20mph speed limits to be imposed to protect cyclists
Discussion
jesusbuiltmycar said:
Just hope the 20Mph limit doesn't apply to cyclists - it'll ruin a lot of Strava segments...
Of course it applies to cyclists but like most rules they are supposed to obey...I can't decide if it's a bad thing if I'm pootling along at 20 and some speed demon flies past at a heady 23, though.
Do they have statistics on the speed of cars/lorries involved in the fatalities? It strikes me, anecdotally, that cyclists seem to get squashed by blind sided vehicles more than mown down by speed freaks doing 100mph...so will this make one bit of difference?
And ref pedestrians, how many of them were where they shouldn't be at the time of the knock?
They should have the info to be able to tell I would think, rather than going on gut feel as it seems is being done.
That said, I no longer live in London and haven't chosen to drive in the city for a very long time - the time when progress ever exceeded 10mph let alone 20mph were few enough that catching the tube or walking always seemed easier/quicker. And driving standards are pretty piss poor generally - it's not the people doing 30mph you worry about, it's the clowns doing 10mph without a clue what they're doing/where they're going/where the windows (let alone mirrors) on their cars are etc. that are the worry. But they're that bit harder to police against evidently.
And ref pedestrians, how many of them were where they shouldn't be at the time of the knock?
They should have the info to be able to tell I would think, rather than going on gut feel as it seems is being done.
That said, I no longer live in London and haven't chosen to drive in the city for a very long time - the time when progress ever exceeded 10mph let alone 20mph were few enough that catching the tube or walking always seemed easier/quicker. And driving standards are pretty piss poor generally - it's not the people doing 30mph you worry about, it's the clowns doing 10mph without a clue what they're doing/where they're going/where the windows (let alone mirrors) on their cars are etc. that are the worry. But they're that bit harder to police against evidently.
I repeat, if we follow the argument that 60mph is safer than 70, and 50mph is safer than 60, and 20mph is safer then 30, then things can only head in one direction.
This is the argument being perpetuated as impervious to argument, and those who make these decisions in Islington don't drive, and therefore see no reason for anyone else to drive - surely, it's not a necessity, is it?
We have to get used to it, move on, avoid motorways and start driving modernised classic cars or motorbikes that will remain exempt from the control of Big Brother.
Now, if only someone can invent a non-machine readable number plate...........
This is the argument being perpetuated as impervious to argument, and those who make these decisions in Islington don't drive, and therefore see no reason for anyone else to drive - surely, it's not a necessity, is it?
We have to get used to it, move on, avoid motorways and start driving modernised classic cars or motorbikes that will remain exempt from the control of Big Brother.
Now, if only someone can invent a non-machine readable number plate...........
t 
I don't care how fast the traffic is going as long as the driver drive with some consideration. If people drive slower they are even more likely to try and squeeze me against the curb when they want to squeeze betwixt me and a traffic island.
Let the faster road users travel faster and get on with their journeys.
Let the faster road users travel faster and get on with their journeys.
Willy Nilly said:
I don't care how fast the traffic is going as long as the driver drive with some consideration. If people drive slower they are even more likely to try and squeeze me against the curb when they want to squeeze betwixt me and a traffic island.
Let the faster road users travel faster and get on with their journeys.
I agree. Let the faster road users travel faster and get on with their journeys.
Though as a sometime pedestrian around London I feel similarly about cyclists.
Jimboka said:
Some Gump said:
I'm a cyclist. I don't want to see 20mph limits. Hell, on a decent day, I should be going that fast. I want you buggers to be on your way, not constantly vie for position with cars.
I am also a driver. 20mph would just piss me off.
Thank god I rarely have to enter the living hell that is London.
Off topic but London is a great place. Made better by people who don't like it staying away...I am also a driver. 20mph would just piss me off.
Thank god I rarely have to enter the living hell that is London.
Can't see this 'initiative' making much difference other than to increase the already not insignificant pollution.
So - we're going to have cars doing 20mph because they are driven by law abiding drivers mixing with 40mph delivery drivers and taxis in a hurry, unlicensed and uninsured drivers who drive as fast as they feel like, and continental drivers who don't give a phuque what the legal limit is. And buses. Sound sensible.
otolith said:
I wonder if the thinking is that if people can't go over 20 anyway there will be less OH MY GOD MUST GET PAST CYCLIST THIS INSTANT AT ALL COSTS.
Someone actually gets it!...I posted this on the the "engage" thread earlier, this scenario is what the 20mph urban limits are trying to prevent.
"Spotted only this morning, single carriageway road, cyclist up ahead clearly visible, good road position and making good progress, traffic island also up ahead.... Green Clio decides that there is room to overtake the cyclist and cut in front ahead of the traffic island, pulls out and floors it before realising that there isnt room and is now aware that if he cuts to the left of the island he will take out the cyclist so goes round to the right hand side of the traffic island into the oncoming traffic lane which was thankfullly empty and then carries on his merry way.... only to get stopped at the next set of lights 200m down the road. I would argue this mentality can not and never will be changed."
The cyclist was riding along at a good pace, probably around 25mph so the Clio was going to have to exceed the 30mph limit to overtake and cut in before the traffic island in the first place... but its rush hour and its about 500m from the ring road and the 10 minutes crawl in traffic that will be waiting for the Clio....
pablo said:
... I would argue this mentality can not and never will be changed..
We are fixated by speed limits in this country, whilst tackling piss poor driving standards takes a back seat. It's nuts.
(Biggest irritant for me driving these days? National limit country roads on a Sunday morning. Groups of 50+yr old lycra clad cyclists riding 3 or 4 abreast at 20mph on a single carriageway road...)
Murph7355 said:
pablo said:
... I would argue this mentality can not and never will be changed..
We are fixated by speed limits in this country, whilst tackling piss poor driving standards takes a back seat. It's nuts.
(Biggest irritant for me driving these days? National limit country roads on a Sunday morning. Groups of 50+yr old lycra clad cyclists riding 3 or 4 abreast at 20mph on a single carriageway road...)
pablo said:
Ah poor you, do they spoil your Sunday morning hoon?
They potentially spoil use of the roads by all manner of legitimate users, including emergency services (I get little chance for hooning at the moment with a young family, but if I did I'd probably answer a more resounding yes too 
). The point being, in the countryside or towns, if cyclists want respect and safety, they also need to shoulder their own responsibility for sticking to the rules,and using common sense. I don't recall seeing much in the way of suggestions from our ruling classes that on the spot fines will be ramped up for cyclists ignoring rules or riding dangerously/without due care and attention.
(Incidentally, I have a couple of bikes and some lycra. Though out of respect for society I very rarely wear the latter).
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff