20mph zones coming.

spindrift

Some truly twatty pro-speeding comments below:

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...cle3941769.ece

The speed limit on thousands of residential roads will be reduced to
20mph under government moves designed to cut road deaths by a third
over the next decade.

Variable limits will be introduced on main roads near schools, with
digital signs ordering drivers to cut their speed to 20mph or less
when pupils are arriving or departing.

Cameras that detect a vehicle’s average speed will be used instead of
road humps to enforce the limit in some of the new 20mph zones.

More than 3,000 people die on the roads each year, including
motorists, passengers, cyclists and pedestrians. The target, to be
reached by 2020, is expected to be set at about 2,000 deaths.


End quote.

Rob Morley

On Fri, 16 May 2008 05:35:34 -0700 (PDT)
spindrift <newtyres@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Some truly twatty pro-speeding comments below:
>
> http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...cle3941769.ece

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/t...icle3941769.ece

Mark McNeill

Response to Rob Morley
> http://business.timesonline.co.uk/t...icle3941769.ece

"The Government is preparing a road safety strategy for the next decade
and will publish proposals in a consultation document this year. Unlike
previous strategies, it is expected to include a specific target to
reduce road deaths and a series of tough measures.

In addition to more 20mph zones, measures are likely to include a lower
drink-drive limit, six penalty points for serious breaches of the speed
limit and harsher penalties for not wearing seatbelts."


This would of course be a perfect time for the government to introduce a
MHL: any cyclists' lives saved by introducing 20mph speed limits would
thereafter be cited as evidence of the marvellous efficacy of h*lm*ts.
</cynic>


"Read all 172 comments"

Oh, sure, that's *just* how I'll be spending my day off...


--
Mark, UK
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always
so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts."

Sir Jeremy

On 16 May, 13:35, spindrift <newty...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Some truly twatty pro-speeding comments below:
>
> http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...cle3941769.ece
>
> The speed limit on thousands of residential roads will be reduced to
> 20mph under government moves designed to cut road deaths by a third
> over the next decade.
>
> Variable limits will be introduced on main roads near schools, with
> digital signs ordering drivers to cut their speed to 20mph or less
> when pupils are arriving or departing.
>
> Cameras that detect a vehicle’s average speed will be used instead of
> road humps to enforce the limit in some of the new 20mph zones.
>
> More than 3,000 people die on the roads each year, including
> motorists, passengers, cyclists and pedestrians. The target, to be
> reached by 2020, is expected to be set at about 2,000 deaths.
>
> End quote.

and a lot of wanky anti-car ones too

spindrift

2000 road deaths is the target- Sweden's stated aim is to achieve zero
road deaths. We've a long way to go.


6 points for "excessive" speeding is a step in the right direction,
but the pro-speeding drivers comparing road safety measure to
"Stalinism" is laughable.

Sir Jeremy

On 16 May, 13:51, Mark McNeill <markonnewsgro...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Response to Rob Morley
>
> >http://business.timesonline.co.uk/t...y_sectors/trans...
>
> "The Government is preparing a road safety strategy for the next decade
> and will publish proposals in a consultation document this year. Unlike
> previous strategies, it is expected to include a specific target to
> reduce road deaths and a series of tough measures.
>
> In addition to more 20mph zones, measures are likely to include a lower
> drink-drive limit, six penalty points for serious breaches of the speed
> limit and harsher penalties for not wearing seatbelts."
>
> This would of course be a perfect time for the government to introduce a
> MHL: any cyclists' lives saved by introducing 20mph speed limits would
> thereafter be cited as evidence of the marvellous efficacy of h*lm*ts. *
> </cynic>
>
> "Read all 172 comments"
>
> Oh, sure, that's *just* how I'll be spending my day off...
>
> --
> Mark, UK
> "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always
> so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts."


The variable limits outside schools was an ABD idea years ago so glad
to see the Government agreeing.

Compulsory helmets on cycles for children - only a matter of time now.
Can't see how it'd be enforced for adults though except perhaps by
insurance companies refusing to pay out on injury claims if a helmet
isn't worn

spindrift

"Compulsory helmets on cycles for children - only a matter of time
now. "

What's your evidence for that bogus remark or its relevance to the
subject?

spindrift

This seems pretty conclusive:

The minister quoted a Transport Research Laboratory study of 250 20mph
schemes across Britain, which found that, after the limit was reduced,
crashes fell by 60 per cent, child casualties by 67 per cent and
average speeds by 9mph.

I don't think many sane people would argue for more dead children or
claim that saving their lives is "anti-car".

_

On Fri, 16 May 2008 06:14:49 -0700 (PDT), spindrift wrote:

> This seems pretty conclusive:
>
> The minister quoted a Transport Research Laboratory study of 250 20mph
> schemes across Britain, which found that, after the limit was reduced,
> crashes fell by 60 per cent, child casualties by 67 per cent and
> average speeds by 9mph.
>
> I don't think many sane people would argue for more dead children or
> claim that saving their lives is "anti-car".

You don't read u.r.tosspot?

spindrift

On May 16, 2:41*pm, _ <jtayNOSPAM...@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com>
wrote:
> On Fri, 16 May 2008 06:14:49 -0700 (PDT), spindrift wrote:
> > This seems pretty conclusive:
>
> > The minister quoted a Transport Research Laboratory study of 250 20mph
> > schemes across Britain, which found that, after the limit was reduced,
> > crashes fell by 60 per cent, child casualties by 67 per cent and
> > average speeds by 9mph.
>
> > I don't think many sane people would argue for more dead children or
> > claim that saving their lives is "anti-car".
>
> You don't read u.r.tosspot?

Sometimes.

The more extreme thugs and criminals who used to post of
safespeeding and compete in both absurd hysterical comparisons of
traffic wardens to the Gestapo and sticking their tongue up dead
Smith's bottom seem to have disappeared.

budstaff

"spindrift" <newtyres@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9cb4f913-a3b5-4873-ad51-50ada34219cd@26g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
> 2000 road deaths is the target- Sweden's stated aim is to achieve zero
> road deaths. We've a long way to go.
>
>
> 6 points for "excessive" speeding is a step in the right direction,
> but the pro-speeding drivers comparing road safety measure to
> "Stalinism" is laughable.

Don't get me wrong, I'm pro reducing speed limits near schools (and any road
safety measure which is likely to reduce accidents), but I'm rather glad
that we have a long way to go to match the Swedes. The only way that we
could achieve a target of zero road deaths would be to close all the roads -
to bikes 'n'all.

Zero targets are ludicrous propagandism.

spindrift

On May 16, 3:09*pm, "budstaff" <budstaffdotusegroupatbtinternetdotcom>
wrote:
> "spindrift" <newty...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:9cb4f913-a3b5-4873-ad51-50ada34219cd@26g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
>
> > 2000 road deaths is the target- Sweden's stated aim is to achieve zero
> > road deaths. We've a long way to go.
>
> > 6 points for "excessive" speeding is a step in the right direction,
> > but the pro-speeding drivers comparing road safety measure to
> > "Stalinism" is laughable.
>
> Don't get me wrong, I'm pro reducing speed limits near schools (and any road
> safety measure which is likely to reduce accidents), but I'm rather glad
> that we have a long way to go to match the Swedes. The only way that we
> could achieve a target of zero road deaths would be to close all the roads-
> to bikes 'n'all.
>
> Zero targets are ludicrous propagandism.

Vision Zero was adopted by the Swedish Parliament in 1997 and has
taken road safety in a new direction by emphasising that:

road safety is an ethical issue and deaths and serious injuries are
not acceptable
society does not expect people to die or be seriously injured while
flying or while working and it should be the same with using roads
it is possible to design the road environment and vehicles to make
sure that any ‘mistakes’ that are made do not result in death
Sweden is the only country in the world to move in this direction,
though others are considering adopting the Swedish approach.

The Stockholm Environment Institute's report was based on detailed
evidence gathering which included interviews with key policy makers
and officials in Sweden, interviews with European stakeholders, focus
groups with over 200 people in 15 locations in England and an on-line
survey of UK road safety professionals.

The report concludes that:

Vision Zero has had a significant impact on re-invigorating efforts to
eliminate deaths and serious injuries on the roads in Sweden
Vision Zero is generally welcomed by citizens in the UK who see it as
a goal which road safety policy should aim to achieve
Policy makers and professionals in the UK are less enthusiastic about
Vision Zero
Vision Zero has the potential to produce in the UK cumulative benefits
of approximately £100 billion over a 10-year period.
Vision Zero has the potential to deliver on a large number of policy
objectives including reducing air pollution, greenhouse gases, road
traffic danger and improving the quality of life and sustainability of
our communities.
Respondents to the on-line survey identified some potential problems
including the lack of realism in the Vision Zero concept and the
unacceptability of large scale barrier segregation on highways
"Our report looks in detail at the radical new direction in road
safety set by Swedish politicians and professionals, and concludes
that it has a lot to offer Britain"
Professor John WhiteleggProfessor John Whitelegg, of the Stockholm
Environment Institute at York, said: "Swedish road safety policy is
based on the maxim that the only acceptable level of death on the
roads is zero. Our report looks in detail at the radical new direction
in road safety set by Swedish politicians and professionals, and
concludes that it has a lot to offer Britain.

"Setting a target of zero has the potential to galvanise action on
every front and in every profession and simply transfers everyday
practice in aviation to the road environment. Our research shows that
the public are ready to move in this direction and want decision
makers and policy makers to be much bolder in eliminating death and
serious injury from the road environment"

The report recommends five key policy areas to secure improved
performance in road safety:

Speed control (20mph in all urban areas)
Accident investigation agency modelled on the Swedish experience and
independent of the police
Law reform to deal with citizen concern about severe outcomes being
dealt with ‘leniently’
Road traffic reduction
Urban design to lock in danger reduction for vulnerable users


http://www.york.ac.uk/admin/presspr...rotolerance.htm

Sir Jeremy

On 16 May, 14:03, spindrift <newty...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Compulsory helmets on cycles for children - only a matter of time
> now. "
>
> What's your evidence for that bogus remark or its relevance to the
> subject?

IMHO

budstaff

"spindrift" <newtyres@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e4925051-7e2b-4ad3-bc37-a2c960af77cf@x35g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On May 16, 3:09 pm, "budstaff" <budstaffdotusegroupatbtinternetdotcom>
wrote:
> "spindrift" <newty...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:9cb4f913-a3b5-4873-ad51-50ada34219cd@26g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
>
> > 2000 road deaths is the target- Sweden's stated aim is to achieve zero
> > road deaths. We've a long way to go.
>
> > 6 points for "excessive" speeding is a step in the right direction,
> > but the pro-speeding drivers comparing road safety measure to
> > "Stalinism" is laughable.
>
> Don't get me wrong, I'm pro reducing speed limits near schools (and any
> road
> safety measure which is likely to reduce accidents), but I'm rather glad
> that we have a long way to go to match the Swedes. The only way that we
> could achieve a target of zero road deaths would be to close all the
> roads -
> to bikes 'n'all.
>
> Zero targets are ludicrous propagandism.

Vision Zero was adopted by the Swedish Parliament in 1997 and has
taken road safety in a new direction by emphasising that:

road safety is an ethical issue and deaths and serious injuries are
not acceptable
society does not expect people to die or be seriously injured while
flying or while working and it should be the same with using roads
it is possible to design the road environment and vehicles to make
sure that any ‘mistakes’ that are made do not result in death
Sweden is the only country in the world to move in this direction,
though others are considering adopting the Swedish approach.

The Stockholm Environment Institute's report was based on detailed
evidence gathering which included interviews with key policy makers
and officials in Sweden, interviews with European stakeholders, focus
groups with over 200 people in 15 locations in England and an on-line
survey of UK road safety professionals.

The report concludes that:

Vision Zero has had a significant impact on re-invigorating efforts to
eliminate deaths and serious injuries on the roads in Sweden
Vision Zero is generally welcomed by citizens in the UK who see it as
a goal which road safety policy should aim to achieve
Policy makers and professionals in the UK are less enthusiastic about
Vision Zero
Vision Zero has the potential to produce in the UK cumulative benefits
of approximately £100 billion over a 10-year period.
Vision Zero has the potential to deliver on a large number of policy
objectives including reducing air pollution, greenhouse gases, road
traffic danger and improving the quality of life and sustainability of
our communities.
Respondents to the on-line survey identified some potential problems
including the lack of realism in the Vision Zero concept and the
unacceptability of large scale barrier segregation on highways
"Our report looks in detail at the radical new direction in road
safety set by Swedish politicians and professionals, and concludes
that it has a lot to offer Britain"
Professor John WhiteleggProfessor John Whitelegg, of the Stockholm
Environment Institute at York, said: "Swedish road safety policy is
based on the maxim that the only acceptable level of death on the
roads is zero. Our report looks in detail at the radical new direction
in road safety set by Swedish politicians and professionals, and
concludes that it has a lot to offer Britain.

"Setting a target of zero has the potential to galvanise action on
every front and in every profession and simply transfers everyday
practice in aviation to the road environment. Our research shows that
the public are ready to move in this direction and want decision
makers and policy makers to be much bolder in eliminating death and
serious injury from the road environment"

The report recommends five key policy areas to secure improved
performance in road safety:

Speed control (20mph in all urban areas)
Accident investigation agency modelled on the Swedish experience and
independent of the police
Law reform to deal with citizen concern about severe outcomes being
dealt with ‘leniently’
Road traffic reduction
Urban design to lock in danger reduction for vulnerable users


http://www.york.ac.uk/admin/presspr...rotolerance.htm

Fantastic bit of swift cut-and-paste-ing, but the only bit relevant to what
I said was:

"Setting a target of zero has the potential to galvanise action on
every front and in every profession and simply transfers everyday
practice in aviation to the road environment. Our research shows that
the public are ready to move in this direction and want decision
makers and policy makers to be much bolder in eliminating death and
serious injury from the road environment"

and I just don't buy it. In aviation they may have an aim of eliminating as
many accidents as possible, but they don't attempt to sell 'zero deaths' to
the public as an achievable objective, and they have a long history of
expedience in recognising the operational requirements of air operators in
the mix (if zero deaths was the aim all the seats would face backwards, for
instance). Also, asking the public whether they would like to see bold
measures to eliminate death on the roads is only ever going to yield one
answer, but if the question made clear the personal restrictions such a goal
would entail (which taken to the only logical conclusion would include
closing all roads completely - presumably allowing us only to travel
off-road) then the answer would be very different.