Was the reduction of speed limits such a great idea?

0
3 months ago (11:34 PM)
To join this discussion please register or log in

Comments:

tanyad

I agree! As a motorist, if you are going at a certain speed, people think twice about stepping in front of you but at low speeds, I have lost count of the number of times I have almost hit someone because they briefly glance at you, go back to staring at their phone and then step out thinking that it doesn't matter if I hit them because I will be going slowly or I am going slow enough that I can just slam on the brakes! It can be hair raising driving in central London with the amount of people who just step out in front of you. I am amazed more people aren't receiving minor injuries from low impact hits.

elainesurvives@...

I thought it was just me. The number of times that I have to brake because
They are on the phone and they just step out because they are preoccupied with their
phone is unbelievable. They need to know that just because you are going at 20mph
doesn't mean that if they get hit, it won't kill them. Hello you can be killed if you get hit
and knock your head. A girl dead after been hit at 15mph she fell and hit her head
got up but later died. 20mph is going to cause more and more injuries, it's all well and good to protect the
environment but not when people do not understand road rules.
As for the Zebra crossings when I was growing up, you were told to stand at the crossing looking left and right
and cross when it is safe or when the vehicle stops for you to cross.
Oh no they just cross without even giving you the driver a second thought again on their phones or feel that you must stop even if you have to make an emergency stop.
I use to enjoy driving but now it is becoming more and more stressful. The road users the number of signs, sometimes meaning less
information for you to read, the layout of some roads is minding blowing, you really do have to have a degree in driving.

LMcPherson

This lowered speed limit has reduced any responsibility for pedestrians and cyclists to use the road safely and with full awareness. The 'green cross code' or 'stop,look,listen' no longer applies due a new law on motorists that state no matter who is as fault in an accident involving a pedestrian or cyclist, the motorist is always at fault hence financially liable. This is part of the american style claim culture, that makes more money out of the motorists. So all our premiums go up and the Government gets more tax. People using phones or listening to music or drunk, constantly wander into oncoming traffic, and cyclists do the same having no obligation to observe the Road Traffic Act i.e breaking red lights, riding dangerously from blind spots. Just because Boris wanted us all to ride bikes, does not make it practical, nor should cyclists get away with breaking the law constantly without recompense as they don't have licence plates. The offence of Jaywalking should be reintroduced, if people get tickets that will start behaving more responsibly.

k.aldo

Well, ive read some c**p on this site but this one takes the biscuit. 2 buses ended up on the pavement and it was because the speed limit was reduced to 20 mph. REALLY?
In summary (please tell if this is not what you are inferring) If the speed limit in some areas is put back to 30 mph then fewer pedestrians and cyclists will be injured.
What planet are you on?

Terry Vaughan

LMcPherson, the presumed liability law works very well in many places. In this country it's restricted, but applies when you run into the back of someone's car. You will be liable unless you can show the other driver caused the collision. Perhaps it's part of the American style claim culture and just a scam to get money out of you. Those irresponsible drivers stopping in front of you, eh? How can you be expected to avoid them?

But if the law is extended it will greatly help people hurt in collisions but who don't get compensation because they can't prove you were at fault, possibly because they were too shocked, or unconscious. So when you run someone down and can't prove they were at fault, your insurance will have to pay out. Premiums will get even higher, because bad drivers injure so many people and do so much damage.

Surely you don't think that there are no bad drivers, that accidents are always the victim's fault, that drivers are never using phones or listening to music or drunk. Do you?

As K. Aldo says, there's no shortage of crap on this site. But I do agree that if more motorists were penalised, they would start driving more responsibly. You see, if it's you who roars through our streets at high speed in a dangerous machine, you are the problem.

paulsw11

Around where I live in Wandsworth car drivers are flippant, reckless & aggressive as they drive around the streets here. Similarly pedestrians aren't going to change their behaviour either as you point out their smartphones are now clued to their nose. We can no longer afford traffic police so a 20mph speed limit is pragmatic if backed up by savage prosecution when accidents or speeding occurs. The average speed in London is about 20mph anyway, so my view is that 20mph limits where pedestrians and cyclist are significant is realistic policy.

Given their behaviour is not going to change anytime soon the 20mph does offer some protection to pedestrians and cyclists.