Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sun Nov 09, 2025 21:41

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 19:24 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 09:16
Posts: 3655
story

Quote:
The death of a schoolboy might have been avoided if transport officials had followed-through plans to cut speed limits on a danger stretch, it was claimed today.

David Cameron, seven, was knocked off his bike and killed by a speeding driver on Newcastle's Stamfordham Road, at Cowgate, in June 2004.

The cystic fibrosis sufferer was sent flying when a BMW driven by Mark Tye, 21, struck him on a pedestrian crossing at 61mph - more than 20mph over the limit.

Tye, of Chapel Park, Newcastle, was jailed for five years and three months for the crime but the sentence was later cut to four years.

Since then, David's grieving family have campaigned tirelessly for stricter safety measures of the 40mph dual-carriageway.


They have been backed by Newcastle Central MP Jim Cousins, who has repeatedly urged the city council to make it a 30mph zone. So far, he has been told a review of speed limits will take place in the future but there were no immediate plans to cut the limit on Stamfordham Road.


Now, a document leaked to the Chronicle, reveals the council had already proposed making it a 30mph road - at least two months before the tragedy.


The report, to the First Secretary of State and written by a Government planning inspector, is about plans to build a supermarket next to Stamfordham Road.


It was written in May 2004 but follows an inspection of the stretch which took place a month earlier. It reads: "The council also proposes to reduce the 40mph limit to 30mph on this section of Stamfordham Road, subject to public consultation and separate statutory process."


Mr Cousins said today: "If they had stuck by their proposal perhaps this kid might not have died.


"I think they should be ashamed of themselves. It refers to something that they'd already decided to do and they'd already told an inspector they were going to do it. I've been meeting them for 18 months now since the accident, which happened after this report was written.


"All I've been told is that at some point in the future - but they can't tell me when - they will evaluate the speed limits across the city, which of course includes Stamfordham Road.


"But now I find out that before poor David Cameron was killed, they'd told an inspector they were going to reduce the speed limit. Why, when I've been meeting them on this issue for nearly two years, could they not have told me it was something they were already planning to do?"


The revelation comes just days after a Chronicle probe revealed nearly one driver every 30 seconds is breaking the speed limit as they race past the flowers laid in David's memory on Stamfordham Road.


David's mother, Debbie, 36, a child minder of nearby Gishford Way, Blakelaw, said: "To think that this was an option that could have been carried out is awful. You never know, Mark Tye might not have been going at speed if the limit was lower. Or, if he'd been going slower, he might have come to a halt before the crossing.


"We're two years on now and it feels like we're sill banging our heads against a brick wall.


"We have collected a petition to get rid of the crossing and have said for ages the road should not be 40mph . We've never been given a final answer about our petition and to find out they'd already planned to reduce it to 30mph is devastating."


A city council spokesman said: "At the time of the report, the city council was considering whether road safety in the area would be improved by reducing the speed limit on that stretch of Stamfordham Road.


"However, after investigating the circumstances behind accidents occurring there, it became clear that they did not seem to be related to the speed limit and were more likely to be the result of dangerous driving. To address this, we installed new traffic signs, reiterating the speed limit, and arranged for a mobile speed camera to be situated on the site.


"We have continued to monitor the situation on Stamfordham Road and further consideration is to be given to reducing the speed limit there. We have kept Mr Cousins fully informed on this, but did not think it appropriate to refer him to a report which had unfortunately been superceded by events."


So lets just recap.

A driver does 20mph over the speed limit and kills a child, a tragedy.

If the speed limit had been set at 30 instead of 40 the accident would not have happened....Am I missing something here? or is the guy a moron.

If you are going to do over 60 in a 40 limit are you going to do 30 if the speed limit on the same road was reduced....I think not.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 19:30 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Gizmo wrote:
If you are going to do over 60 in a 40 limit are you going to do 30 if the speed limit on the same road was reduced....I think not.


Anyway 30mph is plenty fast enough to kill. It's usually the attitude that kills in cases.

_________________
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 Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 21:15 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 23:17
Posts: 499
Typical. Everything comes down to the speed limit. Suggesting a reduced speed limit could have prevented a crash like this is totally flawed logic.

Although, i am 100% sure the local council will now reduce the speed limit as a "seen to be doing something" response to this act of dangerous driving.

I get so frustrated when I read storys like this, i makes me think that there are some REALLY stupid people in local government who just don't have a clue. Speed limits should be set by an independant body, scientifically and objectively; not on an emotional basis and certainly not by the local council.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 21:46 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 16:24
Posts: 322
How politicians can spin things round to make the speed limit sound like a factor when they were going faster than the speed limit ceases to amaze me. How can they get away with this mentality, are people stupid? Reducing the speed limit to 20mph won't stop those who excessively break the speed limit suddenly calm down; it will only serve in penalising the majority.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 21:50 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9268
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
sotonsteve wrote:
How politicians can spin things round to make the speed limit sound like a factor when they were going faster than the speed limit ceases to amaze me. How can they get away with this mentality, are people stupid? Reducing the speed limit to 20mph won't stop those who excessively break the speed limit suddenly calm down; it will only serve in penalising the majority.


And the rash of enforcement measures leading to a "reduction in speed" at that spot, together with a carefuly chosen time scale and set of figures ( known as good statistic management --also know as culinery statistics) wil "PROVE " that the reduction in the limit was a cure all

_________________
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 Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 23:42 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 00:01
Posts: 2258
Location: South Wales
Quote:
David Cameron, seven, was knocked off his bike and killed by a speeding driver


Police would like to question the driver of a silver DeLorean DMC10 in connection with this incident as well as separate incident of arson and exceeding the speed limit by 18mph.

