Balanced story on 20mph limits
- Thread starter User
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Bad Company
Very Old Person
- Location
- East Anglia
Crap article. The comments were pretty good though!
Yeah, I found myself agreeing with all those who wanted to reduce the limit further.
According to the Portsmouth City web site, the 20mph limits are only on residential roads (not the major through routes) and only on roads where the speed was previously 24mph or lower. So I wouldn't expect it to make a dramatic difference either way. It does point to the need for a change in the law so that 20mph zones in other places don't cost a fortune in signage
Really can't see what Paul Watters of the AA is bleating about
Really can't see what Paul Watters of the AA is bleating about
jonesy
Guru
"They haven't got a control group, which is pretty basic, and without which it is pretty naive to jump to conclusions."
Oh yeah, so how do you get a control group in a transport evaluation? Just because someone is a statistician doesn't mean they are an expert in all practical applications of statistics.
Indeed. Although my shudder was at the comment "and they've probably used the wrong statistical test". What the heck sort of basis is that for refuting the findings?
Chutzpah
Über Member
- Location
- Somerset, UK
Your control group would be a similar road with similar accident statistics. I'm sure a researcher with enough time would be able to find one....
The safety is really rather irrelevant!
This is also about the residents and the shocking an d unacceptable thought that they may have some wish to improve their residential environment
Of course the residents whose life is more pleasant have no rights at all here compared to the nutters who want to drive faster on "their roads" and deprive them of that improvement.
As always it is about a few self centred motorist groups who think that no-one else has any rights.
This is also about the residents and the shocking an d unacceptable thought that they may have some wish to improve their residential environment
Of course the residents whose life is more pleasant have no rights at all here compared to the nutters who want to drive faster on "their roads" and deprive them of that improvement.
As always it is about a few self centred motorist groups who think that no-one else has any rights.
Riding in Circles
Veteran
- Location
- EDINBURGH
I ride a recumbent, how am I supposed to keep under 20mph?
I'm fed up with this "fact" being bandied about as if it means that speeding is OK.
Given any potential accident, a lower speed will result in a greater likelihood of avoiding the accident altogether, or a reduction in the seriousness of injuries of the victims.
Lets say a pedestrian walks into the road without looking and is hit by an oncoming vehicle. That's the direct cause of the accident, but it's obvious that the slower the vehicle is going the better the outcome for the pedestrian.
I am too, it's an absolutely trivial point but one which even sympathetic people who know nothing about physics start going on about irrelevent things as some kind of smart ass answer.
SquareDaff
Über Member
- Location
- Doncaster, South Yorkshire
My house in Leeds is surrounded by one of these residential 20mph zones! Does it mean safer slower roads? NO!
Does it mean I risk life and limb as motorists swerve to straddle speed bumps so they don't have to slow down? YES!
I wouldn't have minded too much if the lazy so and so's from the council had actually resurfaced the road before allowing it to catch an outbreak of the bumps.
Those who go on about speed killing should also bear in mind that road surface must also be a contributing factor. The ones that are near me are so full of potholes that stopping distance must be increased by at least 10%. OK that's my guess- but it would be interesting if someone actually did a study on that!!!
Does it mean I risk life and limb as motorists swerve to straddle speed bumps so they don't have to slow down? YES!
I wouldn't have minded too much if the lazy so and so's from the council had actually resurfaced the road before allowing it to catch an outbreak of the bumps.
Those who go on about speed killing should also bear in mind that road surface must also be a contributing factor. The ones that are near me are so full of potholes that stopping distance must be increased by at least 10%. OK that's my guess- but it would be interesting if someone actually did a study on that!!!
Wow! why bother to research when you already know the answer instictively?
Particularly when careful research gets the 'wrong' answer. Step back to the report on London's 20 mph zones which found a 40% drop in injuries and death. The difference? The previous report showed a real drop in average road speeds of around 10 mph whereas Portsmouth was only 1.3 mph. That's because the London example was enforced by passive speed restraints (principally humps). Sticking up 20 mph signs a 20 mph zone does not make.
You actually have to have traffic travelling at 20 mph or less. That saves lives. a lot of lives. If motorists will not do it voluntary then the alternative is obvious. That means humps atm. Unless your name is Hammond P.
