Nuxx:1694a938-c14d-4892-97b4-d62377dd8538@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <1694a938-c14d-4892-97b4-d62377dd8538@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Speed Limits: How Low Is Too Low? Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 23:58:58 -0700 (PDT) References: <43fcb0d5-3e7e-4ae6-b073-ca62ea02d09f@s39g2000prd.googlegroups.com> Lines: 55 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.105.150.187 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1208329138 13029 127.0.0.1 (16 Apr 2008 06:58:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 06:58:58 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=88.105.150.187; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9b5) Gecko/2008032620 Firefox/3.0b5,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 3927 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:647422

On Apr 13, 8:21 pm, Nuxx Bar  wrote: > It seems to me that every single time a speed limit is lowered, the > trolls say it's "perfectly fair". Would this just go on indefinitely, > however far a speed limit was lowered? If not, where does it stop, > and why? > > Many in-town speed limits, which were previously 30 or 40, have now > been lowered to 20. "Perfectly fair" growl the trolls in each and > every case. So what about 19, 18, 15, or 10? 5? 1?  Are they > "perfectly fair", or do accidents suddenly magically stop at 20? > Which limit is "low enough", and why? > > Many out of town single carriageway stretches, previously NSL, are now > 50 or even 40. "Perfectly fair" apparently. So, how low is "low > enough" on these roads, and why? What about ex-NSL dual carriageway > stretches which are now 60, 50 or even 40? What about motorways? How > low can you go? > > I can't wait to find out the answer. Do the trolls want every road to > have a 1mph limit, or would they be happy with us zooming around at > 20mph everywhere (wow, how generous of them)? And is there a > scientific reason for whatever levels they come up with, or is it just > down to sheer blind prejudice (as if I need to even ask)? Will the > trolls agree with each other, or will they differ on the exact speeds > at which motorists should suddenly start being labelled child- > murderers (no matter what the conditions)? It's so exciting! > > (Gets ready for trollisms like "I don't hate motorists, I just think > they should be made to go slower than cyclists"....) > > Thanks in advance > > Blobby Frightcycles

I'll try again.

Camera proponents: if you had a completely free hand in deciding all speed limits in the country, what would you make them on each road type, and why? What would the lowest speed limit on each road type be, and why? If that lowest speed limit was x mph, then wouldn't a speed limit of (x-1) mph be "safer" still, and if it would be, then why not have that instead?

If you support cameras because you believe that they save lives, you position is even more illogical than I thought. If you support the idea of automatically prosecuting people for driving above a certain speed, then you must have an idea of what the lowest such speed should be, otherwise you support the idea of automatically prosecuting people for driving above 0mph (which the motorist-haters do of course, so maybe that's my answer!)
 * must* have an idea of how to answer those questions, otherwise your

If my questions have made you realise that "Slower is safer" is a load of nonsense, and that its logical extreme can only be a 0mph speed limit, please say so.