New 20 mph speed limits.
Discussion
In recent months everywhere I travel I encounter new 20 mph speed limits which have replaced previous 30 mph, and occasionally 40 mph limits, sometimes accompanied by artificial road width restrictions. I have not seen any advance notices about such restrictions. Does anyone know what the procedure is for the implementation of such, and whether they can be legally challenged. There seems to be no justification for the majority of them on safety or pollution grounds, indeed the latter seems to have been exacerbated.
Here you are -
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/part/...
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/setting...
It may be worth bearing in mind that 20s and 30s are used in urban or village settings. They make good sense in such settings. The differences between the effects of a car hitting a pedestrian at 20, 30, and 40 mph are striking.
It's not the 1950s any more, but there are still plenty of opportunities to enjoy driving outside cities, towns, and villages, so we can still go and hoon safely and responsibly out on the open roads.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/part/...
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/setting...
It may be worth bearing in mind that 20s and 30s are used in urban or village settings. They make good sense in such settings. The differences between the effects of a car hitting a pedestrian at 20, 30, and 40 mph are striking.
It's not the 1950s any more, but there are still plenty of opportunities to enjoy driving outside cities, towns, and villages, so we can still go and hoon safely and responsibly out on the open roads.
Sahjahd said:
There seems to be no justification for the majority of them on safety or pollution grounds, indeed the latter seems to have been exacerbated.
And that often creates friction. Have more and more popping up in my neck of the woods and always, without fail, the driver behind me is 2cm from my rear plate as yes, he/she cannot see the reason for the 20mph limit.
And it becomes like the start of F1 once the limit is over.
Safe? Not always.
Breadvan72 said:
Here you are -
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/part/...
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/setting...
It may be worth bearing in mind that 20s and 30s are used in urban or village settings. They make good sense in such settings. The differences between the effects of a car hitting a pedestrian at 20, 30, and 40 mph are striking.
It's not the 1950s any more, but there are still plenty of opportunities to enjoy driving outside cities, towns, and villages, so we can still go and hoon safely and responsibly out on the open roads.
Thanks. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/part/...
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/setting...
It may be worth bearing in mind that 20s and 30s are used in urban or village settings. They make good sense in such settings. The differences between the effects of a car hitting a pedestrian at 20, 30, and 40 mph are striking.
It's not the 1950s any more, but there are still plenty of opportunities to enjoy driving outside cities, towns, and villages, so we can still go and hoon safely and responsibly out on the open roads.
My question wasn't about wishing to hoon around in built up areas, rather the creeping inappropriate lower limits which have been recently imposed surreptitiously under cover of "Covid restrictions", which seem to have merely added to congestion thus pollution, and neither prevented disease, nor cured anyone of it.
Sahjahd said:
Thanks.
My question wasn't about wishing to hoon around in built up areas, rather the creeping inappropriate lower limits which have been recently imposed surreptitiously under cover of "Covid restrictions", which seem to have merely added to congestion thus pollution, and neither prevented disease, nor cured anyone of it.
???My question wasn't about wishing to hoon around in built up areas, rather the creeping inappropriate lower limits which have been recently imposed surreptitiously under cover of "Covid restrictions", which seem to have merely added to congestion thus pollution, and neither prevented disease, nor cured anyone of it.
jondude said:
Sahjahd said:
There seems to be no justification for the majority of them on safety or pollution grounds, indeed the latter seems to have been exacerbated.
And that often creates friction. Have more and more popping up in my neck of the woods and always, without fail, the driver behind me is 2cm from my rear plate as yes, he/she cannot see the reason for the 20mph limit.
And it becomes like the start of F1 once the limit is over.
Safe? Not always.
The road I live on was converted to 20mph in May. Bollards, humps, signs.
All it’s done is reduce parking and force cars closer to each other in the centre of the road, speeds don’t appear to have reduced and noise of people thwacking into the humps has increased, Seems like a great idea. No idea why it was done or who dreamt it up but it seems a pointless waste of money.
All it’s done is reduce parking and force cars closer to each other in the centre of the road, speeds don’t appear to have reduced and noise of people thwacking into the humps has increased, Seems like a great idea. No idea why it was done or who dreamt it up but it seems a pointless waste of money.
Edited by Smiljan on Wednesday 30th September 23:57
The plan is to reduce or eliminate the use of cars in many parts of central London. Even as a petrolhead, I am inclined to agree with this plan, but I'd like to see a faster move to non ICE buses and cabs.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/15/car-free-zones-lau...
I wish that I could say that the Park Lane limit was aimed at teenage t
ts in super cars, but they don't pay speeding tickets anyway.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/15/car-free-zones-lau...
I wish that I could say that the Park Lane limit was aimed at teenage t
ts in super cars, but they don't pay speeding tickets anyway.Sahjahd said:
In recent months everywhere I travel I encounter new 20 mph speed limits which have replaced previous 30 mph, and occasionally 40 mph limits, sometimes accompanied by artificial road width restrictions. I have not seen any advance notices about such restrictions. Does anyone know what the procedure is for the implementation of such, and whether they can be legally challenged. There seems to be no justification for the majority of them on safety or pollution grounds, indeed the latter seems to have been exacerbated.
Most are about virtue signalling ,
Breadvan72 said:
Here you are -
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/part/...
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/setting...
It may be worth bearing in mind that 20s and 30s are used in urban or village settings. They make good sense in such settings. The differences between the effects of a car hitting a pedestrian at 20, 30, and 40 mph are striking.
It's not the 1950s any more, .
No it's not!! cars have better brakes, radar and have crumple zones these days , I would rather the few people driving without due care were held responsible ... https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/part/...
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/setting...
It may be worth bearing in mind that 20s and 30s are used in urban or village settings. They make good sense in such settings. The differences between the effects of a car hitting a pedestrian at 20, 30, and 40 mph are striking.
It's not the 1950s any more, .
Councillors are political. They will be responding to concerns raised by their constituents.
There will be a noisy minority of constituents who account for 90% plus of correspondence / contact, and therefore get more influence than others.
So when was the last time the OP wrote to his councillor about their view? When has anybody on here done that?
It's all very well being upset about the results, but for every driver who dismisses the 20mph as virtue signalling, there will be cycling groups, pedestrian groups, even anti wealth envy groups complaining to their council about the noise, pollution and dangers urging more restrictions.
If people don't write in because they think it won't make any difference, then you've already lost, and might as well just get comfortable with moaning at the internet.
There will be a noisy minority of constituents who account for 90% plus of correspondence / contact, and therefore get more influence than others.
So when was the last time the OP wrote to his councillor about their view? When has anybody on here done that?
It's all very well being upset about the results, but for every driver who dismisses the 20mph as virtue signalling, there will be cycling groups, pedestrian groups, even anti wealth envy groups complaining to their council about the noise, pollution and dangers urging more restrictions.
If people don't write in because they think it won't make any difference, then you've already lost, and might as well just get comfortable with moaning at the internet.
powerstroke said:
No it's not!! cars have better brakes, radar and have crumple zones these days , I would rather the few people driving without due care were held responsible ...
Lots of people drive badly. You appear to have a bad case of Volvo Syndrome. Modern cars do not make you Captain Scarlet. Virtue Signalling - when someone displays a strong opinion on something that you strongly disagree with.
Anyway...
As has been stated, lots of people ignore the limit because they don’t understand why it’s there. This thread is proof of that. Councils need to educate if they want the limits to be successful. 20 mph outside a school at leaving time makes sense, many don’t.
Anyway...
As has been stated, lots of people ignore the limit because they don’t understand why it’s there. This thread is proof of that. Councils need to educate if they want the limits to be successful. 20 mph outside a school at leaving time makes sense, many don’t.
Virtue signalling is a thing, and can be a pain in the butt, but the term virtue signalling tends to be used by people of a particular mindset, as exemplified by the NPE part of PH, to deride anything that they disagree with; and they tend to disagree with anything that inconveniences their chosen lifestyle of entitled selfishness.
Breadvan72 said:
It's not the 1950s any more, but there are still plenty of opportunities to enjoy driving outside cities, towns, and villages, so we can still go and hoon safely and responsibly out on the open roads.
Really, where ?I used to enjoy driving around the Peak District - early mornings with no one around but many of the NSL have been dropped to 40 or 50 and cameras abound whether they be static, average or other drivers dash cams. Wales has been very keen on speed enforcement for some years and Scotland is worse categorising higher speeds as Dangerous Driving
I'm still unclear why 20 is deemed a reasonable speed to drive past someone's house in town yet it's fine to go past at 60 in the Countryside - Country Lives Matter !
There are many roads that do not have speed cameras, in Oxfordshire and in East Anglia for example.
Also, get a slower car for fun driving: 60 mph is great fun in, for example, a classic Fiat 500, a classic Mini, a Caterham, and many other types. Modern cars hardly let you know that you are driving them anyway, at any speed.
Also, get a slower car for fun driving: 60 mph is great fun in, for example, a classic Fiat 500, a classic Mini, a Caterham, and many other types. Modern cars hardly let you know that you are driving them anyway, at any speed.
It is a war, with the Guardian reading car haters taking on everyone else and their 20 limits are the latest chapter of the onslaught, an absolute insanity under the bullst agenda of road “safety”.
But nobody seems to notice anymore, nobody cares or even appears to give a damn as their freedoms aren’t just eroded but permanently erased. They just happily roll over again and again rather than fighting the lefties, paying the fines, taking the points, bending over and quite frankly getting raped. Most even seem to enjoy the new Stasi police state enforced by stealth and “safety” cameras and their other truly underhanded, outright sneaky and disgraceful practices. Their entire revenue earning system rests on s172 and it is truly one of the most abhorrent pieces of Orwellian legislation I have ever encountered, “you will give us zee information or you vill suffer!”
What continues to amaze me is just how apathetic people seem to be, even on an enthusiast site such as PH where we see the same threads again and again attacking some poor bd who has been caught out by the surveillance state, who just attack them and celebrate the injustice of someone else being caught rather than actually trying to help. Absolute s quite frankly.
t agenda of road “safety”.But nobody seems to notice anymore, nobody cares or even appears to give a damn as their freedoms aren’t just eroded but permanently erased. They just happily roll over again and again rather than fighting the lefties, paying the fines, taking the points, bending over and quite frankly getting raped. Most even seem to enjoy the new Stasi police state enforced by stealth and “safety” cameras and their other truly underhanded, outright sneaky and disgraceful practices. Their entire revenue earning system rests on s172 and it is truly one of the most abhorrent pieces of Orwellian legislation I have ever encountered, “you will give us zee information or you vill suffer!”
What continues to amaze me is just how apathetic people seem to be, even on an enthusiast site such as PH where we see the same threads again and again attacking some poor b
d who has been caught out by the surveillance state, who just attack them and celebrate the injustice of someone else being caught rather than actually trying to help. Absolute s quite frankly.Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff