RE: Ken: London To Be 20mph
Monday 7th April 2008
Ken Livingstone will impose a 20mph limit on every residential street in London if he is re-elected as London mayor, it has been revealed.
Ken: London To Be 20mph
Ken Livingstone will impose blanket 20mph zone if he is re-elected
The mayor said trials will begin next year using wireless cameras to enforce the new limits.
The new technology will be cheaper than the conventional wired technology and better than speed bumps, he told reporters.
An estimated 400 20mph zones have already been created in London and the Mayor claims they have been successful in lowering deaths.
He said that cameras would be used to snare motorists instead of ‘cheap and miserable’ speed humps, adding: ‘My broad view is that in a residential area, there should be a 20mph limit.
‘That is what is about to be introduced where I live (in Cricklewood, north west London) but it's being done with road humps.
‘I think if you can say 20mph zones without the road humps there won't be any opposition.’
Transport for London is understood to have been given a £10million fund to introduce low-speed areas.
Boris Johnson, the Conservative candidate for the mayoral elections on May 1, reportedly backs the idea of a 20mph zone in principle but will not impose a blanket London 20mph limit.
Instead it is said that Johnson will work with local authorities to assess were 20mph limits are needed.
Discussion
Can see his point where there are children around, but forcing everyone to slow to 20 mph, including bus's is daft, plenty of main roads where you can get to well over 20 mph, 30-40 is more common, so slower vehicles = more pollution as having to use 1st and 2nd gear instead of 3rd or 4th gear.
Shame he can't be honest about his intentions, but then he is a politician
Shame he can't be honest about his intentions, but then he is a politician
I hope they do bring in wireless cameras. I could make a fortune in wireless blockers. 
ETA - where my kids play, I want people looking where they are going - not at their speedo. But then common sense is rarely applied when it comes to 'enforcement'.
ETA - where my kids play, I want people looking where they are going - not at their speedo. But then common sense is rarely applied when it comes to 'enforcement'.
Edited by PhantomPH on Monday 7th April 10:18
JEEEEESSSSUUUSSS, what is it with this guy...? I think he sits in his office with his overpaid cronies dreaming up more elaborate ways to piss everyone off in London. The election cant come soon enough... this man is an absolute menace... He wont get re-elected will he..? please God no, I cant afford another 4 years of Ken..!!
rhinochopig said:
London in 10 years...
"London Closed for Business"
If Ken gets in again, this may not be so far from the truth... large companies are already staying away and others are contemplating leaving london... Ken seems to think he can keep taxing people and we will keep paying... If he gets re-elected i think people will vote with their feet...... the only reason they havent so far is because we are all waiting for the election..."London Closed for Business"
You can just about put up with all the other spot check speed cameras as if the limit is inappropriate and you are observant you simply slow down for them. However, wireless cameras located all over keeping you to 20mph wont be possible to keep to.
I knew this was coming eventually after he murmed about it last year. This weekend just gone I drove down a clear residential street keeping to 20mph to see what it was like (the gf and I were whining about Ken at the time and his draonian anti-car measures - it has been a bad trip home through London) and it was literally mind numbing. Those people who for some reason or other think 20mph is a reasonable ask in any modern car is off their tits or only drives an old style mini where 20mph felt dangerous. I drive an Audi A3 2003, at 20mph I would go mad if it was forced by cameras - I could see a LOT of people losing their licenses and as a result crippling the already strained public transport network
nice one Ken
I knew this was coming eventually after he murmed about it last year. This weekend just gone I drove down a clear residential street keeping to 20mph to see what it was like (the gf and I were whining about Ken at the time and his draonian anti-car measures - it has been a bad trip home through London) and it was literally mind numbing. Those people who for some reason or other think 20mph is a reasonable ask in any modern car is off their tits or only drives an old style mini where 20mph felt dangerous. I drive an Audi A3 2003, at 20mph I would go mad if it was forced by cameras - I could see a LOT of people losing their licenses and as a result crippling the already strained public transport network
nice one KenI have kids and I think its a good idea in places but a blanket 20mph limit is ludicrous, talk about stopping progress, I'd like to see these stats on road deaths which supposedly show that these areas work as I am not convinced.
Once again common sense takes a back seat and we are being treated like we're all idiots and need to be nannied in this way.
As for kids not playing in the streets, get real. When I was a kid I played in the street and I was educated about traffic, I expect the same for my kids, let them play but equip them with the knowledge they need to keep safe.
And as the speeding advert says 'Its 30 for a reason', so why contradict that with this move? Whats the difference between the stopping distance between 20 and 30 mph? How different are the reaction times between driving at 20 and 30?
This is just another ploy to raise more TAX and get the camera network out there simply dressed up as road safety (well the environment thing is running a bit thin now).
I'd rather they spent the 10 million on fighting violent crime, robbery and assaults, this is what will make the streets safer for all, including children, but theres no revenue stream from that is there and the approach to this requires a little more thought.
Once again common sense takes a back seat and we are being treated like we're all idiots and need to be nannied in this way.
As for kids not playing in the streets, get real. When I was a kid I played in the street and I was educated about traffic, I expect the same for my kids, let them play but equip them with the knowledge they need to keep safe.
And as the speeding advert says 'Its 30 for a reason', so why contradict that with this move? Whats the difference between the stopping distance between 20 and 30 mph? How different are the reaction times between driving at 20 and 30?
This is just another ploy to raise more TAX and get the camera network out there simply dressed up as road safety (well the environment thing is running a bit thin now).
I'd rather they spent the 10 million on fighting violent crime, robbery and assaults, this is what will make the streets safer for all, including children, but theres no revenue stream from that is there and the approach to this requires a little more thought.
He's nuts. All these bloody speed bumps, which I assume he will install to keep us down to 20 do nothing cept we keep slowing down, t
tting our cars, (the low ones of course), and make us chuck out dirty stuff when we accellerate.
This man must go..... And does he really think drivers can be watching all the peds, cyclists, etc etc, speed cameras, their speed and concentrate on the roads at the same time, nuts I tell you, nuts.
And I dont even live there, but I can see all the mayhem it will bring to you guys who have to drive around there on a daily basis.
tting our cars, (the low ones of course), and make us chuck out dirty stuff when we accellerate.This man must go..... And does he really think drivers can be watching all the peds, cyclists, etc etc, speed cameras, their speed and concentrate on the roads at the same time, nuts I tell you, nuts.
And I dont even live there, but I can see all the mayhem it will bring to you guys who have to drive around there on a daily basis.
Define "residential" street? Do you know of many streets in London where someone doesn't live?
So that's every street then.
What's the betting this will also be a mindless 24 hour limit, so that even trying to get home across London at 2am, you will have to crawl below the speed your speedo can accurately read for the whole way?
Just as stupid as 24 hour bus lanes and a 50mph limit on safe dual carriageways, but they exist now, thanks to Ken...
So that's every street then.
What's the betting this will also be a mindless 24 hour limit, so that even trying to get home across London at 2am, you will have to crawl below the speed your speedo can accurately read for the whole way?
Just as stupid as 24 hour bus lanes and a 50mph limit on safe dual carriageways, but they exist now, thanks to
Ken...Crazy eh!
Wireless cameras = more tax for Crazy Red Ken.
21 in a 20mph = £60 fine & 3 points. Soon there will be no motorists.
I tried driving at 20mph down an empty main road the other day to show my girlfriend what 20mph was like - slow as fek!
If people drive repsponsibly then there is no need for a 20mph limit - in residential streets my speed is right down while lots o muppets are flying over bumps at 30mph.
Driver education is the way, not draconian limits for everyone and big fine! 1984 is here!!
Wireless cameras = more tax for Crazy Red Ken.
21 in a 20mph = £60 fine & 3 points. Soon there will be no motorists.
I tried driving at 20mph down an empty main road the other day to show my girlfriend what 20mph was like - slow as fek!
If people drive repsponsibly then there is no need for a 20mph limit - in residential streets my speed is right down while lots o muppets are flying over bumps at 30mph.
Driver education is the way, not draconian limits for everyone and big fine! 1984 is here!!
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff