20mph speed limits to be imposed to protect cyclists
Discussion
Nikolai Petroff said:
Bicycles should be banned. They are 19th century technology and should be replaced with electrically powered personal transportation capsules. Bikes belong in a gym, not on the road. Anybody who wants his prostate stimulated by something long and hard should look elsewhere.
Every time I see an adult on a bicycle, I no longer despair for the future of the human race. - H. G. Wells.The bicycle - named as one of the most useful items every invented by hunankind............
OpulentBob said:
bigdog3 said:
mybrainhurts said:
That's what the Nazi military said. They're still being prosecuted.....
Even Oskar Groening and he was just a book-keeper (of Auschwitz) 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32336353
Nikolai Petroff said:
Bicycles should be banned. They are 19th century technology and should be replaced with electrically powered personal transportation capsules.
They'll be replacing the motor car - robotised pods - and not that far in the future either, I think. The days of people driving cars are sadly numbered. (Will they be allowed to take you to and from the pub though? nd will people still be able to display evidence of their wealth and masculinity, like many currently need to?
)Bikes were on the roads before the car and they'll be providing persoanl transport for centuries after, me thinks.
heebeegeetee said:
They'll be replacing the motor car - robotised pods - and not that far in the future either, I think. The days of people driving cars are sadly numbered.
(Will they be allowed to take you to and from the pub though? nd will people still be able to display evidence of their wealth and masculinity, like many currently need to? )
Bikes were on the roads before the car and they'll be providing persoanl transport for centuries after, me thinks.
So did donkeys. Should we keep them around? BTW, ever felt a Canadian winter? How about a Dubai Summer? Case closed. Bikes are for Guardian readers, composters and those who only use one square of a toilet paper... and obviously living in the <5% of the world where a bike is even remotely viable.(Will they be allowed to take you to and from the pub though? nd will people still be able to display evidence of their wealth and masculinity, like many currently need to?
)Bikes were on the roads before the car and they'll be providing persoanl transport for centuries after, me thinks.
Whats the deal with "digital speed cameras"? Will they work distance over time thus forcing all drivers to stare at the speedo constantly instead of looking around and noticing the biker creeping up at 21mph who's now sat in the blind spot with his sense of righteousness that entitles him to ignore all signals, risk and sense?
OpulentBob said:
I spent a long time arguing to exclude certain roads, only to be told by people that lived on those roads that they hoped my children (and specifically MY children) that were knocked down and killed. Damned if you do...
Google "Setting Local Speed Limits", it's an easy to read DfT document which gives good advice on when and where 20mph is suitable.
People are so nice aren't they?Google "Setting Local Speed Limits", it's an easy to read DfT document which gives good advice on when and where 20mph is suitable.
One wonders if they ever let their children out. In the city the risk of being injured by a car as you sit at home playing games on an electronic device must be very small.
The local residents will, of course, be the first to moan when they find themselves being caught out by the limits they want. Still if it introduces new career opportunities for red flag carriers in the future and thus provides an automatic fitness regime that sames the NHS from collapse I suppose some good will come of it .....
The more pertinent restriction that would make roads safer for children would be to ban parking on residential streets. I wonder how the residents would react to that as a proposal?
I would be surprised if the guidelines about setting speed limits, which used to be realistically applied in most case back in the late 50s and 60s of the last century, are much adhered to these days. Perhaps they are in the general wording but I would bet that the numbers are distorted and twisted to suit some local 'person of influence' or pretty much any highly vocal single issue fanatic.
AlexS said:
As bikes aren't required to have a speedometer cyclists cannot be charged with speeding. A cyclist can be charged with pedalling furiously though.
That is because a bicycle is now classed as a Carriage. The original offence was applied to horse drawn carriages and other trailers (and even groups of animals).Nikolai Petroff said:
and obviously living in the <5% of the world where a bike is even remotely viable.
Which is where most of the world lives. I tell ya, when it comes to personal transport, or should I say personally controlled transport, the bike is going to see the car out by millenia.
Nikolai Petroff said:
Saddle bum said:
The bicycle - named as one of the most useful items every invented by hunankind............
I would say penicilin... or wet wipes.woowahwoo said:
LongQ said:
The more pertinent restriction that would make roads safer for children would be to ban parking on residential streets. I wonder how the residents would react to that as a proposal?
Or, they could maintain the road surface to a much higher quality, instead of adorning it with baubles of humps, bumps signs and lines. Even when a new surface laid, some utility will carve it up within a month of two.And unfortunately, smooth roads with no humps, one way streets, roads with no parking etc all act to increase traffic speed, not reduce it. As was mentioned above somewhere, if people could be trusted to drive sensibly then we could maybe make some progress. But they invariably can't. It's the one d
head on the sports bike, the barryboy machine, the domino's delivery driver, the van driver on a mission, etc, that spoil it for everyone else. It only takes one in a hundred to break "the rules" but they're the one that gets noticed, and more often than not smacks in to the innocent party. It's a difficult one for sure.
woowahwoo said:
LongQ said:
The more pertinent restriction that would make roads safer for children would be to ban parking on residential streets. I wonder how the residents would react to that as a proposal?
Or, they could maintain the road surface to a much higher quality, instead of adorning it with baubles of humps, bumps, signs and lines. Even when a new surface has been laid, some utility will carve it up within a month of two.Edited by woowahwoo on Tuesday 18th August 15:48
Road surfaces.
Last week I was in the area of Reading and happened to pass through the bottleneck that is Sonning at evening commute time.
Who on earth would want to live there? Beautiful place but the commuter traffic is dreadful. Anyway, ofver the bridge and out to the north and a recently resurfaced road appeared. It was like a roller coaster. I would guess that each time they trow some tar down and dump the stones on top the bumps grow bigger.
Some of the other roads around there - one near Henley in particular, are utterly horrendous.
The new A453 from M1 J24 to Nottinghma is another example of a very uneven surface even though totally new. When they had bits of opened with a 40 limit it felt acceptable. At 70 it's the bumpiest new Dual C I can ever remember travelling over. Awful.
They should get the French contractors in.
And then there are the surfaces that look OK but have no grip at all even in the dry. Who allows that as a cost saving exercise?
OpulentBob said:
And unfortunately, smooth roads with no humps, one way streets, roads with no parking etc all act to increase traffic speed, not reduce it. As was mentioned above somewhere, if people could be trusted to drive sensibly then we could maybe make some progress. But they invariably can't. It's the one dhead on the sports bike, the barryboy machine, the domino's delivery driver, the van driver on a mission, etc, that spoil it for everyone else. It only takes one in a hundred to break "the rules" but they're the one that gets noticed, and more often than not smacks in to the innocent party.
It's a difficult one for sure.
I'm not convinced it's really so difficult head on the sports bike, the barryboy machine, the domino's delivery driver, the van driver on a mission, etc, that spoil it for everyone else. It only takes one in a hundred to break "the rules" but they're the one that gets noticed, and more often than not smacks in to the innocent party. It's a difficult one for sure.
Being an old fart, I've noticed a big cultural shift over the decades. Today's soft nanny-state protectionist society would have barely been perceived 40 or 50 years ago. Generally people took responsibility and got on with it.
Today we are frightened to move and frankly it's stifling. We've regressed to a culture structured around the lowest common denominator, which effectively makes us all d
heads. This 20mph nonsense appeases the morons, nothing else...
bigdog3 said:
OpulentBob said:
And unfortunately, smooth roads with no humps, one way streets, roads with no parking etc all act to increase traffic speed, not reduce it. As was mentioned above somewhere, if people could be trusted to drive sensibly then we could maybe make some progress. But they invariably can't. It's the one dhead on the sports bike, the barryboy machine, the domino's delivery driver, the van driver on a mission, etc, that spoil it for everyone else. It only takes one in a hundred to break "the rules" but they're the one that gets noticed, and more often than not smacks in to the innocent party.
It's a difficult one for sure.
I'm not convinced it's really so difficult head on the sports bike, the barryboy machine, the domino's delivery driver, the van driver on a mission, etc, that spoil it for everyone else. It only takes one in a hundred to break "the rules" but they're the one that gets noticed, and more often than not smacks in to the innocent party. It's a difficult one for sure.
Being an old fart, I've noticed a big cultural shift over the decades. Today's soft nanny-state protectionist society would have barely been perceived 40 or 50 years ago. Generally people took responsibility and got on with it.
Today we are frightened to move and frankly it's stifling. We've regressed to a culture structured around the lowest common denominator, which effectively makes us all d
heads. This 20mph nonsense appeases the morons, nothing else...Unfortunately the 20mph stuff has been found to be a vote winner, otherwise it wouldn't be anywhere near as prevalent. Combine that with the vocality of the 20's Plenty lot, the cycle lobbies, the PTAs, BRAKE etc and that makes it the Councillors (note, NOT engineers) first port of call.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff