RE: 80mph limit will cost £1bn say campaigners
Discussion
robinessex said:
We have BRAKE steaming from the ears re the 'possible' increase in road deaths with a proposed increase to 80mph, so maybe ought we ask them about the 34,000 who die in the UK each year from medical errors? http://www.ieu-alliance.org/Survey.html
That really is quite shocking, and no less emotive than road accident victims.I think it just shows how insidious Brake are. They effectively prey on the bereaved, seeing them as marketing opportunities in order to further their cause, using their bereavement to make their argument 'untouchable'.
If claims lawyers are ambiwlans-chasers, Brake are hearse-chasers.
Calamity James said:
If I had more spare time, and the balanced views I'd be more than happy to.
If anyone wants free web hosting for said project I'm more than happy to oblige.
There is plenty of balanced, rational viewpoint over at the ABD - www.abd.org.uk, including:If anyone wants free web hosting for said project I'm more than happy to oblige.
http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/781.htm 'Unfit for 80' Report Seriously Flawed
http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/520.htm No More Excuses — Raise The Motorway Speed Limit Now!
The Ariel site is lovely but the insidious thing about BRAKE is how mainstream they appear.
In reality an 80mph limit will, mostly, make no difference to the average speed of cars on the motorway - you cant get to 70 on many motorways for much of the day anyhow.
From a safety point of view speed never killed anyone, it closing speed that is dangerous, legalising 80 mph on a motorway with all the space and safety systems is still infinately safer than being legaly allowed to do 60mph down single carriageway with no central reservation, which gives a potential closing speed of 120mph, with nothing but trees or a passing deer to catch you! Also, more people could concentrate on the road rather than playing spot the camera / un-marked car....
I think speed limits should be variable depending on time of day / traffic conditions, I regularly do the M4 late in the evening, in a modern car I dont see that 90 or even 100mph is in anyway significantly dangerous....
From a safety point of view speed never killed anyone, it closing speed that is dangerous, legalising 80 mph on a motorway with all the space and safety systems is still infinately safer than being legaly allowed to do 60mph down single carriageway with no central reservation, which gives a potential closing speed of 120mph, with nothing but trees or a passing deer to catch you! Also, more people could concentrate on the road rather than playing spot the camera / un-marked car....
I think speed limits should be variable depending on time of day / traffic conditions, I regularly do the M4 late in the evening, in a modern car I dont see that 90 or even 100mph is in anyway significantly dangerous....
Consider this:
If there are roughly 34 million vehicles on our roads .... and lets say (being conservative - with a small "c") that each "motorist" does three journeys per day (in reality some do many more).
That means that every year there would be 37,230,000,000 separate journeys by motor vehicle. Yes ... that's right ...... over 37 BILLION journeys.
And we think that 3000 deaths every year is unexpected .... or unwarranted ..... or surprising?
The only way that accidents could be reduced appreciably from their present rates is to ban cars buses and trucks completely.
The present accident stats are a testament to the relatively good standard of driving in this country.
Road deaths and serious injury have very little to with speed. They are much more to do with lapses in concentration, bad road design and paying too much attention to looking for speed cameras and a surfeit of general signage. Oh ..... and unsupervised kids running out into the road ... some of whom will never have had a single lesson in how to be a responsible pedestrian.
Bring back Tufty and the Green Cross Code.
Whatever happened to public information films?
If there are roughly 34 million vehicles on our roads .... and lets say (being conservative - with a small "c") that each "motorist" does three journeys per day (in reality some do many more).
That means that every year there would be 37,230,000,000 separate journeys by motor vehicle. Yes ... that's right ...... over 37 BILLION journeys.
And we think that 3000 deaths every year is unexpected .... or unwarranted ..... or surprising?
The only way that accidents could be reduced appreciably from their present rates is to ban cars buses and trucks completely.
The present accident stats are a testament to the relatively good standard of driving in this country.
Road deaths and serious injury have very little to with speed. They are much more to do with lapses in concentration, bad road design and paying too much attention to looking for speed cameras and a surfeit of general signage. Oh ..... and unsupervised kids running out into the road ... some of whom will never have had a single lesson in how to be a responsible pedestrian.
Bring back Tufty and the Green Cross Code.
Whatever happened to public information films?
The only corporate sponsor of Brake with which I have any relationship is the RAC so I have sent a message to them suggesting that as a motorists association it doesn't seem right that they support such an anti-motoring group. Looking forward to the response, hopefully others will do the same if they are customers of any brake supporters, full list here - http://www.brake.org.uk/about-us/brakes-corporate-...
andyps said:
The only corporate sponsor of Brake with which I have any relationship is the RAC so I have sent a message to them suggesting that as a motorists association it doesn't seem right that they support such an anti-motoring group. Looking forward to the response, hopefully others will do the same if they are customers of any brake supporters, full list here - http://www.brake.org.uk/about-us/brakes-corporate-...
And you'll find a surprise here....http://www.brake.org.uk/celebrity-supporters/celeb...
mrmr96 said:
Al 450 said:
Depends on engine torque/aerodynamics/gearing, increasing your motorway cruising speed to 80mph might actually save fuel if you drive the right car...
There's plenty of arguments for/against an 80mph limit. I personally would support the increase to 80. However, I don't think that there's a realistic case for finding a car more economical at 80 than 70mph. I know that cars can be more economical at different points in the rev range, but given the exponential increase in drag with speed, I am highly doubtful that you can show me any car which is more economical at 80 than 70mph.But that is like saying 2mph is better than 1. both are very slow...
Similarly, Piaggio GTX 125 scooter. Top speed - 77 mph. Most fuel effcient speed? 77 mph.
At the start of the week, I would fill it up, proceed to ignore all out of town speed limits where safe to do so, and come Monday, I would need to fill it again.
However, if I stuck to the speed limit, I would be out of petrol by thursday afternoon.
If I still had it, I would offer a go on it to prove the above.
mybrainhurts said:
Eddie Irvine?Nothing is worse than a media celebrity or broadcaster joining a campaign, and not taking the trouble to understand the isssues, and educating himself. Nick Ross, in his support blog on the Brake Website, spouts this complete nonesense, "Road deaths are the forgotten epidemic - killing more young people in the UK and across the globe than anything else". Well for the record, the deaths due to medical cockups in Europe, USA and Australia amount to 939,025. You've just put your foot in it Nick. Standard of accuracy is normmal for Brake.
king children to keep off the fI WISH said:
Bring back Tufty and the Green Cross Code.
Whatever happened to public information films?
They get resurrected in groovy, new pop tunes:Whatever happened to public information films?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9LNRRkFsS8
The War Room ones are quite good too.
It can't just me that's thinking of 1950s sheds with drum brakes alround without seatbelts or an MoT whizzing along at 80.
Twincam16 said:
DaveL485 said:
www.noto80.org said:
Visit www.noto80.org to:
1. add your name to a petition started by bereaved mum Liz Voysey whose daughter Amy was killed by an 80mph driver
1. add your name to a petition started by bereaved mum Liz Voysey whose daughter Amy was killed by an 80mph driver
I'm sure they class an '80mph' driver in the same vein as drink/drug drivers.Ridiculous.
It appears that Amy Voysey's death had little to do with the specific speed of the van that hit her. Her car had been hit and immobilised by an articulated lorry and it was sat in the outside lane of a dual-carriageway with its hazard lights on. There's no doubt it was a horrible death, but when a car is sitting motionless in the outside lane of a dual-carriageway it's the fact it's there, rather than the speed of the vehicle behind it, that's the danger. In fact you could go so far as to say that it was the response speed of the highways agency and the police that was more pressing in that particular situation.
Why do I get the impression that had she been hit by a van doing 70, her mother would have been pressured by Brake into campaigning to get the limit down to 60/50/40? Because had he been doing 70, she would still have been killed - a sad and unavoidable fact of life.
SO what does that prove? Well in all cases, education is the answer. People have to start takling responsibility for their actions. These days it always seems to be someone elses fault. Perhaps if we want to change things we should start looking a bit closer to home rather than pointing the finger at eveyone else.
If you want the roads to be safer, take your own time to get some training and improve your driving first. Then when you have done that you can start worrying about everyone else!
When the steam locomotive was invented it was thought that passengers would suffocate at 12 mph and then when the automobile was invented it had to be led by a gentleman carrying a red flag to warn ordinary people that these killers were approaching and as cars got faster some people thought that they would alter time because it wasn't natural for a human to travel at such speed(I didn't know "Brake's" policies were so antiquated).
But let us all be honest, Brake's aims are venerable in the extreme, to stop all death and injury on the road and they should be applauded, but why haven't they come up with the obvious answer that deals with every individual on the planet in a fair way, BAN ALL MOTOR VEHICLES OF ANY KIND ANYWHERE , if there are no vehicles there would be no accidents, think of the money that could be saved, we could probably get rid of 50% of all the emergency services, there would be no need for mechanics, car sales rooms could become soup kitchens, the disused factories could become temporary housing for the unemployed evicted motor industry related redundant workers, hgv drivers would have to race real elephants and NO horses and traps wouldn't be allowed as they might have an accident somewhere sometime and NO we can't travel by boat as sometimes they sink and as for a pushbike, forget it.
No we should all be grateful to groups such as BRAKE as they have our best interests at heart and we can mull that over as we walk 50 miles a day to and from work.
You know, I wish that these selfish, self serving, narrow minded goody two shoes would all just shut up and let the overwhelming majority of people who do not agree with them get on with our lives in peace and quiet at 80mph.
But let us all be honest, Brake's aims are venerable in the extreme, to stop all death and injury on the road and they should be applauded, but why haven't they come up with the obvious answer that deals with every individual on the planet in a fair way, BAN ALL MOTOR VEHICLES OF ANY KIND ANYWHERE , if there are no vehicles there would be no accidents, think of the money that could be saved, we could probably get rid of 50% of all the emergency services, there would be no need for mechanics, car sales rooms could become soup kitchens, the disused factories could become temporary housing for the unemployed evicted motor industry related redundant workers, hgv drivers would have to race real elephants and NO horses and traps wouldn't be allowed as they might have an accident somewhere sometime and NO we can't travel by boat as sometimes they sink and as for a pushbike, forget it.
No we should all be grateful to groups such as BRAKE as they have our best interests at heart and we can mull that over as we walk 50 miles a day to and from work.
You know, I wish that these selfish, self serving, narrow minded goody two shoes would all just shut up and let the overwhelming majority of people who do not agree with them get on with our lives in peace and quiet at 80mph.
Max_Torque said:
So, yes, perhaps if the driver who hit her had been doing 60 she might have survived, but she would have definitley survived if she hadn't been sat in her car at the time of the impact.
Direct impact at 60 mph or even 40 mph is unsurvivable. A shade of 30 mph is about the limit. So using that criterion, what Britain urgently needs is a blanket 30 mph limit - doh 
astrsxi77 said:
Plus, I can only see a carrot and stick emerging, given the go-ahead.
Carrot - you can drive at 80 where permitted.
Stick - we have harsher punishments waiting if you exceed the limit we kindly gave you.
So let's keep the 70 limit for the driving theory test and rainy days, and cut off the fuel to the fires of those mentioned above.
Just leave it alone.
Agreed - I'm sure I read somewhere that the punishment for exceeding 80 would become more extreme. Carrot - you can drive at 80 where permitted.
Stick - we have harsher punishments waiting if you exceed the limit we kindly gave you.
So let's keep the 70 limit for the driving theory test and rainy days, and cut off the fuel to the fires of those mentioned above.
Just leave it alone.
Brake needs to fxuk off. I hate 'charities', like these bunch of twaats represent, they drive me mad. If the speed limit increases to 80, then doesn't that mean that more money is going into the treasury/UK economy, they never looks at it from this point.
The 'say no to 80' page on facebook is so bogus as well. They're trying to make it out like they're some kind of saviours of the planet, when in truth they're just a bunch of hypocrites and people who need to die.
like these bunch of twaats represent, they drive me mad. If the speed limit increases to 80, then doesn't that mean that more money is going into the treasury/UK economy, they never looks at it from this point. The 'say no to 80' page on facebook is so bogus as well. They're trying to make it out like they're some kind of saviours of the planet, when in truth they're just a bunch of hypocrites and people who need to die.
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff