Discussion
They're a complete load of b
ks. Usually instigated by idiot local councillors who've been chatting to Doris and Mable, who have a bee in their bonnet about 'hooligan drivers' who nearly killed them when they walk out into the road without looking. I believe the ABD website has so info that they do nowt re accidents. And the Police often admit they have no intention of speed trapping any of the roads thus subjected. I’ve just had a 20mph leaflet through my door, because locals are ‘speeding through our estate’. Of course, they don’t (apparently) take any notice of the existing 30mph limit, so I’m bloody sure they’ll iggy the 20mph one as well. Try telling that to the local big wigs.
ks. Usually instigated by idiot local councillors who've been chatting to Doris and Mable, who have a bee in their bonnet about 'hooligan drivers' who nearly killed them when they walk out into the road without looking. I believe the ABD website has so info that they do nowt re accidents. And the Police often admit they have no intention of speed trapping any of the roads thus subjected. I’ve just had a 20mph leaflet through my door, because locals are ‘speeding through our estate’. Of course, they don’t (apparently) take any notice of the existing 30mph limit, so I’m bloody sure they’ll iggy the 20mph one as well. Try telling that to the local big wigs.robinessex said:
They're a complete load of bks. Usually instigated by idiot local councillors who've been chatting to Doris and Mable, who have a bee in their bonnet about 'hooligan drivers' who nearly killed them when they walk out into the road without looking. I believe the ABD website has so info that they do nowt re accidents. And the Police often admit they have no intention of speed trapping any of the roads thus subjected. I’ve just had a 20mph leaflet through my door, because locals are ‘speeding through our estate’. Of course, they don’t (apparently) take any notice of the existing 30mph limit, so I’m bloody sure they’ll iggy the 20mph one as well. Try telling that to the local big wigs.
This seemed to be the kind of justification for dropping the speed limit in my village (down to 30 though). ks. Usually instigated by idiot local councillors who've been chatting to Doris and Mable, who have a bee in their bonnet about 'hooligan drivers' who nearly killed them when they walk out into the road without looking. I believe the ABD website has so info that they do nowt re accidents. And the Police often admit they have no intention of speed trapping any of the roads thus subjected. I’ve just had a 20mph leaflet through my door, because locals are ‘speeding through our estate’. Of course, they don’t (apparently) take any notice of the existing 30mph limit, so I’m bloody sure they’ll iggy the 20mph one as well. Try telling that to the local big wigs.The local councilor even admitted there had never been a serious accident in living memory - but there had been several (anecdotal) "near misses"......
Corpulent Tosser said:
Some new housing estates near me have 20mph limits, they also have traffic calming humps and deliberate winding areas to slow traffic.
I can't see that it is a bad thing where children are likely to be playing.
Maybe children shouldn't be playing in or near the road in the first place....I can't see that it is a bad thing where children are likely to be playing.
I don't recall ever playing IN the road, no, for the simple reason that I was very aware that I could get hit by a car. Unfortunately, judging by the number of idiots that step off the kerb in front of me on a daily basis without looking I can only conclude that more and more parents think letting their kids play in the road is an acceptable thing to do.
At the end of the day, roads are for cars and I don't agree with the whole "think of the children", cars must be slowed down everywhere approach to road safety.
It's like those bobbled paving slabs you see instead of just a regular dropped kerb; I see more and more drivers stop to let pedestrians cross the road, especially around school times, and whilst it's all very admirable to let the peds cross, what it's actually doing is teaching kids that traffic will just stop for them regardless of if it's supposed to (zebra crossing/traffic lights etc) or not.
At the end of the day, roads are for cars and I don't agree with the whole "think of the children", cars must be slowed down everywhere approach to road safety.
It's like those bobbled paving slabs you see instead of just a regular dropped kerb; I see more and more drivers stop to let pedestrians cross the road, especially around school times, and whilst it's all very admirable to let the peds cross, what it's actually doing is teaching kids that traffic will just stop for them regardless of if it's supposed to (zebra crossing/traffic lights etc) or not.
Edited by Centurion07 on Sunday 27th April 16:07
Centurion07 said:
I don't recall ever playing IN the road, no, for the simple reason that I was very aware that I could get hit by a car. Unfortunately, judging by the number of idiots that step off the kerb in front of me on a daily basis without looking I can only conclude that more and more parents think letting their kids play in the road is an acceptable thing to do.
At the end of the day, roads are for cars and I don't agree with the whole "think of the children", cars must be slowed down everywhere approach to road safety.
It's like those bobbled paving slabs you see instead of just a regular dropped kerb; I see more and more drivers stop to let pedestrians cross the road, especially around school times, and whilst it's all very admirable to let the peds cross, what it's actually doing is teaching kids that traffic will just stop for them regardless of if it's supposed to (zebra crossing/traffic lights etc) or not.
Hmmn. A point of view I suppose. At the end of the day, roads are for cars and I don't agree with the whole "think of the children", cars must be slowed down everywhere approach to road safety.
It's like those bobbled paving slabs you see instead of just a regular dropped kerb; I see more and more drivers stop to let pedestrians cross the road, especially around school times, and whilst it's all very admirable to let the peds cross, what it's actually doing is teaching kids that traffic will just stop for them regardless of if it's supposed to (zebra crossing/traffic lights etc) or not.
