I am gemused to see the all too predictable reaction from the anti speed lobby, to government plans to increase the speed limit on motorways from 70mph to 80mph.
Seemingly, if the anti speed lobby is to be believed, when this happens we will enter a nightmare world of carnage, death and mutilation on Britain's motorways.
OK, here in simple terms is why the anti speed lobby are wrong:
1 It's not speed per se that kills, it's bad driving.
2 People die and are injured in accidents on the road, even when the car is travelling at under 30mph.
3 So long as there is good visibility, a safe road surface, a safe distance between cars, alert drivers, roadworthy cars etc then the speed of the car is pretty well immaterial to its ability to stop safely in the event of an oncoming visible hazard.
It's not speed that kills, it's bad driving!
So enough of this nonsense, and let people drive on the motorways unfettered by speed restrictions (in times of clement weather and good visibility).
Prosecute those who tailgate.
Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.
Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.
Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.
www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"
Celebrate the joy of living with booze. Click and drink!
Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
''the speed of the car is pretty well immaterial to its ability to stop safely in the event of an oncoming visible hazard.''
ReplyDeleteBut Mein Fuhrer doesn't look any further ahead than the end of the bonnet FFS! :o(
Most of these speed limits were set decades ago, and at the back of any Highway Code book there are stopping distances that a learner driver must remember for their test, which were calculated in the 1930’s.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I cannot see this, or any other government giving anything without taking something away. Prepare yourselves for huge stretches of road with 20MPH speed limits or less.
And another thing; has anyone any idea how much it would cost to change all the traffic signs?
Isn't this all an EU alignment exercise?
ReplyDeleteI don’t think there is any EU alignment regarding speed on motorways. Each country has different limits, including Germany where, I believe, there is no speed limit on some autobahns.
ReplyDeleteAt present anyone caught speeding between 70 and 100MPH on a British motorway can expect a fine and points on their licence, those caught speeding above 100MPH can expect a ban.
I imagine that fines will increase dramatically for speeding at more than 80MPH, and a ban will come into force for a speed less than 100. After all, someone will have to pay for the millions it will cost to change signs and recalibrate cameras!
Once again, I suspect that the public are being conned.
Ok.. you know that National Speed Limit signs do not have an actual speed on them?
ReplyDeleteSo they don't have to replace every sign! They probably will end up putting up a few though.
"It's not speed that kills, it's bad driving!"
ReplyDeleteActually even that is wrong - it's not speed, but the sudden deceleration caused by bad driving that kills...
I agree with Anonymous 12:06.
ReplyDeleteI find it too much of a co-incidence that on the day the media shouts about 80mph on motorways and buried that same day (due to the furore) inside the news was a more insidious plan to make every residential area into a 20mph zone.
When are the "Environmentalists" going to come out & argue against the "Health & Safety" crowd? Never, I suspect, although they should. I'm stuck with an automatic car. Due to road (ahem) improvements I now get 20mpg round town whereas I used to get 25mpg only a year ago. Stop. Idle. Start... Same car will do 45mpg on a straight run. Environmentalists might care to calculate the increased emissions for 5mpg wasted fuel plus the cost of a pedestrian crossings every 200 yards. They might care to do a joint study with town planners who seem to have phased the lights to stop you just before you hit the next set of lights.
I'm becoming very strongly of the opinion that insurance ought to be increased for every year a new driver doesn't improve themselves(**). Ultimately this will reduce the premiums for young drivers. Pass test. Renewal time: passed these courses? Whack a percentage on for each one they haven't taken. I would quite happily volunteer my time to help them improve themselves(*). Ditto experienced drivers. Had more than one night time accident in period X then (re)take the night time course or pay more insurance.
(*) Baseball bat for iPod/mobile phone users. You can tell drunk drivers a mile off but not the "comms brigade". They just do the erratic thing. Other than that, I'd be helpful.
(**) Put into a pot that the driver gets back when they pass each test. Incentive!
Sounds like Nirvana folks? Probably best go listen to them as it's the closest it'll ever be to ever happening.
"They might care to do a joint study with town planners who seem to have phased the lights to stop you just before you hit the next set of lights."
ReplyDeleteI think you'll find they are deliberately timed to encourage drivers to keep to below the limit.
In a main street near me there are about half a dozen crossings quite close together. If you stick to no more than 25mph you will get a row of greens. Try and rush from one to the next and you will have to stop each time...
The truth is that they are really trying to discourage people from driving into the city, and use methods like this a way of doing it.