Road safety press release from CTC

Discussion in 'UK and Europe' started by Wafflycathcsdir, Feb 5, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Copied from the CTC website - P**l S**th won't like it - so it's got to be good
    :)

    Cheers, helen s

    "Cyclists want road safety made top priority February 5 2003

    Cyclists are backing new demands for urgent action to make our roads safer for all.

    National cyclists’ organisation CTC is part of the Safer Streets Coalition which is today
    writing to Transport Secretary Alistair Darling urging him to take action to reduce speed limits,
    enforce traffic law, introduce more traffic calming measures and raise driver awareness of road
    safety issues.

    CTC is one of 25 national organisations forming the Safer Streets Coalition. Today’s letter calls
    for measures to force motorists to drive more responsibly. Improved road safety is just as necessary
    as measures to fight crime and anti-social behaviour, the Coalition says.

    Roger Geffen, CTC Campaigns and Policy Manager said: “We all stand to gain from the health,
    social and environmental benefits of encouraging more cycle use. Yet too many people are put off
    cycling by the fear of traffic. Cycle lanes can help but do not address the speed and dominance of
    motor vehicles. These are the key issues that must be tackled if we want to see more people cycling
    more often.”

    Speeding and speeds too high for the situation or conditions, are a major factor in the deaths of at
    least 1,100 people on British roads every year.

    Safety fears also force thousands more people off their bikes which means that the health benefits
    of regular exercise, which for many could be part of the daily routine, are lost, significantly
    contributing to increased heart disease, diabetes and obesity.

    Geffen said: “It is time for the government to accept that responsibility for the safety of others
    will have to be forced on drivers who intimidate, maim and kill.”

    The letter to Transport Secretary Alistair Darling follows.

    Ends

    For more press details call CTC Media Officer Cath Harris on 0870 873 0063 / 07909 685600 or email
    [email protected]

    Notes to editors

    • CTC is the national organisation for all cyclists in the UK and Ireland, including children,
    families, and commuters. CTC has 70,000 members and affiliates and is the oldest and largest cycling
    body in the UK.

    • In 2003 CTC celebrates its 125th anniversary with locally organised rides for all over the May
    Day weekend and eight days of Birthday Rides in Dorset in August.

    • Officers and members actively promote cyclists’ right to use roads and work to improve offroad
    access throughout the UK and Ireland.

    • CTC Cymru and CTC Scotland are well established and influential. CTC is in the process of
    forming seven CTC regions in England.

    • CTC membership includes free third party insurance, legal claims advice, travel and technical
    guidance, on and offroad route information and a bi-monthly magazine.

    • For details of all CTC services visit www.ctc.org.uk

    Rt Hon Alistair Darling MP Secretary of State for Transport Department for Transport Great Minster
    House 76 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DR

    Wednesday 5 February 2003

    Dear Mr Darling,

    We represent millions of people from around the country: young and old, able-bodied and people with
    disabilities, from both urban and rural communities.

    We have become increasingly concerned about the impact of traffic – and particularly people
    driving too fast – on our quality of life. Speed is a critical factor in road crashes: over 1100
    people die every year in road crashes in which speed is a major factor. Many more thousands are
    seriously injured as a result of excessive speeds.

    People who drive too fast also intimidate other people on our streets, reduce people’s freedom to
    enjoy walking and cycling (beneficial to both our health and the environment) and blight both towns
    and villages through noise, air pollution and community severance.

    As the Safer Streets Coalition, we call on the Government to take more action to deal with this
    issue. We urge the Government to move quickly to review speed limits across the country, and in
    particular to deliver a 30mph limit for every village and make much wider use of 20mph limits in
    residential areas and on main shopping streets. We would like to see better enforcement of speed
    limits through more speed cameras, more resources for traffic police and stricter traffic law
    enforcement. And we would like to see substantially more funding for well designed traffic calming,
    traffic reduction schemes and other improvements that take into account the needs of all road users.

    Above all though, we ask for leadership from the Government on this issue. With all the Government
    focus on the need to clamp down on anti-social behaviour and the need to be tough on crime, it would
    surely be hypocritical not to demand more responsible behaviour from car drivers. After all, 3450
    people died on British roads last year. Government needs to convey this message and ensure that the
    matter gets the priority that it should in terms of policy, funding initiatives and awareness
    campaigns. As legislation to make our railways as safe as possible is debated in the House of
    Commons, the Government should strive for a similar attitude to be applied to safety on our roads.

    We look forward to working with Ministers to rectify this situation and to make our streets safer
    for all of us.

    Yours sincerely,

    Martin Bacon – Chief Executive, Civic Trust Tom Bogdanowicz – Campaigns Manager, London Cycling
    Campaign Paul Cann – Director of Policy, Research and International Development, Help the Aged
    Helen Carey – National Chairman, National Federation of Women’s Institutes Brigitte Chaudhry –
    Director, RoadPeace Kevin Clinton – Road Safety Adviser, ROSPA` Issy Cole-Hamilton – Acting
    Director, Children’s Play Council Tom Foulkes – Director General, Institution of Civil Engineers
    Tom Franklin – Director, Living Streets Roger Geffen – Campaigns and Policy Manager, CTC (the
    national cyclists’ organisation) Robert Gifford – Director, Parliamentary Advisory Council for
    Transport Safety Matt Grainger – Guide Dogs for the Blind Association John Grimshaw – Director,
    Sustrans Mike Hayes – Deputy Director, Child Accident Prevention Trust Stephen Joseph –
    Director, Transport 2000 Tony Juniper – Executive Director, Friends of the Earth Brian Lamb –
    Director of Communications, RNID Paul Lincoln – Chief Executive, National Heart Forum Gordon
    Lishman – Director-General, Age Concern Paige Mitchell – Co-ordinator, Slower Speeds Initiative
    Kate Parminter – Chief Executive, Campaign for the Protection of Rural England Ian Roberts –
    Professor of Public Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine Nicholas Russell –
    Transport Policy Officer, RNIB Carol Thomas – JMU Access Partnership and the Joint Committee on
    Mobility of Blind and Partially Sighted People Mark Whitby – Director, Whitby Bird and Partners
    Engineers"

    ~~~~~~~~~~
    Flush out that intestinal parasite and/or the waste product before sending a reply!

    Any speeliong mistake$ aR the resiult of my cats sitting on the keyboaRRRDdd
    ~~~~~~~~~~
     
    Tags:


  2. "wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > Copied from the CTC website - P**l S**th won't like it - so it's got to be
    good
    > :)
    >
    > Cheers, helen s

    He's not the only one :-( when will these people realise that bad drivers will be just as bad at
    30 mph as they are at 40 - what we need are much much higher standards of driving not lower
    speed limits.

    Get the worst 20% of drivers off roads completely and we'll cut out 80% of accidents. That's the
    solution but no-ones got the political balls to do it. Harder driving tests, compulsory advanced
    driving training and testing and compulsory re testing. That's the real answer.

    Russ
     
  3. Andymorris

    Andymorris Guest

    russell pinder wrote:
    > "wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    >> Copied from the CTC website - P**l S**th won't like it - so it's got to be good :)
    >>
    >> Cheers, helen s
    >
    > He's not the only one :-( when will these people realise that bad drivers will be just as bad at
    > 30 mph as they are at 40 - what we need are much much higher standards of driving not lower
    > speed limits.
    >
    > Get the worst 20% of drivers off roads completely and we'll cut out 80% of accidents. That's the
    > solution but no-ones got the political balls to do it. Harder driving tests, compulsory advanced
    > driving training and testing and compulsory re testing. That's the real answer.
    >

    Here we go again.

    You, of course, are a superior driver?

    Who are the people most likely to rate themselves as very good drivers? young men who drive to fast,

    They may well have faster reactions and be able to change gear quickly, they are also more likely to
    be involved in collisions, that's why their insurance is more.

    Any fool can drive safely for a test.

    As long as a large number of motorists fall for the 'Fantasy Colin Macrae' marketing scam, or act
    out their masculinity crisis on the road, we will need speed limits and enforcement.

    Its about time we gave up the wank fantasy and treated cars as we would any other piece of heavy
    machinery. Its a tool to get a job done, not a sporting accessory, or a proving ground of your
    masculinity.

    We don't need expert drivers, we need competant, reponsible drivers, who are awake and not
    off on one.

    --
    Andy Morris

    AndyAtJinkasDotFreeserve.Co.UK

    Love this: Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes
    http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/
     
  4. AndyMorris <[email protected]> enlightened us with:
    >russell pinder wrote:
    >> "wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> news:[email protected]...
    >>> Copied from the CTC website - P**l S**th won't like it - so it's got to be good :)
    >>>
    >>> Cheers, helen s
    >>
    >> He's not the only one :-( when will these people realise that bad drivers will be just as bad at
    >> 30 mph as they are at 40 - what we need are much much higher standards of driving not lower speed
    >> limits.
    >>
    >> Get the worst 20% of drivers off roads completely and we'll cut out 80% of accidents. That's the
    >> solution but no-ones got the political balls to do it. Harder driving tests, compulsory advanced
    >> driving training and testing and compulsory re testing. That's the real answer.
    >>
    >
    >Here we go again.
    >
    >You, of course, are a superior driver?

    Did he say here that he was?

    >Who are the people most likely to rate themselves as very good drivers? young men who
    >drive to fast,
    >
    >They may well have faster reactions and be able to change gear quickly, they are also more likely
    >to be involved in collisions, that's why their insurance is more.

    Sure. They're a good part of that 20%. And retests can only help catch them. And R plates IMHO.

    If you're that sceptical about Russell's driving then you should feel happy he's proposing getting
    rid of himself in that 20% ;-).

    >Any fool can drive safely for a test.

    Oh I'm not sure about that at all. People pick up bad habits and find them very hard to shift. I'm
    very sure a lot of cagers *don't* have the skills to pass a driving test any more. Do you think
    otherwise?

    >As long as a large number of motorists fall for the 'Fantasy Colin Macrae' marketing scam, or act
    >out their masculinity crisis on the road, we will need speed limits and enforcement.

    Did Russell say otherwise?

    >Its about time we gave up the wank fantasy and treated cars as we would any other piece of heavy
    >machinery. Its a tool to get a job done, not a sporting accessory, or a proving ground of your
    >masculinity.

    Yes, and that job is getting from A to B. In one very real sense, I'd be happy if they whizzed off
    down the dual carriageways as quickly as possible so they could get where they're going faster, so
    that fewer of them are clogging up urban streets where we cycle.

    >We don't need expert drivers, we need competant, reponsible drivers, who are awake and not
    >off on one.

    Isn't that the aim of what he's suggesting? Anything to make tests harder, improve driving
    standards, and add inducements to cagers to try and maintain good habits is only a good thing and to
    be encouraged. Why are you arguing?

    Some people on this group can be dreadful bores in assuming that because $MOTORIST says something,
    it must always be bad.

    I for one would prefer higher driving standards over the current half-arsed attempts at enforcement.
    In any case, enforcement only helps when something bad has already happened. Better to stop it
    happening in the first place, hmmm?

    Jifl
    --
    --[ "You can complain because roses have thorns, or you ]-- --[ can rejoice because thorns have
    roses." -Lincoln ]-- Opinions==mine
     
  5. Just Zis Guy

    Just Zis Guy Guest

    russell pinder wrote:

    > when will these people realise that bad drivers will be just as bad at 30 mph as they are at 40 -
    > what we need are much much higher standards of driving not lower speed limits.

    You are Paul Smith & I claim etc. etc.

    They drive just as badly at 30 but are much less likely to kill someone when they do crash (and
    may even have long enough to react and not crash in the first place). Given that most drivers
    overestimate their level of skill, I'm not inclined to trust them in the choice of when to
    exceed the speed
    limit.

    --
    Guy
    ===
    I wonder if you wouldn't mind piecing out our imperfections with your thoughts; and while you're
    about it perhaps you could think when we talk of bicycles, that you see them printing their proud
    wheels i' the receiving earth; thanks awfully.

    http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/09.shtml#103 http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/09.shtml#104
     
  6. "AndyMorris" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > russell pinder wrote:
    > > "wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]...
    > >> Copied from the CTC website - P**l S**th won't like it - so it's got to be good :)
    > >>
    > >> Cheers, helen s
    > >
    > > He's not the only one :-( when will these people realise that bad drivers will be just as bad at
    > > 30 mph as they are at 40 - what we need are much much higher standards of driving not lower
    > > speed limits.
    > >
    > > Get the worst 20% of drivers off roads completely and we'll cut out 80% of accidents. That's the
    > > solution but no-ones got the political balls to do it. Harder driving tests, compulsory advanced
    > > driving training and testing and compulsory re testing. That's the real answer.
    > >
    >
    > Here we go again.
    >
    > You, of course, are a superior driver?

    I like to think I'm more responsible, more alert and have better hazard perception than average [1]
    but since the average in this country is so bloody low that's not saying much. I've no false
    impressions that I can see whats around the next blind corner any better than the next man.

    > Who are the people most likely to rate themselves as very good drivers? young men who drive
    > to fast,

    We're not talking about people who rate *themselves* - that's what continued testing is about.

    > They may well have faster reactions and be able to change gear quickly,
    they
    > are also more likely to be involved in collisions, that's why their insurance is more.

    and your point is......... if they're more likely to have collisions they'll be in that 20% that
    shouldn't be on the road.

    >
    > Any fool can drive safely for a test.

    Im not so sure about that at all - not if it's done properly (ie not like the current laughable
    excuse of a test)

    > As long as a large number of motorists fall for the 'Fantasy Colin Macrae' marketing scam, or act
    > out their masculinity crisis on the road, we will need speed limits and enforcement.
    >
    > Its about time we gave up the wank fantasy and treated cars as we would
    any
    > other piece of heavy machinery. Its a tool to get a job done, not a
    sporting
    > accessory, or a proving ground of your masculinity.
    >
    > We don't need expert drivers, we need competant, reponsible drivers, who
    are
    > awake and not off on one.

    Errm, that's just about exactly how I'd describe an expert driver - just because someone says he
    doesn't believe speed limits are the answer to the appalingly low standards of driving doesn't mean
    I wish to drive everywhere at double the speed limit. However I'd like to see realistic limits set
    and then enforced - at the moment we have two problems 1. Some limits are clearly arbitarily set too
    low (some are too high too) and this brings the whole system into disrepute and means that other
    properly set limits don't have the same effect on some drivers that they should and 2. by setting
    limits some drivers are happy to drive at the limit and then switch off all sense of responsibility
    for the safety of others around them just because they're abiding by the speed limit.

    IMO both the speeders and the inattentive are just as dangerous as each other - your solution (speed
    limits) only addresses one of the problems.

    I'm a little surprised that you seem to imply that you're quite happy sharing the roads with the
    worst 20% of drivers as long as they're driving a bit slower than they do now. Personally I'm not
    and I believe that generally current limits are more than adequate and that the problem lies with
    the drivers abilities. If I'm really a part of that 20% then I'm more than happy to be re-educated
    or to surrender my licence although I happen to be fairly confident that's not the case.

    Russ

    [1] and have had this independently confirmed by an advanced drivng instructor so it's not just my
    perception. I drive between 25 - 50,000 miles a year and in the last 20 yeras have had nil
    accidents or convictions so I may be in a position to comment. I also make no bones that I
    (ocassionally) drive a sports car and enjoy doing so. If I want to 'give it some' I'll go do a
    track day where it's safe to do so.
     
  7. "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > russell pinder wrote:
    >
    > > when will these people realise that bad drivers will be just as bad at 30 mph as they are at 40
    > > - what we need are much much higher standards of driving not lower speed limits.
    >
    > You are Paul Smith & I claim etc. etc.
    >
    > They drive just as badly at 30 but are much less likely to kill someone
    when
    > they do crash (and may even have long enough to react and not crash in the first place). Given
    > that most drivers overestimate their level of skill, I'm not inclined to trust them in the choice
    > of when to exceed the speed
    > limit.

    Personally I'd much rather they weren't behind the wheel of a car at all - then they can't crash
    into me at 40 or 30. However if you're happy being crashed into at 30 by some cr*p driver who may
    well be below the speed limit then so be it.

    Nowhere have I suggested that people shoudl be allowed to exceed the speed limit - they shouldn't. I
    just don't happen to believe that (generally) lowering the speed limits is the answer at all -
    removing the bad drivers from the roads is the real answer. Good driving is about hazard perception,
    responsibility for other road users and driving defensivly - it's not about exceeding speed limits.

    Russ
     
  8. John B

    John B Guest

    russell pinder wrote:

    > "AndyMorris" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    >
    > > Here we go again.
    > >
    > > You, of course, are a superior driver?
    >
    > I like to think I'm more responsible, more alert and have better hazard perception than
    > average [1]

    <snip>

    > [1] and have had this independently confirmed by an advanced drivng instructor

    No longer can you deny being Paul Smith. The game is up.

    John B
     
  9. Ian Walker

    Ian Walker Guest

    On Thu, 6 Feb 2003 09:48:53 -0000, russell pinder <[email protected]> wrote:

    >>
    >> You, of course, are a superior driver?
    >
    > I like to think I'm more responsible, more alert and have better hazard perception than average

    I don't. As soon as I get into a car I turn from a normal, considerate pro- cycing pro-pedestrian
    person into a cretin. That's what cars do to people and that's one of the main reasons I dislike
    them so much.

    Ian

    --
    Ian Walker, Department of Psychology, University of Bath. Remove the yummy paste in my address to
    reply. Homepage: http://www.drianwalker.com
     
  10. "John B" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    >
    >
    > russell pinder wrote:
    >
    > > "AndyMorris" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > >
    > > > Here we go again.
    > > >
    > > > You, of course, are a superior driver?
    > >
    > > I like to think I'm more responsible, more alert and have better hazard perception than
    > > average [1]
    >
    > <snip>
    >
    > > [1] and have had this independently confirmed by an advanced drivng instructor
    >
    > No longer can you deny being Paul Smith. The game is up.
    >
    > John B

    Either I missed the smiley or you've deliberately avoided a serious argument for the cheap shot?

    Russ
     
  11. "Ian Walker" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:eek:[email protected]...
    > On Thu, 6 Feb 2003 09:48:53 -0000, russell pinder <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >
    > >>
    > >> You, of course, are a superior driver?
    > >
    > > I like to think I'm more responsible, more alert and have better hazard perception than average
    >
    > I don't. As soon as I get into a car I turn from a normal, considerate
    pro-
    > cycing pro-pedestrian person into a cretin. That's what cars do to people and that's one of the
    > main reasons I dislike them so much.
    >
    > Ian

    I suspect you have a point - but shouldn't we be doing something to address this rather than just
    arguing for lower speed limits which will be resolutely ignored by exactly those drivers who we'd
    most want to comply with them.

    Russ
     
  12. Fortyeight16

    Fortyeight16 Guest

    "russell pinder" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...

    > But I never said people should be allowed to drive too fast - I said lowering speed limits won't
    > make much of a dent in the accident figures,
    the
    > bad drivers will ignore them anyway - I want the worst 20% of drivers off the road, not driving,
    > which would mean they can't crash into you at all,
    at
    > any speed, and people here seem to be against that. It's hardly rocket science either. It's a
    > different solution and if someone had the political balls to implement it it would make a much
    > much bigger impact on road
    safety
    > than reducing speed limits which those drivers who are the worst danger
    will
    > just ignore anyway.

    What criteria do you use to determine if someone is sub-standard? How do you enforce the removal of
    sub-standard drivers, many of whom would presumably continue to drive without a licence?
     
  13. Ian Walker

    Ian Walker Guest

    On Thu, 6 Feb 2003 10:15:09 -0000, russell pinder <[email protected]> wrote:

    >> I don't. As soon as I get into a car I turn from a normal, considerate
    > pro-
    >> cycing pro-pedestrian person into a cretin. That's what cars do to people and that's one of the
    >> main reasons I dislike them so much.
    >>
    >> Ian
    >
    > I suspect you have a point - but shouldn't we be doing something to address this rather than just
    > arguing for lower speed limits which will be resolutely ignored by exactly those drivers who we'd
    > most want to comply with them.
    >
    > Russ

    Exactly. A big part of the problem has to be car design. Look at the 4WD nonsenses that people are
    in these days. You're about 2m off the ground so that you feel like you're going much slower than
    you really are (if you don't believe this, try driving a go-kart with your bum 1 inch off the ground
    - 20 mph feels like Mach 2); you're sitting in an armchair; you've got a hi-fi, phone, etc etc.
    Basically, driving has become like being in a living room. No wonder people forget what they're
    doing and the danger they present. If cars were all low-slung with wooden benches and no roofs then
    people would drive differently. But sadly noone's going to make Ford build these.

    Ian

    --
    Ian Walker, Department of Psychology, University of Bath. Remove the yummy paste in my address to
    reply. Homepage: http://www.drianwalker.com
     
  14. [email protected] (wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter) wrote
    > National cyclists’ organisation CTC is part of the Safer Streets Coalition which is today
    > writing to Transport Secretary Alistair Darling urging him to take action to reduce speed limits,
    > enforce traffic law, introduce more traffic calming measures and raise driver awareness of road
    > safety issues.

    Of these measures he suggested, I think by far the most important is enforcing traffic law, and
    imposing severe penalties on those who drive dangerously, especially to the point of killing or
    injuring others.

    And I think traffic calming measures are by and large very counter-productive. I don't think I've
    seen a traffic calming measure that didn't make life more difficult for cyclists. One of the most
    common, large central islands, is one of the most dangerous to cyclists.

    You guys seem to be attacking Russ. I think this is pointless. I know him; he's a good guy, and I
    happen to agree with him. I'm much more offended by someone who overtakes me at 20mph with just
    inches to spare in town than someone who overtakes me at 60mph on a straight B-road by going
    entirely into the opposing lane. Speed is only a samll part of the issue. Being concerned with
    others on the road is much more important.

    Note that, along with Russ, I don't think that speeding sould be allowed! Speed limits should be
    well enforced. But lowering speed limits and putting in lots of traffic calming measures will
    not help things. It will only bring cyclists and cars into more conflict with one another, if
    the traffic calming measures I've seen are any indication. What we need is better driving
    standards, driving with more care and consideration for others. I don't know for sure how to
    promote this, though.

    BTW, I don't feel the it's necessarily the case that getting behind the wheel of a car makes one
    into an inconsiderate lunatic. I drive very seldom. I'm far more used to cycling than driving.
    Whenever I get into our car, I'm very aware that I'm sitting in a large, powerful vehicle (our new
    car is a VW Passat with a turbo diesel engine -- it really is quite large and powerful) and I drive
    very carefully to avoid crashing it into anything and anyone.

    -Myra
     
  15. >Of these measures he suggested, I think by far the most important is enforcing traffic law, and
    >imposing severe penalties on those who drive dangerously, especially to the point of killing or
    >injuring others.
    >

    I agree enforcing traffic law and imposition of severe penalties is required. It's essential and
    doesn't happen now.

    >And I think traffic calming measures are by and large very counter-productive. I don't think I've
    >seen a traffic calming measure that didn't make life more difficult for cyclists. One of the most
    >common, large central islands, is one of the most dangerous to cyclists.

    I think it depends what the measures are.

    >You guys seem to be attacking Russ. I think this is pointless. I know him; he's a good guy, and I
    >happen to agree with him. I'm much more offended by someone who overtakes me at 20mph with just
    >inches to spare in town than someone who overtakes me at 60mph on a straight B-road by going
    >entirely into the opposing lane. Speed is only a samll part of the issue. Being concerned with
    >others on the road is much more important.
    >

    No, not attacking him. I just fail to see how speed isn't a *vitally* important factor and I think
    speed limits are essential.

    I don't have a problem keeping to speed limits and find the argument about speed limits one where it
    deflects from the main problem - people think it's okay to break the current law. I don't see how
    raising current speed limits is going to make life safer, either for a driver, cyclist or
    pedestrian. As I said, I don't know of anyone who wants to be hit by a vehicle at any speed - but,
    if it's going to happen at all, I'd much rather it was by someone doing under 30 mph than above - in
    order to increase my chances of survival.

    Speed may only be part of the issue - but it's a key part of the issue. I don't like the way some
    drivers see the speed limit as the speed they must be driving at irrespective of road conditions.
    The limit is just that, a maximum limit, not a condition of being allowed to drive is that you have
    to drive at that speed. I see that arguments about problems of the poor beleaguered motorist having
    problems keeping to the speed limit and that we shouldn't be getting fixated on speed as a smoke
    screen. As for someone passing you with inches to spare at 20mph, the point is, apart from not
    wanting it to happen at all, I'd much rather that if it does happen, it happens with the vehicle at
    20mph than the same happening at 60mph. Speed limits aren't perfect, but they're the best we've got.

    As for driving - I drive quite a bit and when doing so, I am very aware of the potential danger of
    what I do. Hence, I won't drive when tired - will pull in and have a break or two on a long journey
    - will be aware of what's going on around me. There's no guarantee that I'll never hit anyone - if
    someone jumps out in front of me I'll be doing my level best to avoid that. I see my driving licence
    as a priviledge, not a right, and I want to hold on to it. If I ever did hurt anyone as a result of
    my driving, heck, I don't know what I'd do - I'd feel *dreadful remorse* and that's putting it
    mildly. I just hope it never happens and when I drive I try to make sure it doesn't happen.

    Cheers, helen s

    ~~~~~~~~~~
    Flush out that intestinal parasite and/or the waste product before sending a reply!

    Any speeliong mistake$ aR the resiult of my cats sitting on the keyboaRRRDdd
    ~~~~~~~~~~
     
  16. "FortyEight16" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    > "russell pinder" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    >
    > > But I never said people should be allowed to drive too fast - I said lowering speed limits won't
    > > make much of a dent in the accident figures,
    > the
    > > bad drivers will ignore them anyway - I want the worst 20% of drivers
    off
    > > the road, not driving, which would mean they can't crash into you at
    all,
    > at
    > > any speed, and people here seem to be against that. It's hardly rocket science either. It's a
    > > different solution and if someone had the
    political
    > > balls to implement it it would make a much much bigger impact on road
    > safety
    > > than reducing speed limits which those drivers who are the worst danger
    > will
    > > just ignore anyway.
    >
    > What criteria do you use to determine if someone is sub-standard? How do you enforce the removal
    > of sub-standard drivers, many of whom would presumably continue to drive without a licence?

    That's a whole other discussion and isn't an easy thing to achieve - a rolling testing regime (say
    test every 5 years) with much higher standards would be a start.

    Unlicenced drivers is a much biger problem but in this day and age shouldn't be beyond us to
    enforce adequately (some decent penalties would be a start - banning them from driving seems a
    little inadequate) - presumably once we get road accident numbers down and remove the more
    dangerous drivers from the roads the police can stop concentrating on clearing up the mess after
    accidents and start enforcing the traffic laws including (importantly) keeping unlicenced drivers
    off the road. Number plate recognition technology a la conjestion charging one feels could play an
    important part too.

    Russ
     
  17. James Annan

    James Annan Guest

    Myra VanInwegen wrote:

    > BTW, I don't feel the it's necessarily the case that getting behind the wheel of a car makes one
    > into an inconsiderate lunatic.

    Not necessarily the case, but frequently true IME. I've observed a substantial proportion of usually
    reasonable and considerate people becoming considerably less so once they are behind the steering
    wheel. Part frustration in congestion, part a long ingrained attitude of 'car is king'. It's
    unpleasant to witness and I think an attitude shift in the general population is long overdue.

    James
     
  18. Fortyeight16

    Fortyeight16 Guest

    "russell pinder" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...

    > Unlicenced drivers is a much biger problem but in this day and age
    shouldn't
    > be beyond us to enforce adequately (some decent penalties would be a
    start -
    > banning them from driving seems a little inadequate) - presumably once we get road accident
    > numbers down and remove the more dangerous drivers from the roads the police can stop
    > concentrating on clearing up the mess after accidents and start enforcing the traffic laws
    > including (importantly) keeping unlicenced drivers off the road. Number plate recognition
    technology
    > a la conjestion charging one feels could play an important part too.

    Impounding the car of anyone caught would be a start.
     
  19. James Annan

    James Annan Guest

    russell pinder wrote:
    > "Ian Walker" <[email protected]> wrote in message

    >>I don't. As soon as I get into a car I turn from a normal, considerate
    >
    > pro-
    >
    >>cycing pro-pedestrian person into a cretin. That's what cars do to people and that's one of the
    >>main reasons I dislike them so much.
    >>
    >>Ian
    >
    >
    > I suspect you have a point - but shouldn't we be doing something to address this rather than just
    > arguing for lower speed limits

    I don't think anyone is _just_ arguing for lower speed limits. Many people are arguing for lower
    tolerance of criminal and antisocial driving, which includes but is not limited to speeding alone.

    James
     
  20. "James Annan" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > Myra VanInwegen wrote:
    >
    > > BTW, I don't feel the it's necessarily the case that getting behind the wheel of a car makes one
    > > into an inconsiderate lunatic.
    >
    > Not necessarily the case, but frequently true IME. I've observed a substantial proportion of
    > usually reasonable and considerate people becoming considerably less so once they are behind the
    > steering wheel. Part frustration in congestion, part a long ingrained attitude of 'car is king'.
    > It's unpleasant to witness and I think an attitude shift in the general population is long
    > overdue.
    >

    I'd agree wholeheartedly with that

    Russ
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...