20mph in London?
Discussion
So Red Kens twin, In MK-- Lib - Graham Mabbutt who said ALL limits would be reduced by 20 mph on grid roads, after a 13 yr old decided not to use a bridge, but beat the traffic.He said 69% were in favour of the reduced limits--After a few weeks of letter writing to local papers, it turns out that 79% want the limits as IS.
To-days paper Reports -SLIME M, says the idea,s have been dropped---BUT-- we must review ------ NO mention at any time of the --KSI on the roads-DUE to Drugs/Drink --You NEVER see the Coroner,s Report in the papers--only Speeding Driver hits house at 50+ mph, SO speed limits MUST be reduced, !!!!Remember ALL this--on polling day eh!!!
To-days paper Reports -SLIME M, says the idea,s have been dropped---BUT-- we must review ------ NO mention at any time of the --KSI on the roads-DUE to Drugs/Drink --You NEVER see the Coroner,s Report in the papers--only Speeding Driver hits house at 50+ mph, SO speed limits MUST be reduced, !!!!Remember ALL this--on polling day eh!!!
johnny88 said:
Democracy only works when the majority is right. The majorty is almost always wrong in my experience. I'm 17 next month and thanks to stupid speed limyts etc i will probably never know the fun of driving that my father or grandfather knew unless we do something.
It doesn't matter whether you are right or wrong (and by who's definition anyway?) it's the actual decision that counts.
In any case you can know the fun of driving as your father and grandafather experienced, just drive a similar car to them and not some huge bhp massive tyred thing which needs huge speed to get loose.
birdbrain said:
I think London must be one of the few cities in the world where the objective is to impede the traffic flow, not to keep it moving.
Agreed!
I read somewhere that even before the congestion charge came into effect the number of cars entering central london was already lower than it was in the 1970s-Congestion had risen due to deliberate policies.
edc said:
Democracy only works when the majority is right. The majorty is almost always wrong in my experience. I'm 17 next month and thanks to stupid speed limyts etc i will probably never know the fun of driving that my father or grandfather knew unless we do something.
It doesn't matter whether you are right or wrong (and by who's definition anyway?) it's the actual decision that counts.
In any case you can know the fun of driving as your father and grandafather experienced, just drive a similar car to them and not some huge bhp massive tyred thing which needs huge speed to get loose.
I think that's a good point. As speed limits come down and congestion rises, most driving is done at speeds which any car of 20+ years ago can easily manage. Therefore it makes sense to have a nice classic for daily use. Lower insurance, less depreciation... but perhaps higher servicing costs. I reckon that if I ever stop doing 40k miles/year I will be looking into the classic market for something interesting. Original S-type, CX, Rover P6?
-DeaDLocK- said:
Well if the survey was unbiased and accurate and the majority wants it, who are the minority to argue? Democracy in action I guess, even if it is a bit delusional.
Funny though how politicians will ignore the polls when they don't agree them. Democracy is overrated anyway; I think this shows why Churchill described as the "worst system with the exception of all other systems" and Benjamin Franklin described it as "two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch".
AlexH said:
Well if the survey was unbiased and accurate and the majority wants it, who are the minority to argue? Democracy in action I guess, even if it is a bit delusional.
Funny though how politicians will ignore the polls when they don't agree them. Democracy is overrated anyway; I think this shows why Churchill described as the "worst system with the exception of all other systems" and Benjamin Franklin described it as "two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch".
The grass is always greener isn't it? ... Are you saying you'd prefer to live somewhere that is not a democracy?
edc said:
-DeaDLocK- said:
Well if the survey was unbiased and accurate and the majority wants it, who are the minority to argue? Democracy in action I guess, even if it is a bit delusional.
Funny though how politicians will ignore the polls when they don't agree them. Democracy is overrated anyway; I think this shows why Churchill described as the "worst system with the exception of all other systems" and Benjamin Franklin described it as "two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch".
The grass is always greener isn't it? ... Are you saying you'd prefer to live somewhere that is not a democracy?
Not at all... just because I get incredibly frustrated with its flaws doesn't mean I would rather live under another system. My point about democracy being overrated is simply that its easy to be the best system when all others are such steaming piles of manure.
AlexH said:
AlexH said:
-DeaDLocK- said:
Well if the survey was unbiased and accurate and the majority wants it, who are the minority to argue? Democracy in action I guess, even if it is a bit delusional.
Funny though how politicians will ignore the polls when they don't agree them. Democracy is overrated anyway; I think this shows why Churchill described as the "worst system with the exception of all other systems" and Benjamin Franklin described it as "two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch".
The grass is always greener isn't it? ... Are you saying you'd prefer to live somewhere that is not a democracy?
Not at all... just because I get incredibly frustrated with its flaws doesn't mean I would rather live under another system. My point about democracy being overrated is simply that its easy to be the best system when all others are such steaming piles of manure.
How about one that hasn't been tried-Platos idea of being ruled over by 'Philospher Kings'
Pies said:
First find who,where and how the survey was carried out 
There are statsmstats and damned lies
Livingstone is the master of the biased survey. The West London tram link is a classic of the genre. First of all there was an extensive survey of West London residents with leaflets to all houses in the affected areas, and a roadshow. I went to the roadshow, and sent back my reply. Guess what, when it didn't give the result Ken wanted, he commissioned a separate survey, which did give the answer he wanted. Read all about it here:-
www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/press-releases/2005/march/press-PN-0074.shtml
This article doesn't really convey it, but much was made of the original consultation at the time. Views would be listened to etc. All crap of course. A similar trick has been pulled on the westward expansion of the congestion charging zone. This 20 mph example is another such example I'll wager. It's absolutely nothing to do with safety, you can find documents on the TfL web site which show that there are actually few casualties around schools, everybody is already thinking of the children there, it is simply another anti car measure, by an anti car bigot.
As the man himself says it wasn't a referendum, which begs the question why have a consultation in the first place, when you already know the answer. All we can hope is London will come to it's senses at the next mayoral election.
On a related topic, that much asked question of what would happen if there were diversions taking people into the congestion charging zone who didn't want to go there. Guess what. It's just happened. See the link. Should be interesting, no.
www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/press-releases/2005/march/press-PN-0074.shtml
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff