garman wrote:
i must admit, a tree hugging, bearded lental eater would read that site and be a nodding dog for every word of it
Here's one for you, garman -
http://www.roadpeace.org/partaffi/ssc/index.htmlSome extracts:
Quote:
almost 5,000 children were killed or seriously injured on British roads. Child pedestrians from low-income families suffer greater exposure to traffic which makes them at least three times more likely to die in road traffic crashes than child pedestrians from higher income families
Quote:
In a survey of women in rural communities, carried out by the National Federation of Women's Institutes, many said they wanted to see lower speed limits in their villages. We know from experience in Suffolk that village speed limits of 30 mph can cut crashes by a fifth. Yet in many villages elsewhere, speed limits of 40 mph, 50 mph, or 60 mph are the norm. Actual speeds are often even higher. In one survey, less than one in five local authorities had introduced 30mph speed limits for all villages, with bureaucratic obstacles remaining a problem to their widespread introduction.
Quote:
All of us are united in believing that the Government should act firmly to reduce road danger. We broadly welcomed the launch, by the Prime Minister, of the road safety strategy in March 2000 (and the accompanying speed management review), which recognised both the casualty reduction imperative as well as the social and environmental consequences of activities such as speeding. ,and Government targets include pledges to reduce child deaths and serious injuries on our roads by 50% and to reduce other deaths and serious injuries in road crashes by 40%. We welcome the government's support for 30mph speed limits in all villages
All good stuff!