speed limits: do they work? (of course not)

speed limits: do they work? (of course not)

Author
Discussion

anthonym

Original Poster:

51 posts

174 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
It's been a while since I posted here, in fact I am not sure if I ever have, just cannot recall. I'll see my time and posts count when I post this.
I am interested in changing the world's (UN, EU, WHO, BMJ) approach to speed. To recognise that speed does not kill - every time someone breaks the speed limit, someone doesn't die., for example.
Seems to me that ALL the anti speed pressure comes from vested interests. For example years ago when HMG threatened to shut down 50% of the railway network, Transport 2000 was set up by rail unions (and others anti car) to drive cars off the road through taking the joy out of driving, they then leveraged other anti car groups and since then "charities" have used the bereaved as weapons and politicians are faced with mums and kids bearing placards demanding speed traps - all because the idea that passing over an empty piece of tarmac at one speed as compared to another speed alone is going to cause death on said empty piece of road. Since ancient times it has been seen that attempts to force change on the people do not work, and this includes driver behaviour. People respond to support and education, not threats. Threats are responded to with counter measures and in the case of enforcement alienates society from the police who need support from said society in order to protect said society. "plod" are part of society and their being tasked with criminalising 50% of drivers, who by the way are the responsible adults who in the rest of life make that society work, is really not a good idea, especially when it has been shown that not only do speed traps not work, neither do political speed limits.

Question I have here is, is PH a place to find like minded people who may be interested in doing something about all this? Change would not be fast, but it could be made inevitable - debunking the faulty research has been done (that's not for here, too long and complex and as we know BS beats brains especially online), but being right doesn't achieve anything on its own, especially in the face of well funded vested interests, well organised and professional. They will first and always "attack the man" as can be seen in every case where individuals try to take on the establishment - get yourself on Breakfast TV and you will find yourself up against a nine year lass who tragically has lost her daddy in a road crash. Nothing to be said. You lose.

Anyone prefers to engage by pm is welcome.

oh yes, knowing PH, you can take the piss, mock (both keyboard simple for puerile idiots) - or get involved. DO SOMETHING. Question is: what? Stopping the carnage is what it's about - because that is not what is going on, to the profit of those involved.

How is it that the population of drivers are the only group excluded from representation in road safety policy?

In my view it is all about respect. The law and government has to respect the people. Failure to do so will mean the people do not respect the law and government, which leads in the end to anarchy, in this case on our roads. You cannot force drivers, you must lead them with support and education etc. Radar signs, not radar traps, for example.

Anthony - petrolhead and pissed off with the bull.

Let's create a rebellion. F R E E D O M !!!! Stay awake, Stay sharp, Stay alive!

Edited by anthonym on Friday 14th August 10:23


Edited by anthonym on Friday 14th August 12:32

bobtail4x4

3,701 posts

108 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
nurse! the meds are wearing off again.............

_dobbo_

14,327 posts

247 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
anthonym said:
To recognise that speed does not kill - otherwise all airline passengers would arrive dead, for example.
This is a bad, bad example to use. A better one would be that every time someone breaks the speed limit, someone doesn't die.

Regardless you are on a hiding to nothing here, save your time, and your sanity, and give up now.

lbc

3,212 posts

216 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
anthonym said:
It's been a while since I posted here, in fact I am not sure if I ever have, just cannot recall.
Less than one post per year during nearly six years.

We look forward to your next post in the year 2017. biggrin

Dammit

3,790 posts

207 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
I suspect the next post will involve:

a) Lizards ruling us and
b) Something about jet fuel and steel beam
c) A continued total ignorance of physics, human nature, and personal responsibility

HantsRat

2,369 posts

107 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
R500Bdr said:
Regardless you are on a hiding to nothing here, save your time, and your sanity, and give up now.

I expect you are right, I'll change the example thanks for that.

Just thought I would see but I see already the attacks on the man have started above.

I won't be giving up, but it is probably true rather ironically that this is not an appropriate place, as evidenced by the anonymous dammit post above .

Anthony
This is a different username to your original post?

LordGrover

33,532 posts

211 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
In general, I agree with the OP. Just not sure what to do about it.
The whole system is flawed, not just driving.

Dammit

3,790 posts

207 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
HantsRat said:
This is a different username to your original post?
That'll be the illuminati changing his post to make him look stupid.

Trust no one!

Always wear a tin foil chapeau when doing 90mph past a school, lest they read your mind with their lasers.

Dammit

3,790 posts

207 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
LordGrover said:
In general, I agree with the OP. Just not sure what to do about it.
The whole system is flawed, not just driving.
In which case I have some magic beans that I am sure you'll be interested in.

anthonym

Original Poster:

51 posts

174 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
Dammit said:
In which case I have some magic beans that I am sure you'll be interested in.
TO DAMMIT whoever you are.

your activities here suggest you have a vested interest in trashing road safety (edit: he is a cyclist car hater), probably to your own profit - or you are a troll or both.
your failure to contribute anything meaningful and to engage in hostile mockery suggest you have a hidden agenda.

should you wish to join in informed debate I expect you would be welcome, but currently your behaviour is no more than a troll - despite having x thousand previous posts - it seems having engaged in posting large numbers of previous posts is no guarantee of acceptable behaviour nor of hidden agendas or vested interests.

GENERALLY PH

Seems to me it is wrong of those in here to attack new posters without any mercy whatever - ask yourselves why some never or rarely post. The poor quality of the troll like responses makes it no surprise.

Any real troll, vested interest holder, hidden agenda follower, will not be affected by your hostility, only those who would join you in your interests are the ones you hurt. As such you destroy only what you claim to be your own interests in things where speed matters.

WHAT CAN WE DO?

A lot. First step is to gather together, I was hoping PH is an obvious place, but the (quite frankly) trolls make me wonder.

That said I do see some sensible responses (THANK YOU) and I see also what I have seen elsewhere, that there is a desire to effect change, but a hopelessness about it being possible. I believe it is possible. However at present it is a case of divide and conquer, motorists are divided in to individuals who alone are powerless. There are I gather 40 million motorists in the UK, I do not know if that includes bikers though many are both. There are groups on the internet, but none have millions of members.

The carnage on the roads needs to be stopped. It is not being stopped. Current methods are not working and the powers that be are wondering why, saying that MORE enforcement of what is not working is the only way.

I say different. Responsible adult drivers can be trusted and must be respected. How one goes about this is a different discussion. The desire to make a beginning has to start somewhere. Sections of society trying to force their methods on another unrepresented section is wrong. What we need is working with motorists to the common good.

So how about right here?

Anthony


Edited by anthonym on Friday 14th August 13:01

Dammit

3,790 posts

207 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
The problem is, Anthony old chap, that you are making lots of assertions with no substance.

i.e. there is nothing to debate.

If you had any evidence that support your assertions then you should introduce it, give it some context, suggest what you feel would be a way forward, and then it could be discussed.

Simply saying that speed limits don't work is akin to saying "I'm Elvis", it's going to make people pay attention to you (which is, I think, your ultimate goal) but with no evidence it's just noise.

HantsRat

2,369 posts

107 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
Not going to happen. I would seriously stop wasting any more time on this.

Edited by HantsRat on Friday 14th August 13:57

anthonym

Original Poster:

51 posts

174 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
so we have detractors as follows:

DAMMIT a cyclist who thinks engaging in abusive mockery followed by "argument" is acceptable.

and to my surprise

HantsRat who appears to be a serving traffic police officer - is that right?



tapereel

1,860 posts

115 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
anthonym said:
so we have detractors as follows:

DAMMIT a cyclist who thinks engaging in abusive mockery followed by "argument" is acceptable.

and to my surprise

HantsRat who appears to be a serving traffic police officer - is that right?
I am sure I know how this is going to play out so let's cut your research and campaign short.

All you need to do is to suggest to the autorities that drivers promise not to crash any more. Then they will say you are bonkers. Job done.

Saves any more wasted bandwidth.

Moonhawk

10,730 posts

218 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
LordGrover said:
In general, I agree with the OP. Just not sure what to do about it.
The whole system is flawed, not just driving.
Speed limits themselves are a reasonable measure - the problem is the muppets who are in charge of setting them. They are far too concerned with political point scoring, are influenced far too easily by anti-speed campaigners and must be seen to be to be doing something (even if that something is uncalled for or has no impact). Speed limits are far too easy to lower without any real justification, evidence or demonstrable benefit - and are almost impossible to have raised if they are set inappropriately low. Out of the several hundred speed limit reviews in place in my county - every single one was a reduction (and from what I have seen - most of them were implemented).

If councils actually followed the governments white paper on setting speed limits - I doubt we would be seeing the wholesale reductions we have of late.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...

Some of the key points I feel councils are ignoring:

"Speed limits should be evidence-led and self-explaining and seek to reinforce people's assessment of what is a safe speed to travel.They should encourage self-compliance."

"enabling the setting of more appropriate local speed limits, including lower or higher limits where conditions dictate"

"Unless a speed limit is set with support from the local community, the police and other local services, with supporting education, and with consideration of whether engineering measures are necessary to reduce speeds; or if it is set unrealistically low for the particular road function and condition, it may be ineffective and drivers may not comply with the speed limit."

"Where there is poor compliance with an existing speed limit on a road or stretch of road the reasons for the non-compliance should be examined before a solution is sought. If the speed limit is set too low for no clear reason and the risk of collisions is low, then it may be appropriate to increase the limit."

Anyone know of a road where the limit has been raised - especially in response to a survey showing that drivers regularly exceed the one already in force?

Edited by Moonhawk on Friday 14th August 14:16

Vaud

50,291 posts

154 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
Nope. I'm generally happy with speed limits and enforcement.

I think we need pragmatic enforcement (which still happens when you get stopped vs a camera) but limits are a good idea in many places.

I think we should be investing more in smart systems with variable limits (upwards as well as downwards) that are pragmatically enforced.

e.g. Going past a primary school in the dark, wet at end of school - a 20 limit is appropriate. But it is equally possible that a 30 or 35 limit at that same location is sensible at weekends. Whilst we should trust drivers to choose the appropriate speed...

But I guess that doesn't help you. Better education - which would then also include retesting and updating - would be good in my view, but it would be massively unpopular.

AA999

5,180 posts

216 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
The problem we've got in the UK is that indeed there are too many vested interest pressure groups rallying their local MPs and authorities to reduce speed limits on roads for nothing more than their own convenience and nothing much to do with the general safety of any stretch of road.

The balance between the national need for people/goods to effectively travel on the road network versus the need to make others feel comfortable in proximity of the roads for their own peace of mind seems to have swayed largely towards the latter.

Another reason is due to lack of funding for roads. Instead of improving the road network to accommodate larger volumes of traffic the simple solution in a lot of parts is to reduce the speed limit, so again its not a safety issue, more of a traffic volume management issue.

BUT the main gripe I have, and I think a lot of others too, is that many speed limits and the resultant enforcement are supposedly done in the name of safety. Speed related infringements are classed as criminal activities and if they were primarily in the name of safety then this would be easy to swallow, but when its in the name of reducing noise impact in order to increase the value of resident's houses near a road then it strikes a sour note.


Edited by AA999 on Friday 14th August 14:24

Type R Tom

3,859 posts

148 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
Here we go again, another "I have a driving licence, therefore I am an expect on all things to do with roads".

anthonym

Original Poster:

51 posts

174 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
Type R Tom said:
Here we go again, another "I have a driving licence, therefore I am an expect on all things to do with roads".
Highway engineer .

0000

13,812 posts

190 months

Friday 14th August 2015
quotequote all
anthonym said:
Type R Tom said:
Here we go again, another "I have a driving licence, therefore I am an expect on all things to do with roads".
Highway engineer .


Personally it's the emphasis on speed limits; as if they're they only way of reducing accidents, always reduce accidents when speeds are lowered and are the only thing which can be enforced, that particularly bothers me.