Wild fires in BC Canada.

[Jameshow]

But nobody said that in the first place.
The issues are:
"When speed limits are lower, people feel safer to cycle and to walk, so less people are driving," said Mr Waters. A Welsh government spokesperson said: "The introduction of a 20mph speed limit in mainly residential areas is designed to save lives and make our communities safer for everyone, including motorists."

Well that to the Welsh when it's peeing it down with rain for days on end and they are sat in thier cars!

 

[Jameshow]

But football, marathon running, etc. are all activities that mainly affect the person doing them, whereas motorists driving faster affects pedestrians, including children, while having a negligible effect on the motorists. Your world is unlikely to end because your doing 20 instead of 30.
By your logic we should abandon speed limits completely, maybe you think that's a good idea.

Getting jail time for manslaughter would be life changing imho. That's as much a deterrent to speed as any limit or camera.

 

[John Brown]

Getting jail time for manslaughter would be life changing imho. That's as much a deterrent to speed as any limit or camera.

I can't tell if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me...

 

[Terry - Somerset]

I'm sure that evidence can be assembled to demonstrate that a 20mph limit in towns will reduce both the frequency and severity of accidents. I am also sure that it is possible to enforce adherence to said limits by either camera technology or police presence.

Taken to its logical extreme any action which can impact adversely upon other members of society can and should be regulated in some way.

Environmentally we should limit the consumption of red meat, limit domestic temperatures, limit lumens per sq m to ensure energy is not wasted. Ban electric scooters as a danger to pedestrians, ban gambling, alcohol, tobacco as individual actions impact those around them. Ban sports for fear that sporting injuries will divert resources away from the prolongation of life at any cost.

Over regulation saps enjoyment and pleasure, and encourages the abrogation of personal responsibility. Regulation needs to be balanced with risk. Accepting some risk is a price worth paying to make existence something to be treasured rather than endured.

20mph limits - time constrained around schools which have lots of easily distracted children makes sense. Widening the scope significantly and ensuring it is robustly enforced is, IMHO, a denial of liberty, personal responsibility and choice.

 

[Spectric]

Don’t forget, last winter there was concern of blackouts due to electrical load exceeding generating capacity.

It is no good having electrical generation if your infrastructure has been ignored for years because you will just have a lot of dead EV's and people sitting in the dark & cold. Rather than drawing some deadline in the sand it is better to have a start line and then phase in the newer technology over a period of time with incentives. Net zero is a wonderful goal but cannot happen without a magic wand, at least in a reasonable time frame unless you are willing to throw a lot of people under the bus.

hope they do a better job than HS2

Any major project can only be successful if it has been properly researched and has objectives that can not only be met but will deliver for the majority. HS2 was someones dream in which they actually believed that the UK would gain status and credability on the world stage by having high speed rail, it went wrong when they woke up. The big problem is that we are just a little island and really do not need HS2, that sort of money would have been better spent re-opening many of the old branch lines just like Scotland has done with the Waverley line from Edinburgh to Galashiels that has benefited many smaller communities in the borders, yes it is supposed to reach Carlisle at some point but guess who is the bottlekneck, a clue is that it will cross a border !

What makes them believe London is the centre of the universe and that we are all desperate to get there fast, well within sight as it stops short of London itself.

 

[John Brown]

I'm sure that evidence can be assembled to demonstrate that a 20mph limit in towns will reduce both the frequency and severity of accidents. I am also sure that it is possible to enforce adherence to said limits by either camera technology or police presence.

Taken to its logical extreme any action which can impact adversely upon other members of society can and should be regulated in some way.

Environmentally we should limit the consumption of red meat, limit domestic temperatures, limit lumens per sq m to ensure energy is not wasted. Ban electric scooters as a danger to pedestrians, ban gambling, alcohol, tobacco as individual actions impact those around them. Ban sports for fear that sporting injuries will divert resources away from the prolongation of life at any cost.

Over regulation saps enjoyment and pleasure, and encourages the abrogation of personal responsibility. Regulation needs to be balanced with risk. Accepting some risk is a price worth paying to make existence something to be treasured rather than endured.

20mph limits - time constrained around schools which have lots of easily distracted children makes sense. Widening the scope significantly and ensuring it is robustly enforced is, IMHO, a denial of liberty, personal responsibility and choice.

Nobody's taking anything to an extreme, just 20mph instead of 30moh in some areas.
BTW, electric scooters are already banned, except for some trial rental schemes.

"Accepting some risk is a price worth paying to make existence something to be treasured rather than endured."

Are we talking about the same thing here? 20mph speed limits? Sorry if a 20mph speed limit will turn your existence into something to be just endured, but with the greatest respect, you should seek professional help if that's the case.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Nobody's taking anything to an extreme, just 20mph instead of 30moh in some areas.
BTW, electric scooters are already banned, except for some trial rental schemes.

"Accepting some risk is a price worth paying to make existence something to be treasured rather than endured."

Are we talking about the same thing here? 20mph speed limits? Sorry if a 20mph speed limit will turn your existence into something to be just endured, but with the greatest respect, you should seek professional help if that's the case.

Imposition of a 20mph limit in itself is a relatively trivial issue.

But it is symptomatic of a society which seeks to control all activity, however trivial, through regulation, legislation and ultimately enforcement.

It is that to which I take exception - the thin (or increasingly thick) end of the wedge. It turns life into the pursuit of compliance rather than a reasonable expression of personal choice and pleasure.

 

[Jameshow]

Imposition of a 20mph limit in itself is a relatively trivial issue.

But it is symptomatic of a society which seeks to control all activity, however trivial, through regulation, legislation and ultimately enforcement.

It is that to which I take exception - the thin (or increasingly thick) end of the wedge. It turns life into the pursuit of compliance rather than a reasonable expression of personal choice and pleasure.

Problem is where grace decreases then the law has to increase.

 

[Jacob]

Imposition of a 20mph limit in itself is a relatively trivial issue.

But it is symptomatic of a society which seeks to control all activity, however trivial, through regulation, legislation and ultimately enforcement.

I see it as symptomatic of civilisation, and the emphasis is not on trivia at all.
Motor vehicles are dangerous.
Oddly enough the petrol-heads are really excited against cyclists, who are a really trivial in terms of road usage.

 

[Jacob]

Getting jail time for manslaughter would be life changing imho. That's as much a deterrent to speed as any limit or camera.

The cameras deter speeders and prevent manslaughter before it happens.

 

[Jacob]

I'm sure that evidence can be assembled to demonstrate that a 20mph limit in towns will reduce both the frequency and severity of accidents. I am also sure that it is possible to enforce adherence to said limits by either camera technology or police presence.

Taken to its logical extreme

Nobody proposes taking it to your illogical extreme!

 

[Jacob]

.... Ban electric scooters as a danger to pedestrians,

Put them on the road instead , with 20 limits and more cycle/scooter lanes

ban gambling, alcohol, tobacco as individual actions impact those around them.

These are already tightly controlled, didn't you know?

.... Widening the scope significantly and ensuring it is robustly enforced is, IMHO, a denial of liberty, personal responsibility and choice.

They are only doing it from existing 30 to 20mph. Not universal. It won't make much difference to journey times but will reduce accidents and encourage other users of the roads.
It's particularly bad in our village with a 30 limit and narrow streets sometimes with narrow to non existant pavements. Too dangerous for kids to walk to school and they organise a "walking bus" group walk with lots of yellow hazard jackets at front and back. No doubt some motorists see this as a gross intrusion on their freedom to do just what they like.

 

[Jacob]

..

We have to speak up for the silent majority. The bad tempered un-woke have very loud voices!

 

[paulrbarnard]

Imposition of a 20mph limit in itself is a relatively trivial issue.

But it is symptomatic of a society which seeks to control all activity, however trivial, through regulation, legislation and ultimately enforcement.

It is that to which I take exception - the thin (or increasingly thick) end of the wedge. It turns life into the pursuit of compliance rather than a reasonable expression of personal choice and pleasure.

Then stop moaning about 20mph and make some points about things that really matter to you instead of using a perfectly sensible life saving initiative to grind an axe over we know not what.

 

[Jameshow]

The cameras deter speeders and prevent manslaughter before it happens.

I should have said in my mind!
One if my children came out with the 20/40 fatality quote which quite shook me. I'm not against cars either, nothing beats a mini cooper ona twisty road!

 

[Jameshow]

We have to speak up for the silent majority. The bad tempered un-woke have very loud voices!

So so the WOKE! Very grumpy guardian readers!

 

[Jacob]

I should have said in my mind!
One if my children came out with the 20/40 fatality quote which quite shook me.........

Glad to hear it!

The difference 30/20 is really surprising.
Have to say - when something whooshes close past your elbow at 30 going down our village street it does seem very fast. One chap got his hand broken when he tried to flag one down a bit. He was escorting his kids to school.

https://www.roadwise.co.uk/using-the-road/speeding/the-chance-of-a-pedestrian-surviving/

 

[John Brown]

Imposition of a 20mph limit in itself is a relatively trivial issue.

But it is symptomatic of a society which seeks to control all activity, however trivial, through regulation, legislation and ultimately enforcement.

It is that to which I take exception - the thin (or increasingly thick) end of the wedge. It turns life into the pursuit of compliance rather than a reasonable expression of personal choice and pleasure.

Straw man.fallacy.

 

[RogerS]

Enforce 20 as well. I’m of the opinion cars should be made such that they can not exceed the limit. The stupid argument that you some times need to go faster to avoid an accident is probably down to going too fast in the first place and overtaking where you shouldn’t.

Yes, of course. Now please explain that to my wife and suggest what she should have done in the circumstances. The A69 has very few overtaking places between Hexham and Carlisle. There are two hills where there are two lanes on the upslope. We know that drivers will always 'push it' and try and get past that last lorry before it goes back to single file. So she is driving up that hill at 60mph...the speed limit..and can safely overtake the last lorry before the single file.

In her rear mirror she sees White Man in a Van hammering along behind her and realises that unless she shoves her foot down (and break the speed limit) that he is going to be left high and dry and likely have a head-on collision with oncoming traffic. So she does. There was a bloody portable speed check van just over the brow of the hill, she got done and did the Naughty Boys and Girls course.

Next time, she's going to let him have that Head On and sod it.

It's NOT about speed limits. It is about the wrong speed, the wrong place, the wrong weather and road conditions. End of.

 

[RogerS]

You may be right. What a sad reflection on the priorities of the electorate.

Or that the electorate are exercising commonsense ?