Oh wait, it's not that David Cameron, sorry.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:14 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 10:44
Posts: 98
Location: Wokingham, Berkshire
40mph on a dual carriageway is nonesense. Either restrict it to one lane, or make sure pedestrians are kept away from it.

The kid was knocked off his bike on a pedestrian crossing (which, I am told you should get off the bike first to cross
Quote:
Crossing the road


64: Do not ride across a pelican, puffin or zebra crossing. Dismount and wheel your cycle across.

65: Toucan crossings. These are light-controlled crossings which allow cyclists and pedestrians to cross at the same time. They are push button operated. Pedestrians and cyclists will see the green signal together. Cyclists are permitted to ride across.

66: Cycle-only crossings. Cycle tracks on opposite sides of the road may be linked by signalled crossings. You may ride across but you MUST NOT cross until the green cycle symbol is showing.



So the BMW driver obviously didn't see the pedestrian crossing, or the bike on the crossing. If the crossing was well signposted, the obvious fault was for the BMW driver to not slow down and check the crossing was clear. He was probably on a mobile phone, or anyway distracted. Something a speed camera won't detect.
Yet they put a mobile camera van to catch speeders, after assessing that
Quote:
The accidents were not related to the speed limit, but due to dangerous driving


There is a road just like that near where I live: a dual carriageway that leads traffic to a residential area: no through road. That dual carriageway is so underutilised that usually people sit on the outside lane just to be away from the kerb. And the speed limit is 40mph but no one actually observs it because the only people ever travelling on that road are locals who know the road pretty well and the kids play well away from it. If there ever was a KSI on it, it would be out of sheer stupidity of either party.

Indeed, the other dual carriageway I know in my area with a 40 limit is the one where two bus stops are on opposite sides, but there is no bridge connecting the two. Since the two busstops are the only ones for nearly a mile and there is no safe way to cross the road (safe = subway or bridge, just like near railway crossings) then some silly pedestrians play russian roulette with the traffic, and obviously one of them in the past few years must have been killed because now that stretch is a 40mph leading to an NSL just a few yards down.

And guess what the solution to this problem was? Was it building a bridge or a footpath? No, it was placing a mobile s-camera van there on the odd occasion, i.e. at midday when traffic is the least, and it is easier to catch "speeding" motorists (50mph on a dual carriageway...)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:55 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 16:24
Posts: 322
Reminds me of Farnborough. There is a 30mph dual carriageway seperating the main shopping area and some offices and housing. To cross the road in safety a pedestrian should take a longer route via a subway. The dual carriageway has no pedestrian railings and the bushes at the side of the road haven't been cut back so that sightlines are good. As a result of not discouraging pedestrians from crossing and not providing good sightlines a lot of people have been knocked down there.

What was the solution? Hampshire Constabulary built a tarmac refuge where a scamvan could sit and catch motorists exceeding the 30mph speed limit. Guess what, the location is still an accident hotspot. What a surprise.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 11:06 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 10:15
Posts: 318
Location: Co Durham
A 30 limit on a dual-carriageway can only have a reasonable chance of enforcement if Specs cameras are put at either end.

If someone rides at speed across a road without stopping and looking (I have seen this happen) then a driver cannot be reasonably expected to avoid a collision if they are obeying the speed limit, otherwise they will have some but not necessarily all responsibility for the ensuing collision. The degree of responsibility is down to the police, CPS and courts.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 11:22 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2005 22:47
Posts: 1511
Location: West Midlands
T2006 wrote:
I get so frustrated when I read storys like this, i makes me think that there are some REALLY stupid people in local government who just don't have a clue...
Trust me, I know for a fact, there are! This is why they work for the LA and not the private sector...

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 12:04 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 15:14
Posts: 420
Location: Aberdeenshire
BottyBurp wrote:
T2006 wrote:
I get so frustrated when I read storys like this, i makes me think that there are some REALLY stupid people in local government who just don't have a clue...
Trust me, I know for a fact, there are! This is why they work for the LA and not the private sector...


Precisely my opinion! If these numpties had to perform to ensure their paycheque they'd be knackered!

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 11:45 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:30
Posts: 2053
Location: South Wales (Roving all UK)
Surely the issue is why the driver didn't see the lad on the crossing, or even the crossing at all?

Not sure how fast you have to drive to go blind but I'm sure its not 50 mph!

Either he was distracted, or the crossing was sighted in an innappropriate place, sunlinght etc.....no real lessons will be learned from this! A 30 disc and van raises revenue, re-engineering the crossing doesn't!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 11:51 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 10:44
Posts: 98
Location: Wokingham, Berkshire
civil engineer wrote:
Surely the issue is why the driver didn't see the lad on the crossing, or even the crossing at all?

Not sure how fast you have to drive to go blind but I'm sure its not 50 mph!

Either he was distracted, or the crossing was sighted in an innappropriate place, sunlinght etc.....no real lessons will be learned from this! A 30 disc and van raises revenue, re-engineering the crossing doesn't!


Agree entirely and exactly my point (see above).

revenue is king, be it the private or public sector.
Safety is nobody's business...


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 16, 2006 04:01 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 01:42
Posts: 686
Reducing an already ignored speed limit by 10mph and doing nothing about what is obviously a dangerous pedestrian crossing is nothing short of lunacy.

If a cars hits a pedestrian on a legitimate crossing at 60mph then there are problems other than the speed limit.

No doubt the lunacy will be compounded by the siting of a camera hundreds of yards away from the crossing it's supposed to protect.

_________________
“For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.” - H. L. Mencken


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 16, 2006 21:35 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9268
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
Only another 650 , or so to go - unless Toe + crones get nicked for selng shares in the house of lords( see i told you- it's privatisation gone mad )

_________________
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 Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests


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 can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.021s | 12 Queries | GZIP : Off ]