Nuxx:E43463e6-db67-465b-b349-494c85fc1fe6@t16g2000vbi.googlegroups.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!t16g2000vbi.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling,uk.rec.driving Subject: Re: Government Could Raise Speed Limit Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 17:59:56 -0700 (PDT) References: <1a7ccd90-8c19-4ae0-8dd2-b558e0e59f69@e8g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>   <39Tfp.121164$ts7.14698@newsfe14.ams2> Lines: 52 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.71.49.124 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1300237196 12562 127.0.0.1 (16 Mar 2011 00:59:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 00:59:56 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: t16g2000vbi.googlegroups.com; posting-host=82.71.49.124; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Firefox/3.6.15,gzip(gfe) Bytes: 3971 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:802533

On Mar 16, 12:03=A0am, "BartC"  wrote: > "Clive George"  wrote in message > > news:FNWdnbQELZqk2uPQnZ2dnUVZ7oqdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk... > > > On 14/03/2011 16:44, Jethro wrote: > > >>> Transport secretary Philip Hammond is considering raising the motorwa= y > >>> speed limit to 80mph in order to shorten journey times and boost the > >>> economy. > > >> Is it just me, or is this gesture politics of the cynical kind ? > > > Not just you. Nice easy way for the minister to get some positive > > coverage, and he doesn't have to actually do anything - I rather doubt > > he'll go ahead and do it. > > Why not introduce something radical, such as speed limits that end in "5"= ? > (For speeds above 20mph anyway)

The trouble is that that just reinforces the idea that there's an exact "magic number" below which you're "safe" and above which you're "dangerous". Thanks to the obsession that the authorities have had with the speed limit over the last 20 years, we already have a worrying number of indoctrinated drivers who simply bumble round at 30mph *everywhere* in a 30mph limit without slowing down for dangerous/ unsighted/awkward junctions, places with lots of parked cars/ pedestrians, narrowed sections of road, bends around which they can't see, or other areas of danger.

Give me any day a driver who actually observes and slows down in such areas, even if they do approach maybe 35mph on the safer sections, rather than obsessing with staying at *exactly* 30mph and not concentrating on any other factors because that's what they've been repeatedly and patronisingly told to do by conniving self-serving "safety" camera partnerships and the like. Introducing a greater array of speed limits will just intensify the problem, as will introducing lower speed limits for hazardous areas (which are often not large enough to justify a speed limit change for a start, and in any case, there is no substitute for observing and setting your speed according to the conditions at the time...the idea that a sign can set the correct speed for you is a horribly dangerous one).

The promotion of speed limits far, far beyond their level of competence has done immense damage to road safety, as well as the police/public relationship. Those who make out that speeding is worse than they really think it is, because they stand to make money from it or simply dislike motorists and see it as a good way of punishing them by the bucketload, have blood on their hands, there's no doubt about it.