls:,
but you ain't considered the damage a bike ridden by an idiot can do to a pedestrian .Ten stone of biker hitting an old lady (or heaven forbid ,a child )and stopping from 20mph in a few inches - over 4000 ft lbs of force . (Unless my figures are wrong) - enough force to produce the same result ---severe injury /death ,especially as the force is concentrated in a small area ,and in the case of recoverably injury -almost certain permanant injury to the wspinal column - any medics (eg MM) care to back this up.

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 07, 2008 23:55 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:01
Posts: 4813
Location: Essex
A good friend of ours was hospitalised for some time and only saved permanent disfigurement thanks to some snazzy surgery by a cyclist running into her filtering between traffic - silently - as she crossed at a green man where others had stopped.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 20:29 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
mpaton2008 wrote:
Flynn wrote:
Also, how would you restrict cyclists with your draconian measures?


Cyclists tend not to cause the same carnage as a 1 ton vehicle hitting someone at 30mph.


Ah, the old "accidents are acceptable as long as the chance of death is low" gem!

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 94 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.671s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]