20 mph Speed Limit Rejected - A Rare Win

[speedking31]

But that's not what he said, which was effectively "You need a new car because it should be capable of doing 20 mph in 4th." Diesel maybe, but 1.0 Yaris?

[singlecoil]

No need to worry about what he 'effectively said' when we can read what he actually said.

As someone said recently, modern cars should be able to cope with all frequently encountered road conditions. Whether that's in a lower gear or a higher one will be a matter for the manufacturer and the customer, but driving at 20mph ought not to be a problem for any road car.

[Terminator X]

singlecoil said:

No need to worry about what he 'effectively said' when we can read what he actually said.

As someone said recently, modern cars should be able to cope with all frequently encountered road conditions. Whether that's in a lower gear or a higher one will be a matter for the manufacturer and the customer, but driving at 20mph ought not to be a problem for any road car.

At odds to his post though. Chances are that he knows his car better than you.

TX.

[singlecoil]

Terminator X said:

singlecoil said:

No need to worry about what he 'effectively said' when we can read what he actually said.

As someone said recently, modern cars should be able to cope with all frequently encountered road conditions. Whether that's in a lower gear or a higher one will be a matter for the manufacturer and the customer, but driving at 20mph ought not to be a problem for any road car.

At odds to his post though. Chances are that he knows his car better than you.

TX.

I don't know his car at all, nevertheless, driving at 20mph ought not to be problem for any road car.

SC.

[crowfield]

I'll speak to Jaguar and ask them to redesign it shall I? My kit car will not do 20MPH in 3rd gear either - it just bogs down and dies. Perhaps I should contact Weber and ask them to redesign the carbs?

[crowfield]

And I would far rather drive around looking where I am going and paying attention to the road than staring at the speedo in case I inadvertently slip a few MPH over a number.

[singlecoil]

They are just the kind of arguments to present at a town hall meeting to decide on a 20mph limit, you'll really carry the day with those!

[bad company]

Can't believe I started a thread about a likely win against '20's plenty' and some of you still manage to make a fight between yourselves out of it.

There is an old saying about starting a fight in an empty room.

[Dammit]

Buying a modern car that can't be driven below 30mph seems to be a little unwise, given that the average speed of travel in a built up area is less than 20mph (and less than 9mph in town).

The only thing that the 20mph limit brings to driving in an urban environment is to (try) to stop people putting their foot down between junctions, with the risks that that brings (dangerous overtakes etc).

Sadly the whole 20mph thing is a waste of time as it'll probably only ever be used by accident investigators to apportion blame - the coppers don't enforce it at all.

However, railing against the whole idea of a 20mph limit being in any way a good idea with such risible statements as "my car can't do it" makes as much sense as bleating about a limit which is higher than the average speed of the traffic that claims to be being held up by said limit.

[singlecoil]

Can't believe anyone would start a thread on a forum and not expect a discussion to ensue.


If I lived in a town and a 20mph limit was proposed, and if I disagreed with it as I expect I would, though it would depend on the local circumstances, I like to think I could come up with better arguments against it than "my car won't pull 20 in 3rd gear" and "I don't think I could judge 20mph without keeping my eyes glued to the speedometer".

I think most speed limits in this country are fine as they are and I don't know of any that need to be reduced further. But if we are to prevent further lowering, we need to come up with MUCH better arguments than the ones we see here nearly every day. Example of crap arguments seen on SP&L include "if I have to drive any slower I will go to sleep" and "they only have speed limits so they can fine people for exceeding them, and make loads of money".

[bad company]

singlecoil said:

Can't believe anyone would start a thread on a forum and not expect a discussion to ensue.


If I lived in a town and a 20mph limit was proposed, and if I disagreed with it as I expect I would, though it would depend on the local circumstances, I like to think I could come up with better arguments against it than "my car won't pull 20 in 3rd gear" and "I don't think I could judge 20mph without keeping my eyes glued to the speedometer".

I think most speed limits in this country are fine as they are and I don't know of any that need to be reduced further. But if we are to prevent further lowering, we need to come up with MUCH better arguments than the ones we see here nearly every day. Example of crap arguments seen on SP&L include "if I have to drive any slower I will go to sleep" and "they only have speed limits so they can fine people for exceeding them, and make loads of money".

There are lots of examples of how to run a successful campaign against reducing speed limits here - http://20spointless.org.uk/

Those guys ran a great campaign and as you said came up with much better arguments than some on this thread.

[Dammit]

From the site you just linked to:

"WASTE OF MONEY – £350,000 will be spent to reduce traffic speeds by an average of 1mph-2mph".

Which suggests that the average speed in Worthing is 21-22mph, so people are getting het up about very little in the way of (potential) change?

[crowfield]

Dammit said:

From the site you just linked to:

"WASTE OF MONEY – £350,000 will be spent to reduce traffic speeds by an average of 1mph-2mph".

Which suggests that the average speed in Worthing is 21-22mph, so people are getting het up about very little in the way of (potential) change?

Perhaps they are upset that £350,000 of ratepayers money is being wasted for so little return?

[Dammit]

Nah.

[Dr Jekyll]

singlecoil said:

But if we are to prevent further lowering, we need to come up with MUCH better arguments than the ones we see here nearly every day. Example of crap arguments seen on SP&L include "if I have to drive any slower I will go to sleep" and "they only have speed limits so they can fine people for exceeding them, and make loads of money".

Surely it should be up to them to come up with arguments for further restrictions, not us to come up with arguments against?

[singlecoil]

Dr Jekyll said:

singlecoil said:

But if we are to prevent further lowering, we need to come up with MUCH better arguments than the ones we see here nearly every day. Example of crap arguments seen on SP&L include "if I have to drive any slower I will go to sleep" and "they only have speed limits so they can fine people for exceeding them, and make loads of money".

Surely it should be up to them to come up with arguments for further restrictions, not us to come up with arguments against?

Surely it should only rain at night, and never on Bank Holiday weekends?

[Dr Jekyll]

singlecoil said:

Dr Jekyll said:

singlecoil said:

But if we are to prevent further lowering, we need to come up with MUCH better arguments than the ones we see here nearly every day. Example of crap arguments seen on SP&L include "if I have to drive any slower I will go to sleep" and "they only have speed limits so they can fine people for exceeding them, and make loads of money".

Surely it should be up to them to come up with arguments for further restrictions, not us to come up with arguments against?

Surely it should only rain at night, and never on Bank Holiday weekends?

It's a principle of a free society that people should be allowed to do what suits them unless there is a reason for preventing it. Not that everyone should be banned from doing anything unless they can prove it's a good idea.

[Dammit]

Where does running with scissors fit on that spectrum?

[Dr Jekyll]

Dammit said:

Where does running with scissors fit on that spectrum?

Perfectly legal so far as I know.

[singlecoil]

Dr Jekyll said:

singlecoil said:

Dr Jekyll said:

singlecoil said:

But if we are to prevent further lowering, we need to come up with MUCH better arguments than the ones we see here nearly every day. Example of crap arguments seen on SP&L include "if I have to drive any slower I will go to sleep" and "they only have speed limits so they can fine people for exceeding them, and make loads of money".

Surely it should be up to them to come up with arguments for further restrictions, not us to come up with arguments against?

Surely it should only rain at night, and never on Bank Holiday weekends?

It's a principle of a free society that people should be allowed to do what suits them unless there is a reason for preventing it. Not that everyone should be banned from doing anything unless they can prove it's a good idea.

It's a principle of a free society that people should be allowed to vote for individuals to represent them on governing bodies of one sort or another. Those representatives then vote on proposals according to the wishes of the majority of the people who voted for them, otherwise they get voted out at the next election.

There's already a speed limit in force, so people are already being prevented from doing what suits them (to drive at their own preferred speed if that is greater than the speed limit) so it's just a question of what that limit should be.