As reported in the Evening Standard today, the government is reviewing speed limits with a view to lowering most urban areas to 20mph with many more limits being reduced in rural areas. Motorway limits are to remain at 70 mph.

I'm in two minds about this - firstly I see it as yet another excuse to put up more speed cameras, but I can see the benefits of enforced lower limits in urban areas expecially around schools etc.

I also find it strange that statisically, motorways are the safest roads in the country and 75% of fatal accidents occur in 30 mph limits and yet the government still persists with the 'speed kills' message.

Surely it is time to look at improving people's driving, introducing mandatory eye tests at regular intervals and educating people rather than just persuing the same old policies?

Chris

Oooh, this speed kills thing makes me so mad! Look at the Association of British Drivers for some arguments on actually raising the speed limit on the motorway.

As for 20 mph speed limits, 30 is slow enough for most places. In Northampton, I drive along a road which is "dual carriageway" and is STILL 30 mph. And yes, it has speed cameras, 3 in fact within about a mile of each other!

Do they want to REALLY slow us down so a 10 minute journey to work actually takes an hour? Surely the "green" demonstrators will have something to say!

20mph is fine for outside schools and busy shopping areas, yeah i'd agree with that ....

But not for a normal roads !!!! I mean FFS, my nephew goes faster than that on his push bike. Are they going to start handing him speeding tickets now.

*) Variable speed limits on motorways - 100mph middle of night, 50 when raining etc. 85ish 'normal' conditions
*) Decrease in heavily built up urban areas (particularly outside schools / town centres) to 20mph, although personally i think 30mph is fine, as long as people would be sensible about it (some hope)
*) Disembowel Ken Livingstone

Bloody school kids - some of them deserve to get run over to be honest. Larking around, pushing each other into the roads. Shouldn't EDUCATION be the key to road safety - from both the drivers and pedestrian's perspective!

It wouldnt make any difference where I live, you cant do over 10mph in the mornings or evenings, and anyone who is going break the law will regardless of limit. Outside Schools and through estates yes - everywhere else - no.

30 almost feels like walking and there are some daft roads with 30 limits, the dual carraigeway that runs through Farnborough past Barons BMW is a 30!?!?!? - why???

Well since they made it a 30 they have been catching thousands of people doing 40 as they never announced it!! - no signs , nothing, wonder why?? - revenue. ;(

if the government were to genuinely review speed limits then I would certainly be in favour. There are some areas where a 20mph limit is sensible eg outside schools, hospitals, housing estates.
However, in my opinion a genuine review would have to address the motorway speed limits aswell. Most people seem to think that 70 is too low.
Personally I cannot understand why they cannot implement variable speed limits (which they have done successfully on the M25) and when circumstances permit (ie good weather conditions, low traffic levels) the limit can be increased.

Steve

Nobody ever suggests slowing down trains when someone is killed crossing a level crossing, so why slow down cars because people don't look both ways before crossing the road? Why is it ok for pedestrians to walk out in front of a 1 tonne+ lump of metal moving at 30mph or more? Why is it ok for the local councils to sell off playgrounds and expect children to play on busy roads?

Unlike other countries who have variable speed limits outside schools, we only seem able to insist on 20 mph outside schools 24 hours a day and on weekends!

As is pointed out on the ABD website, you need a coherent, wide-ranging policy that tackles the real causes of accidents in order to make a difference.

As Clarebabes mentioned, the ABD website has pretty much all the stats you need to make your mind up on this one. I been following the updates on their site for years now and i cannot understand why the government are not taking notice of them. It's the one oganisation that has all the facts and has come up with the most sensible proposals.

I may be wrong here but if the traffic slows from say 30mph to 20mph then it will take 1.5 times longer for the journey. That will in turn multiply the amount of traffic by 1.5. Is that a good way of making the road safer?? I don't think so.

Lowering speed limits in the wrong areas will just lead to : -

1) road rage
2) increased traffic levels
3) lower level of driver concentration
4) more accidents
5) more speeding fines
6) increased fuel useage
7) more pollution
8) me having to assasinate several members of parliment

I agree with low speed limits in areas such as school/hospitals etc but lets face it they are relatively rare things in the grand scheme of the roads network. The 30 mph limit is being imposed far to often where it is not necessary purely as a way of generating revenue from motorists.

With regards to the motorways. Somebody please tell me the last time you did 70 mph or under on the motorway when the road is relatively clear and the conditions are reasonable/good. I for one almost always exceed 70 mph and from what I've seen so does almost everybody else who has a vehicle that can! Either we are all reckless drivers or the speed limit is too low for most modern vehicles........

Marty makes an interesting point. What about us people that have and use a pushbike and can get over 20mph on that? We don't have a speedo so how do we know how fast we are going?

Would we be breaking the law and liable for prosecution?

Would be nice to be doing 25mph on a pushbike, smiling at the camera as it takes your picture :)

Why would cyclists be breaking the law over 20??, they seem imune to all other laws so why worry?

And have you noticed the mobile speed camera that sits but the traffic lights there so that as you come off the roundabout you get caught. I work not far from Barons and several people here have been caught speeding on that bit.

Mind you I've started to notice cameramen on the bridges over the A331 lately, close escape for me one day

A331 - is that the newish road from Camberley to Guilford (hogs back??)

My Ex's dad got done on that road for 90mph, I cant belive ive never been caught as I often go quickly up that road when its quiet!!!

I know where your talking about, they are ares's in Farnborough, I lived there for 19 years!!!

STi,

Gotta agree with you there... the 70 limit is unreasonable considering the current spec of modern cars.

Going by the speed most folk drive at on a clear motorway i'd say most folk agree. Even with the mother-in-law in the car, on a clear day i'll be over the 70 limit (sitting at the speed of the traffic of course). Take a look at the M6 on a clear, dry night... average car travelling down there must be coasting around 90.

I believe the 70mph was chosen in the first place because of the speed cars were capable of safely travelling at in the 60s. This limit is obviously outdated.

I know of someone who was charged while riding a push pike whilst drunk (was reported in a local paper in Greenock). Not sure what they got charged with though.

Dunno about you lot but i'd rather get bumped by a car slowing from 20mph than a cyclist hurtling down a hill at 40mph. Stands to reason that pushbikes would have to follow the same (albeit silly) guidelines for speed.

You can be charged for being drunk in charge of any vehicle I think.

Tom, unfortunately, I'm in the minority and tend to stick to the laws of the road on both bike and in car, it's the sad boring kind of life I lead :D I have seen, and almost been wiped out, by cyclists acting stupidly and IMHO they shouldn't even be allowed on the road.

My issue with cyclists being charged is that they would all need to be fitted with speedos so you knew you weren't breaking the law. I can't see that happening, which makes the whole 20mph thing a complete farce in that it cannot be policed correctly. How do you trace a cyclists from a speed camera picture? Put them on crimewatch?

I've no probs with doing 30mph on our estate due to number of kids and animals about. It would help though if parents taught their kids how to cross a road, and not just walk out with the toddlers without looking. You can always (well nearly) avoid an accident by driving a lot slower, but it's not the only means. Education is the best means, driver, cyclist, pedestrian....show them all what can happen and it might eventually start to make a difference.

well re motorways - my mums drives everywhere sooooooooooooooo slowly ;) mostly around towns. On the odd occasion she hits the motorway for a trip up to York to see the rellies she tells me how she was doing 90mph most of the way :eek: :D 70mph is outdated even for my "slow" mum ;) [img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img]

This cyclist 20 mph thing is irrelevant, it is not that hard to break a 30 limit on a push bike, a fit cyclist would make over 40.

There are a few timed 20 limits at schools around here, they are also irrelevant as the chances of doing more than 10 mph near a school during the school run period are minimal anyway.

Seriously though this whole issue needs reviewing as suggested above. I have noticed in France that they progressively reduce the speed limit as a hazard is approached e.g a crossroad on a main road. Whether or not a driver takes any notice or not is another problem.

Why 100? Why any specific figure at all. Define "middle of night". The problem is that conditions vary so much, from minute to minute, and from location to location.
Im sure the southern stretches of the M1 and around the M25 always have a certain volume of traffic, yet the motorways around where I live can be empty "in the middle of the night".

Its such a shame that its so difficult to define "safe for the conditions".

How do you define rain?

Why *can't* you do 100mph on a deserted motorway in light drizzle?

Is is unsafe to do so?

How do you define "taffic volume"? (slightly easier I guess)

What constitues dangerous?

Does anybody know how the Germans manage the traffic on their unlimited stretches of motorway? Why can't the same methods be employed here in the UK?

It frustrates the fCJK out of me that I can be driving home on an empty motorway, yet Im only legally allowed to do 70mph.

Ask yourself this one:

"where are my concentrations levels higher?"

70mph or >100mph ?

I know where mine are !!!

The problem is, that once you go above a ton, you have to spend more and more time looking for pigs with nothing better to do. Wouldn't it be better if you could put 100% into watching whats developing in front?

Rough extract from local rag:

"Mr xyz was followed for a distance and recorded an average speed of 116mph." The police commented that his driving was not dangerous and that in a distance of x number of miles, he only passed 2 cars, one of which was the unmarked police car that caught him. The time was 02:30hrs.
The driver received a two week ban and £400 fine.

Why?

One well respected member of the local community is now a fully paid up member of the "all police are wa£kers" club.

I know they are only doing their job..... ZZzzzzzz

The whole attitude of the government to speed is wrong. Why is it so difficult to see?

qwerty,

I see the point you are making, but imo derestricted motorways in this country will never happen, its too politically controversial
I suggested the figure of 100 because firstly i plucked it out of thin air, and secondly I think its about the most realistic figure we'll ever get to (if that).
Middle of the night was vague, yes, I would suggest 11pm - 6am as a median figure for when traffic flow would be lightest.
I appreciate you live in an area where traffic is light, but how would regional speed limits ever be introduced? You have to have something that can be workable for the whole country.
Sadly for every sensible driver in this country, theres a boy racer who isnt and how many accidents at 100mph + would it take to cause uproar?.
On a semi seperate note, we have incredibly congested roads on the whole relative to germany, and braking distances have to be taken into account - IMO over 100mph in this country is too much for our roads if there are other cars on it.
(please no-one try and argue about superior braking technology on high performance cars, cos it isnt true!)

:)

Regarding this particular dual carriageway, I travel down there every day to work now.

I was caught 4 years ago doing more than the posted speed limit. At the time I didn't know the road well and presumed that as a dual carriage way it was a much higher limit. I don't condone what I did but IMO there is no justification for that road to be a 30. The limit should be higher, 50mph would be suitable to me (you get stuck in traffic anyway at 9am and 5pm, all other times visibilty is excellent and the road is easily safe enough).

The fact that the police are there every week with the camera safety van raking in the £££'s has no influence on this particular stretch being/staying a 30 of course.:rolleyes:

DP.

[Edited by drumsterphil - 10/16/2002 6:54:16 PM]

Hanslow, I was ticked off by our local police officer for cycling past the police station at well over 30mph when I was at high school :o and I have heard of cyclists being done for speeding.

IMHO a revision of limits should mean a revision of all limits, if they are only going to reduce limits then it should be called such.

20 Limits should not be required, all that is required is for the police to allocate a couple of officers to the areas outside schools and if people go flying past it is dangerous driving.

I drive in Europe fairly regularly. The roads in France are multi speed depending on weather, the speed limit drops 20Km/hr on the Mway when it rains.

The thing that really impresses me about driving through France/Belgium/Germany is how disiplined the traffic is. Because people are travelling quickly they use their mirrors and if they see a car aproaching they move over and let you pass, it makes for relaxed driving.

My trips to the ring are 600 miles each way, 300 in the UK, 300 on the continent. Typically it takes me 8 hours to do the UK run, 4 hours to do the Continental run. It is much safer on the continent IMHO.

John, Agree completely. Having just had a drive over to Holland/Germany border, the driving style is so much more relaxed and appreciative.

Robertio, apart from scaring the crap out of yourself occasionally, how would a cyclist know they were breaking the speed limit? Do you know what fine/caution the people got? Can hardly put points on your licence :rolleyes:

Can't see how they could police a speed limit that push bikes with no identifiable marks could break? I haven't got a problem with the limits being 20mph in the right areas, will just seem a farce if they exclude cyclists, yet I can't see how they can justifiably prosecute a cyclist that has no indication of their speed.

This country is just a little fcuked up in the road department methinks :)

Agreed. I sometimes wonder why there's a specific offence of 'speeding' at all - either it's dangerous driving, or it isn't. Of course, speed is the easy thing to measure and quantify, so there's no subjective judgment required in order to secure a prosecution. Maybe there should be another offence of 'stupid-ing' to cover other cases? How about 'not-looking-where-you're-going-ing'?

Out of interest, of those people on here who regularly stick rigidly to 30 limits? Do you:

a) spend half your time staring at your speedo, the other half at the car or van that's inevitably tailgating you, and the remainder on watching the road ahead?

b) find it a calm, relaxed experience?

c) feel threatened by other road users?

d) wonder why on earth you bother, when other cars zoom past you?

e) believe that there's a safety benefit for the 99% of the time you're not outside a school?

What really annoys me is that ridiculously low limits are set, and then they're not policed properly. I'm fed up of the constant mental battle between on the one hand, sticking within the law and knowing that my license is safe, while on the other hand I could speed up, probably get away with it, and not risk a battering at the hands of the hairy ar$ed trucker behind me. Being hassled by other traffic annoys me a heck of a lot more than merely driving slowly.

Please don't get me wrong - I hate inappropriately low speed limits, but I hate being pressured into breaking them even more. If I ever hold you up on the roads, then please accept my apology in advance, and understand that I'm only doing it because it's the law - just as I don't steal things from shops just because noone's looking. The police are just enforcing the law, which is their job. It's the law that's an ass. Join the ABD and let's help change it.

I think I'll move to the Isle of Man, where you're very welcome to try and catch me on the mountain road :D

Andy.

due to my poor comunication skills...

I second the "other" Andy's comments

all too true mate.

Iv'e tried both approaches

drive under / at the limit,

get harassed by impatient tailgaiters.
constantly re checking speed.
annoyingly slow to no concievable danger (apart from the arse behind.)
have people overtake, making the so called "safe speed" a total waste of my effort.

I'll go with my own view of a safe speed and if I get done then so be it (should have been more observant :D )

Andy (the other Andy C )

If you have any experience in driving, you should have a good judge of speed. I know how much thottle I should be applying, how many revs my engine will be making, and roughly how fast the scenery will be passing at 30mph. OK, it may not be exact but I know when I'm doing [an indicated] 33mph and need to adjust accordingly. I can easily tell when riding as a passenger if the driver is exceeding 35mph for example. This is not difficult!

No, too many people tailgate at these speeds. But then again at 40mph these people are probably only a further 6 inches away, so probably safer at 30mph.

As above, but if people do tailgate/get aggravated, I will stick even more rigidly to the speed limit (see example below).

In am urban 30, I feel safer driving at 30mph than driving at 40mph. Some 30s are unexplainable, but adhered to through fear of collecting some more 'bonus points'.

Yes, padestrians, children, stray dogs, stupid people pulling out of side roads, cyclists, big holes in the road etc, etc.

I don't think a blanket 20mph in urban areas would be a good move - any more than a few hundred yards at that speed would cause boredom, loss of concentration, and probably more accidents!!

Cannot understand why motorways are supposedly the safest roads, and yet also the same roads where most people exceed the limit?!


Finally, a tale from a few weeks ago. Came into some roadworks on the A38 dual carriageway north of Birmingham, 30mph limit, and down to one lane. I thought the limit was a bit excessively low (weekend, no apparent work being done on that stretch), so only slowed to 40mph. Then a Transit van came within a few feet of the back of my car. So what do I do? Precicely. Slow down gradually, but purposly using the brake to 30mph. As if tail-gating me is going to make me go faster? Like, durr!!

I find it depends on the road - wide roads with little street furniture or other features feel slower to me than narrow, cluttered ones, for the same reading on the speedo. If you don't have any such problem then congratulations, you're probably an above average driver. By definition, 50% of drivers are below average, though. Maybe I'm one of them?

Agreed.

That's because they're 'stupid-ing'. (Can you patent a phrase?) When I'm president, I'll make them drive Daihatsus. My experience is that most people who tailgate dangerously at 30 are much happier (and further away) at 40.

That takes balls. Have you ever found yourself with a Transit-shaped dent in your back bumper? Come close? That's what I worry about - maybe unnecessarily?

Me too. I find it ironic that, at 30 in a 30 limit I feel physically threatened, yet if I take the obvious action to alleviate the threat (speed up!), I then feel threatened by the very people who are supposed to protect people from physical harm. It's a no-win situation thanks to flawed lawmaking.

Observation! You're not looking at your speedo, so look around you! (Sorry, but you win 3 points and £60 for 'not-looking-where-you're-going-ing' :D )

Agreed, absolutely. Ever driven through Slough? Dual carriageway, 30mph all the way (with cameras), except for 5 yards either side of each set of lights, and they're 20 zones. I've NEVER seen anyone do 20! Even if they did, there are far more important things to look at at junctions than the speedo.

Gov't figures, though only widely publicised through the ABD: speed causes 7.3% of all accidents. That leaves 92.7% that are caused by something else.

I have a very similar story from my summer holiday in Ireland. I think it was a 50 zone, single carriageway, someone happily tailgated me for nearly 10 miles just because I wouldn't (illegally) pull over to the hard shoulder to let her past. We passed two sets of policemen with radar guns aimed at the other carriageway and still she wouldn't take the hint. I prodded my brake pedal to flash my brake lights - her response was a similar cadence on her headlights. Some people just can't take a hint :(

[edited - you try getting all those quotes right after a hard day and a couple of beers ;)]


[Edited by AndyC_772 - 10/16/2002 10:26:13 PM]