Safe Speed Forums

A case of monkeys and typewriters? We don’t drive alongside ‘never ending pavements with peds’ do we?

Anyway, is that not better than none of them having received training hence many more of them stepping out? (which strangely enough is what we have today)

Is this how our road safety policy has let us down?

Given this can you try again at Robin's question:

Quite. I don't think (m)any of us would disagree with the need for drivers to maintain their vigilance in the vicinity of even the best trained pedestrian, just in case they have a momentary brain-fart and do something monumentally stupid that (if they survive it) they'll be kicking themselves about for the rest of the day.

But right now the situation appears (disclaimer: this is personal opinion based on driving in/around London, things may be better elsewhere) to be that pedestrians simply don't need to bother taking any responsibility for their own safety. How often have we been confronted with youngsters (and younger adults) casually sauntering across the road (usually along a meandering route which is far from being the most direct path from pavement to pavement) forcing traffic to slow/stop? Now ask yourself how often that used to happen even just a few years ago, let alone a decade or more (depending on how long you've been driving) ago...

Edited to add:

IMO, this decline in pedestrian sensibility seems to have coincided with the decline in road safety messages aimed at pedestrians - it's all well and good having a few shock-tactic ads showing what can happen if you wander into the road whilst playing on your mobile, but where are the ads explaining how to cross the road safely in the first place? Do I hear someone cry "But that should be down to the parents to teach their kids"? Maybe it should, but given the behaviour of too many young adults (including, sickeningly, some wheeling around prams/pushchairs as if they were battering rams for forcing apart the waves of traffic) who themselves seem to have absolutely no roadsense whatsoever, what chance do their children have of learning anything other than how to treat the road as their personal fiefdom, expecting every other road user to be subservient to their wishes and needs?

_________________
Chris

Christopher Booker's Notebook
By Christopher Booker
Last Updated: 1:07am BST 21/10/2007

So every speed limit is correct and above reproach?

Then consider the A56 between the M66 and M65 in Lancashire. Several miles of dual carriageway with a 70mph limit. Maintained by the Highways Agency, who announced a planned limit reduction to 50mph last October. They even put the signs up and repeaters in readyness. Then came the objections and the HA them spoke to the local BiB and Lancs Council and now they aren't placing a blanket limit reduction on the whole road but looking at signage and engineering solutions combined with a couple of specific reductions. So they are clearly not infallible.

It's also worth noting that Councils don't have to make public any evidence for why they are reducing the limit (You can use FoI to make them I think). That the legal requirements for publicising notice of a proposed reduction are a joke, and can be got round in anycase. And if you don't live in that Council's area you have to justify why you should be allowed to object. Both myself and and another poster wrote objections to the imposition of a 50mph limit along 18 miles of the A515 and neither of us got the courtsey of a reply. So much for democracy and open government.

Barkstar

_________________
The difference between intelligence and stupidity is that intelligence has limits.

Woah, hold on there! This reminds me of Jeremy Clarkson saying, "How hard can it be?" (I'm not talking about anything in particular.)



Unless you're a combined programmer, car engineer, and satellite systems engineer all rolled into one, I would suggest that you can't say with anywhere near that much certainity that it is that easy.



But how on earth do you know that, when the first trials on this technology - satellite-linked speed limiters - have only been done in the last, what, two or three years? It sounds to me like you expect the moment a new technology is developed that it will be instantly available everywhere.

In my case, IF this technology was available on a new car, IF I could afford the car (these two "ifs" might go together), and IF other factors such as the car having low emissions were good, then I would get on and buy one. In fact I would like to buy one. There's no hypocrisy from me.



I would bet that the percentage of, say, district nurses that had points on their licence compared to the percentage of aggressive middle-aged men in powerful cars with points, would be much lower.

[quote=]"S[/quote]

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

Are your driving skills that poor that you need electronic gadgetry to help you adhere to a speed limit? Why can't people just use their eyes?

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

No, my driving skills are not so poor that I need electronic gadgety to help me adhere to a speed limit. What Mole was talking about was hypocrisy. And you've targeted exactly the wrong person with a comment like that - you need to target someone who says, as someone does on another thread, that they need to keep their eyes "glued" to the speedo to adhere to the speed limit.

As for people just using their eyes, they can but there's nothing wrong with making life easier. And if this technology was widely available and affordable, then it would certainly shut up the people who moan about getting caught a small amount over the limit.

They might be doing 20mph as an average speed (they wish, its more like 10 or 12) but that doesn't stop some people trying to go faster, and some people try to go stupidly fast between waiting at junctions.

I see it all the time when I'm cycling, some drivers applying ridiculous speed, only to end up sitting at the lights at the next junction.

My question is what's the problem introducing 20 limits in such areas when most cars are doing less than 20 (overall) anyway?

I already have.

The only way to prevent people stepping out would be a an unscalable physical barrier along the entire length of pavement which I don't agree with.

I wonder how much time you'd save overall going at 50 or going at 70 along that stretch of road, about three minutes if its clear? Wow.

Have you ever worked on a production line when the products don't arrive fast enough? An intelligent person would get bored very quickly. Intelligent kids get very bored a school if the work is not challenging enough.

The same happens to drivers. If the job doesn't use enough of the brain the resource's divert to the radio, the window etc.

I am convinced that is why so many lorry drivers crash into queues of traffic. I believe it is worse for intelligent drivers.

_________________
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

No, they just do it because they're asleep. I know one [well-known-hauliers] driver who refuses to use digital tacho equipped trucks because his second job will be threatened....he drives over 90 hours a week.

Well, at least I can respect that! I wouldn't worry about cost either. Unless the manufacturers unfairly profit from it, the cost to install would be little more than that of a GPS receiver. I'm curious as to WHY you'd want one though - if you're so good at sticking to the limit anyway?

To answer your earlier question, I'm an engineer and I work in the automotive field. I'm not a computer programmer (very few people in the industry have all the skills necessary to design a modern car) but that doesn't mean to say I don't work closely with them. I can assure you that this technology is available and that three years in today's motor industry is quite a long time. Hybrid buses are soon likely to be using the same kind of technology - where they are obliged to run on electric propulsion within a pre-defined "low emissions zone" and as soon as they cross out of it they can start their diesel engines again. The same could be done with speed limits (assuming the authorities can stop changing them every 5 minutes)!

My biggest fear is that one day, somesuch technology will be forced upon us and, once introduced, the accident rate won't change as much as the authorities and campaigners hoped. The most likely response to this would be "oh well, it's obvious that all the limits were too high then" so they will all be lowered. This will go on until we have the (electronic version of) the "red flag act" all over again. We've already seen the start of it. Very crude automated speed limit enforcement with cameras on an unprecedented scale and still no discernible benefit to the nation - so now they're reducing limits all over the place...

You seem to have very little faith in pedestrians. Given that the Green Cross Code is no longer taught in schools then introducing it again can do no harm, and would almost certainly make some dent in the problem.

Great idea, jomukuk. To which I would add: Walking while admiring the trees; walking with your laces not done in a reef-knot; waving at a friend across the road; speaking while walking.

Oh, nearly forgot: Getting out of bed in the morning. All should be subject to a £1,000 fine and/or three months' imprisonment.

You really don't get it, do you?

Seeing as how Glaikie and weepej are obviously supporters of the ideology of " the medicine aint working double the dose" i can only hope i get to meet either of these two sometime in the future, whereupon i shall take huge delight in forcing vast quantities of paracetamol down both of their throats in an attempt to cure their blatantly incurable stupidity.

Ignorance can be cured but stupidity is forever.

_________________
"Safety" Scamera Partnerships;
Profitting from death and misery since 1993.

Believe nothing- Question everything.

Likewise pavement cyclists or those who do not give away to "old trouts" as Cousin Andreas und his trio of "brandy tippling chums" once got cross about.

Or the one who pushed my husband into a gas works trench..

Then my own niece.. then aged 5 years. She was deeply traumatised when a pavement cyclist cause her to jump for her life .. und she hurt herself quite badly on the SCHOOL's playground walling when she fell against this. My sister was just yards behind her und my brother-in-law had just walked around to the his driver's door. The little girl was approaching the rear door to get into this vehicle as this cyclist stormed up.

Und what about the chap who killed that other gentleman? 25 mph on a pavement

Never heeded any warnings so deaf as well as "retarded" as he later claim in defence in the court.


We noted that spindrift und his little lover (who have the hots for him apparently - He need to be very careful on them CMs.. ) seem to think it "not this cyclist's fault und that it right not to lock him up." I happen to disagree und if he had "learning difficulties" - then this mean we cannot then simply allow any one on wheels without some kind of test as health und safety issue.


So does speed, courtesy, consideration und OBEYING the law not apply to cyclists? We know that COAST does not seem to apply despite claims to have read John Franklin und reinforced by Mr Pedoe und Mr Peace in Cycling Plus magazine - which also not read by this type of cyclist )

We have a RIGHT to expect to be able to WALK on a FOOTPATH und CROSS a ROAD at a PELICAN or ZEBRA CROSSING without being MOWN DOWN by some MORON on a BICYCLE just as we have the same right to use the road WITHOUT ANY THREAT from ANYONE in A MOTORISED VEHICLE OF ANY TYPE!



Sits back und watches with amusement as fingers now go a-scurrying to hidden from view fora (or are they really fora on various cycling fora. We know more about who folk are than you might think )

We cycle but I cannot ever recall riding on pavements, disobeying a red light (either in car or on bike), nor being on the road in the dark without making sure another road user can see us.. nor do have we ever aimed a vehicle nor continued at same speed when we see any hazard ahead either so how we travel .. und this also include walking





Sink estates. We need MORE policemen.

The ones who hurtle around residential streets are

1. the people who live on the housing estate/development or whatever. Sister-in-laws live in nice leafy Manchester /burb. There are roads running off to other cul-de-sacs.. und to other link to main roads between which the residential hub ist sanwiched. Both say they know the cars which race between the humps or aim to the "low point" without reducing speed are fellow residents und even worse - they see the worst offender as the one who petitioned for the humps in the first place

2. The boy racers. Without wishing to speak ill of dead .. but some boys she teaches died when car hit a tree. It had a blow-out .. but when she showed me und IG a photo of that road (on which one of these boys lived).. we think the young driver must have been "pushing it some" at the same for the crash to have occurred as described.

But she also know of an area in rough-ish area nearby und one which the buses no longer service after dark - whereby burnt out und TWOC cars are regularly reported in press as severest nuisance .. yet the police fail consistently to actually go do some handcuffing.

These not isolated cases und the reality behind many a KSI amongst the innocent because these low-lifes always seem to walk away from this carnage or leave one of their pack dying to face the music alone - sich is the degree of their cowardice und so called "honour amongst ne'er do wells"



People set out to deliberately graffiti .. some deliebrately set out to just dump their crap as well.

The inadvertent accidental drop of a paper or the unfelft gradual creep-up blip over a speed limit ist much better handled by common sense professional judgement und "avuncular word"






They crash because they are complacent.

They crash because they think keeping to a speed limit ist more important than actually reading road und all hazards.

I hear of one person who set to 30 mph cruise control.. but expected everyone to clear out of his way He crashed of course.. at 30 mph into another car. The person (neighbour in village) he crash into could not believe he said that to him when exchanging the details


They crash because they do not apply C O A S T They crash at any speed if they not apply this. Even cyclists






If they drive applying COAST which ist RoadCraft's OAP extended a lot (I suggest a read of this along with Cycle Craft - especially page 52 of the latter :;wink:) - then they at the most appropriate speed which may be BELOW the lolly or just a short term blip above if a serious need to just avoid the problem of the moron who accelerate to prevent a very legal overtake or some other emergency.



Better than a speed cam. Think of the HGVs it prevents too.

Besides - you would still be paying for the speed cam (which presumably ist in addition to these chicanes). It cannot have been working since you also needed the chicanes

But the real reason ist to prevent the rat run. My sister-in-law says once upon a time folk would cut through a council estate to get to M602 somewhere in Eccles. They built a chicane which would allow the bus/fire engine/ambulance to get through.. but not a car. The residents though now have to drive around the main roads to get parked in the garage lot behind their homes though




So.. you apply for humps und chicanes. You then find the real culprits are your neighbours really Strangers would not know the area und would keep to the main roads.




But you are complaining about chicanes at council tax payer cost. Und the people who use these roads will be the ones who live around them.




He ist called Mr Smith. Kindly refer with respect. He did encourage discussion on how to improve driving und safe standards und I think we have more takers for IAM as result.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

So you acknowledge that they aren't infallible but think it doesn't matter anyway - sheesh.

You very clearly think anyone going over the limit deserves all they get. Yet in this case the limit reduction was eventually deemed unnecessary, but if no one had objected they'd have had the cameras in and been handing out the fines to ensure we stuck to an artificially low limit - when there was no need.

There are examples of this all over the country. And perhaps there'd be rather fewer if the authorities were required to justify such changes rather more openly, so they could be challenged more thoroughly and better solutions sought.

Barkstar

_________________
The difference between intelligence and stupidity is that intelligence has limits.

Lol yes! And sometimes when people drive too slowly they crash. And when they drive too fast within the speed limit, they crash.
I wonder, therefore, if speed is the be-all and end-all of road safety?

This is too easy - like shooting fish in a barrel.

Can we have the next person please?

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus