J
Just zis Guy, you know?
Guest
Safer cycling
=============
CTC has joined forces with 28 other road safety, community, health and
environmental organisations under the banner of the 'Safer Streets
Coalition' (SSC), to call for a number of amendments to the
Government’s Road Safety Bill. The issue which most concerns SSC
member organisations is the proposal to lower the penalty for
‘marginally’ exceeding the speed limit from 3 points to 2 points –
even though ‘marginal’ could mean driving at 39mph in a 30mph
area. It is ironic that the first full-blown Road Safety Bill since
1967 could actually increase (rather than reduce) deaths and serious
injuries on our roads. CTC is urging members to contact their MPs,
urging them to support the Safer Streets Coalition’s proposals. The
Bill has its second reading debate on January 11th. Many MPs will be
having constituency surgeries in the meantime. Click here for further
information on the Bill (by all means draw on this text when writing
to your MP), and a link to the Safer Streets Coalition’s briefing on
the Bill. You can contact your MP (and if need be find out his/her
name) via www.faxyourmp.com. Please let adam dot coffman at ctc dot
org dot uk know of any responses.
CTC's page on the Bill is here:
http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=3701
The date has been moved forward - probably a sign of decks being
cleared for a May election. The Government and DfT in particular are
keen for this Bill to go through, so contentious issues will be
avoided. If it is made clear that reducing the penalty for speeding
in precisely the circumstances where the risk posed to others is
greatest /is/ contentious, and amendment may be forthcoming. That's
what i think this proposal does - at 30mph half of pedestrians will
survive being hit, at 39mph around 95% will die. It seems to me that
there is ample justification for increasing penalties for greater
margins over the limit, introducing a sense of proportionality, but to
give a nod and a wink to those driving a third over the limit in 30
limits is simply foolish.
On a personal note, Adam Coffman is a good guy. I think he used to
work for Bob Davis and I bear him no malice for getting a job I
applied for
Guy
--
"then came ye chavves, theyre cartes girded wyth candels
blue, and theyre beastes wyth straynge horn-lyke thyngs
onn theyre arses that theyre fartes be herde from myles
around." Chaucer, the Sheppey Tales
=============
CTC has joined forces with 28 other road safety, community, health and
environmental organisations under the banner of the 'Safer Streets
Coalition' (SSC), to call for a number of amendments to the
Government’s Road Safety Bill. The issue which most concerns SSC
member organisations is the proposal to lower the penalty for
‘marginally’ exceeding the speed limit from 3 points to 2 points –
even though ‘marginal’ could mean driving at 39mph in a 30mph
area. It is ironic that the first full-blown Road Safety Bill since
1967 could actually increase (rather than reduce) deaths and serious
injuries on our roads. CTC is urging members to contact their MPs,
urging them to support the Safer Streets Coalition’s proposals. The
Bill has its second reading debate on January 11th. Many MPs will be
having constituency surgeries in the meantime. Click here for further
information on the Bill (by all means draw on this text when writing
to your MP), and a link to the Safer Streets Coalition’s briefing on
the Bill. You can contact your MP (and if need be find out his/her
name) via www.faxyourmp.com. Please let adam dot coffman at ctc dot
org dot uk know of any responses.
CTC's page on the Bill is here:
http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=3701
The date has been moved forward - probably a sign of decks being
cleared for a May election. The Government and DfT in particular are
keen for this Bill to go through, so contentious issues will be
avoided. If it is made clear that reducing the penalty for speeding
in precisely the circumstances where the risk posed to others is
greatest /is/ contentious, and amendment may be forthcoming. That's
what i think this proposal does - at 30mph half of pedestrians will
survive being hit, at 39mph around 95% will die. It seems to me that
there is ample justification for increasing penalties for greater
margins over the limit, introducing a sense of proportionality, but to
give a nod and a wink to those driving a third over the limit in 30
limits is simply foolish.
On a personal note, Adam Coffman is a good guy. I think he used to
work for Bob Davis and I bear him no malice for getting a job I
applied for
Guy
--
"then came ye chavves, theyre cartes girded wyth candels
blue, and theyre beastes wyth straynge horn-lyke thyngs
onn theyre arses that theyre fartes be herde from myles
around." Chaucer, the Sheppey Tales