More than 32,000 people have died on British roads in the past 10 years

[Cab]

The cost of implementing and policing a 20mph limit nationwide will cost billions.

Why? How? I mean, it isn't like there is no road maintenance/sign maintenance anyway, and it isn't like every road will be at 20mph.

 

[very-near]

Eh? So you'd rather be hit by the faster drunk-driver?

What is the chance they will observe any limit or indeed actually use the brakes when under the influence TC - think carefuly about what you are advocating here as you are trying to prop up the weak side of the argument please. You are condoning drivers (or cyclists come to think of it) taking to the roads whilst in an unfit state to do so. They are a danger to all others irrespective of whatever speed they travel at. You are showing a very distinct lack of either self awareness or that of the risks these irresponsible users take at the moment

 

[very-near]

Why? How? I mean, it isn't like there is no road maintenance/sign maintenance anyway, and it isn't like every road will be at 20mph.

We have had these zones in Gloucester for at least 10 years now with specs cameras. People still speed where not monitored. It is impossible to do this on every road. It is just a pipe dream.

 

[theclaud]

What is the chance they will observe any limit or indeed actually use the brakes when under the influence TC - think carefuly about what you are advocating here as you are trying to prop up the weak side of the argument please. You are condoning drivers (or cyclists come to think of it) taking to the roads whilst in an unfit state to do so. They are a danger to all others irrespective of whatever speed they travel at. You are showing a very distinct lack of either self awareness or that of the risks these irresponsible users take at the moment

Linf - you've stolen Spire's Missing The Point Award just as he thought he had it in the bag. Two drivers, equally drunk. Same cars and conditions. One is travelling at 20mph, the other at 30. If you have to be hit by one of them, which do you choose? I'll give you a minute to think about it.

 

[very-near]

Linf - you've stolen Spire's Missing The Point Award just as he thought he had it in the bag. Two drivers, equally drunk. Same cars and conditions. One is travelling at 20mph, the other at 30. If you have to be hit by one of them, which do you choose? I'll give you a minute to think about it.

There is no safe speed for a drunk to be behind the wheel TC!

 

[Cab]

We have had these zones in Gloucester for at least 10 years now with specs cameras. People still speed where not monitored. It is impossible to do this on every road. It is just a pipe dream.

It isn't the goal to do this on every road, as pointed out in the post your above reply was a response to.

You're now replying to points made with a repetition of the content of those points. Whats going on?

 

[Cab]

There is no safe speed for a drunk to be behind the wheel TC!

I contend that in a straight choice between a drunk driver travelling at 20mph, and a drunk driver travelling at 30mph, both the likelyhood and severity of a collision is greater at 30mph. Do you agree, yes or no?

 

[theclaud]

There is no safe speed for a drunk to be behind the wheel TC!

I quite agree! Now would you answer the question please? Two drivers, both unsafe behind the wheel, one going 10mph faster than the other. One of them is going to hit you, and you have the luxury of choice. Make it.

 

[very-near]

I've got to go to the East Midlands in a minute, so cant debate the minutaie of your ridiculous assertion. However, suffice to say...

Are you on drugs today Linford?

I'm on drugs every day Smeggers. Anyway, have a safe journey and keep the speed down.

140 mile round trip at 20mph, you should get back just in time for tea

 

[summerdays]

But nowhere is anyone suggesting that all roads should become 20 mph - or did I miss that bit?

 

[theclaud]

But nowhere is anyone suggesting that all roads should become 20 mph - or did I miss that bit?

I pretty much am, actually, except for motorways. Or perhaps 15mph. But I've let it go for the purposes of this discussion...

 

[very-near]

I contend that in a straight choice between a drunk driver travelling at 20mph, and a drunk driver travelling at 30mph, both the likelyhood and severity of a collision is greater at 30mph. Do you agree, yes or no?

Mr Clarkson quite rightly stated that cars have the luxury of 'Brakes'

An inebriated driver is very unlikely to bother to use them before impact
so your question is really irrelevant.

Are you suggesting that you would be happy to share the roads with drink drivers as long as they are doing 20mph ?

 

[very-near]

But nowhere is anyone suggesting that all roads should become 20 mph - or did I miss that bit?

IIRC, that was Cab

 

[theclaud]

Either answer the question or stop banging on, Linfy...

 

[very-near]

Either answer the question or stop banging on, Linfy...

Let me put it another way.

A) You're standing in the road and a car is coming towards you at 20mph. The driver has impared judgement through drink or drugs and you cannot get out of his way. He then he proceeds to run you over (ouch)

You're standing in the road and a car is coming towards you at 30mph. The driver is sober and alert and as a result steps on the brakes in good time. You cannot get out of his way but he stops in good time (result)

Can you see the problem with your argument