Safe Speed Forums

20mph limits. They're cropping up everywhere. Where, if anywhere, do you think they're justified?

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

Narrow roads where cars are forced very close to the pavement and close to each other.

None of these -some parts of the country have a time limited 20 zone - outside schools etc.
Excellent idea - but why just 20 -- with kids on the loose and idiotic parents parking - the idea shoud be go very slow .20 gives an idea of safety - a feeling of it's all right. Why not a massive sign saying "KIDS LOOSE - TAKE CARE"

_________________
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

another grey area
the only 20mph zones i know of in my area co exist with speed bumps, where it is impossible to exceed 20mph so whats the point, outside schools the may be a arguement

_________________
now retired

There are just two sound reasons for installing a 20mph speed limit:

1) Because robust science says that they will be effective in casualty reduction in a particular environment.

2) Because we need to try a practical experiment with suitable control groups to feed the robust science.

So I didn't answer. Road safety by: "well it sounded like a good idea" has to stop.

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

I didn't answer either.
The only places a 20mph speed limit might be justified are those where most drivers would, of their own accord, do less than 20mph most of the time - and in those situations the limit would not be needed. The few who would drive faster than 20 would probably do so regardless of whether there was a limit or not.
The only true justification for such a limit would be in situations where hidden hazards exist which cannot be engineered out - those which would not be apparent to most drivers, although I can't think of any such situations.

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

My answer is Where there is a hidden or very deceptive hazard that requires dramatic moderation of speed. however, my gut reaction is that a "SLOW, HIDDEN XYZ AHEAD" sign is far more appropriate. Accordingly, sorry, I can't tick any of your boxes, except perhaps "none of these". I like Paul's answer too.

As pretty much everybody else has said, speed limits are a very blunt tool, and everything depends on time. What is a sensible speed at 3am, and is just making progress, may be lethal at 8:45am. But the speed limit is not typically implemented with time considerations, it is just bluntly imposed for worst case times, and ignores the consequences of boring the pants off somebody who is naturally tired at a much quieter time of day...

Set the limits higher, and let drivers once again have some responsibility for determining the correct speed for the conditions!

maybe variable speed limits should be introduced,
it is not hard to design a sign which changes at a set time. or even a colour change would suffice,
BUT GET RID OF SPEED TRAPS AND CAMERAS SOON AS POSSIBLE, THEY ARE DOWNRIGHT DANGEROUS!

_________________
Brian of Plymouth
When will the government realise , that to err is only human, to be perfect is to be GOD.