Edited by Centurion07 on Sunday 27th April 16:07
The fact is though that pedestrians have as much right to be on a road as a vehicle. The only general limitation is that cars don't go on the footway, and we all know how well that is observed.
The problem with kids, I've found, is that they behave like kids. It is a counter-intuitive concept but if you work at it then it gradually comes.
Many feel that a residential area should consider those likely to be there. If a parent can't get out of the house then should we lock the kids up? Only go out when there's an adult.
Again a point of view I suppose, but not one I would subscribe to.
Of course we should consider the needs of children. Perhaps drivers should stop for kids to cross the roads, although I think I agree with one implied aspect of your post: children should be aware that many drivers are totally selfish and will drive at speeds totally inappropriate to the circumstances.
Centurion07 said:
I don't recall ever playing IN the road, no, for the simple reason that I was very aware that I could get hit by a car. Unfortunately, judging by the number of idiots that step off the kerb in front of me on a daily basis without looking I can only conclude that more and more parents think letting their kids play in the road is an acceptable thing to do.
At the end of the day, roads are for cars and I don't agree with the whole "think of the children", cars must be slowed down everywhere approach to road safety.
It's like those bobbled paving slabs you see instead of just a regular dropped kerb; I see more and more drivers stop to let pedestrians cross the road, especially around school times, and whilst it's all very admirable to let the peds cross, what it's actually doing is teaching kids that traffic will just stop for them regardless of if it's supposed to (zebra crossing/traffic lights etc) or not.
The "bobbled" slabs are there to help the partially sighted.At the end of the day, roads are for cars and I don't agree with the whole "think of the children", cars must be slowed down everywhere approach to road safety.
It's like those bobbled paving slabs you see instead of just a regular dropped kerb; I see more and more drivers stop to let pedestrians cross the road, especially around school times, and whilst it's all very admirable to let the peds cross, what it's actually doing is teaching kids that traffic will just stop for them regardless of if it's supposed to (zebra crossing/traffic lights etc) or not.
Edited by Centurion07 on Sunday 27th April 16:07
Corpulent Tosser said:
Some new housing estates near me have 20mph limits, they also have traffic calming humps and deliberate winding areas to slow traffic.
I can't see that it is a bad thing where children are likely to be playing.
Lower speeds may reduce the severity of an accident - but surely the best solution is to try to ensure the accident never happens in the first place. This can only be achieved through education and personal responsibility on behalf of both the pedestrian and the driver. Unfortunately the former seems to have fallen by the wayside and the onus has very much been placed on the driver.I can't see that it is a bad thing where children are likely to be playing.
Speed has been so demonised over the past few years that councils and politicians first reaction to road safety seems to be "reduce the speed limit". Its quick, cheap and easy to score political brownie points - without ever having to prove the limit reduction was ever needed, was effective - or was even the best solution.
covboy said:
The "bobbled" slabs are there to help the partially sighted.
I know that and YOU know that, but the drivers that decide to come to a stop at what they think are pedestrian crossings clearly don't.What really gets on my tits though is that if the "helpful" driver cared to take a look in their rearview mirror, they would invariably see either hardly any cars behind them meaning by the time the pedestrian has registered they're being allowed to cross, the couple of cars would've passed them anyway or there's a whole bunch of cars behind them meaning they're inconveniencing a whole load more people than the single pedestrian having to wait!
I live in a village where there are side roads etc, etc, i.e. it is not a through road at all and it is a national limit everywhere (even in the close I live in) as there are no speed limit signs anywhere on entering the village thus meaning it is national limit as are the country lanes approaching it, but it's the lack of visibility and width of roads that stops people speeding... I could pull in my drive at 60 without breaking the law after circling the close at the same speed. Thankfully we don't seem to have any issues with excessive speed in my opinion but I guess it's subjective?
I am aware that national speed limit does not always mean 60 or 70 so I'm guessing that is the basis on which it has been left alone.
I am aware that national speed limit does not always mean 60 or 70 so I'm guessing that is the basis on which it has been left alone.
Derek Smith said:
The fact is though that pedestrians have as much right to be on a road as a vehicle.
Absolutely. But not at the expense of personal safety. There is no way in hell a pedestrian is going to come off better than a car in a collision between the two yet my personal experience would indicate A LOT of pedestrians seem to think the opposite.Derek Smith said:
....although I think I agree with one implied aspect of your post: children should be aware that many drivers are totally selfish and will drive at speeds totally inappropriate to the circumstances.
Exactly, but I don't think you can tell kids that it's ok to play in the road as long as the drivers are paying attention/not driving like assholes; far better to just make sure they're aware the only time they should be in the road is when they're crossing it to get to the other side and not to hang about.Centurion07 said:
the only time they should be in the road is when they're crossing it to get to the other side and not to hang about.
Children don't always make the best decisions about where and when is safe to cross; they're not very good at judging the speed of traffic; they're not very good at looking in the right places to spot cars (around junctions etc). You can and we should educate them about crossing more safely, but fact remains, they're children and they will make mistakes. And besides children crossing the road, what about those cycling around the corner to get to their friends houses? That's a legitimate use of the road in a residential area. Children can be hard to spot - they're smaller than adults. Is it really a great idea to have cars travelling at more than 20mph when there are likely to be a higher number of children around, making mistakes, and that are hard to spot when there are also likely to be an abundance of parked cars obscuring drivers' sight lines?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff