National speed limit to be cut to 50mph on "most roads" as early as 2010

[Nor]

NS60 roads are about the only fun I get in the car. Will be boring pootling around these big roads at 50mph. Whichever party objects to this will get my vote at the next GE.

 

[The_Dark_Side]

what goverment havn't thought of is the increase in travel time for people working etc.. slow drivers on a/b roads will no doubt now stick at 40mph, as they like to be 10mph under limit.

That's tenuous at best.
They may just feel more comfortable at 50 than at 60mph. There's no evidence to suggest that "they" will drive at whatever the posted speed limit is -10 mph.

I've just had another thought. I'm sure there's plenty of people on this forum who own modern cars with 6 speed gearboxes (hello BMW crew).

Can you tell me the lowest speed your car can comfortably cruise in in 6th gear, without struggling or getting crappy MPG.

I bet it's 55-60mph.

I'm unsure of your point here. If the comfortable cruising speed in 6th is around 60mph then if the posted limit is 50mph what's stopping you from cruising in 5th?

So would it be fair to say that cruising at 50mph instead of 60 means you'll need to drop down a gear and consume more fuel, thus emitting more CO2

No, it would be neither fair nor accurate. The difference in RPM between 50mph and 60mph in 5th and 6th gears respectively is negligible.

 

[Fido McNasty]

Another thing thats gets me wound up is that these speed limits are every bit as lawfully enforcable at 4am as they are at 6pm.

 

[Booner!]

Surely labour have done nearly everything possible to loose votes over the past term? lol

 

[sampo]

I'm sure someone has already posted this, but to reiterate:

Shadow Transport Secretary Theresa Villiers said: "Rather than across the board reductions in the speed limit that hit the most responsible drivers, we believe a strategy to make our roads safer needs to target problem drivers."

Labour out. Conservative in. Please.

 

[Booner!]

I'm sure someone has already posted this, but to reiterate:

Shadow Transport Secretary Theresa Villiers said: "Rather than across the board reductions in the speed limit that hit the most responsible drivers, we believe a strategy to make our roads safer needs to target problem drivers."

Labour out. Conservative in. Please.

I saw that and will settle with that.

Labour out, vote the best of a bad bunch in (conservative).

 

[CaneyJ]

This makes my blood boil proper, did anyone see BBC morning news? They asked a handful of people in the street with a bias approving the reduction in the speed limit.

Oh what the 2 people they could find who were for that, the mollycoddling mums with kids in push chairs.

Then they drag out some guy whose daughter was killed on the road (they didn’t have another person for the counter-argument I noticed) who bleated on about how it should be reduced to thirty, THIRTY!

They then raised the point that the man driving was also high on drink and drugs. Did he really think he’d care about the speed limit? As if hitting somebody at 50mph gives them any more chance than if they hit them at 60. Oh I can see the advert now.

“Hit me at 60 and I’ll be strawberry jam. Hit me at 50 you might be able to identify me in the morgue.”

Driver education and common sense to the road conditions are what ought to be taught at funder mental test level.

 

[NathanE]

Maybe there should be Gran Turismo style licenses... the higher your license level the faster you are allowed to go

Just throwing it out there...

 

[Dup]

Lowring the speed limit? I'm sorry but round these local country roads, I hardly go over the speed limit when driving on the limit anyway becasue they're so tight and twisty. OK, so in the future I could be speeding 10mph over the legal limit, but due to the lack of a straight road, a camera isn't going to be very viable in stopping me.

I think they should invest in fixing the condition of the roads. The roads I've been using this past week are twisty and the edges are that broken up most people seem to drive down the damn middle! I think people half driving in your lane with the ractions of a tortoise are more the problem than anything, especially when some impatient clod is also trying to overtake them as you approach in the opposite direction.

I can imagine they will canvass all the townies and cilty folks about this, as they won't care and will probalby think us **** kickers deserve to drive slowly.

The fact is, the accidents that happen on the country roads happen when people are speeding over the 60mph limit and can't stay o ntheir side of the road. This will happen at 50, 40 or whatever speed you impose on the road. People will still speed and will still crash becasue they're inept at anticipation and life in general.

Eyes wide shut solution to a problem that really doesn't exist from what I can see. I like to have fun on country roads, I grew up riding and driving them and i'll be very disappointed if they have a remote interest in messing with roads (other than fixing them) round here.

 

[TheCrow]

I sure that more people die getting dressed in the morning!!!! Dont see them doing anything to help that, o right no money in it for them...shame.

 

[MikeHunt79]

Most people tend to do around 40 on the 50 limit roads near me so I doubt this is going to help...

 

[BigglesPiP]

I think the vast majority of motorists are actually against this.

The entire thread thus far is just one big valid point.

Politicians, I will vote for the party which promises to un-do this. Regardless of all other issues.

 

[Booner!]

I think the vast majority of motorists are actually against this.

The entire thread thus far is just one big valid point.

Politicians, I will vote for the party which promises to un-do this. Regardless of all other issues.

I think that the vast majority of people on motoring related forums that I read, would also do the same.

 

[Puzzled]

I think that the vast majority of people on motoring related forums that I read, would also do the same.

Shame that all of them combined are still a tiny minority of the voting public.

Sadly most people will probably agree (or just not care) with the proposal as they have been brain washed that speeds kills for so long now.

 

[stockhausen]

According to BBC Online today:

Proposals to bring down speed limits in areas where there is a higher risk of accidents have been announced by the government's road safety minister. Reductions from 30mph to 20mph in urban locations and 60mph to 50mph in the countryside are being considered.

Road safety researchers say only one in 40 people who are hit by a vehicle at 20mph die, compared with one in five at 30mph.


Jim Fitzpatrick said the way people learn to drive and how they are tested is also set for major reform. The plans are part of a new strategy to reduce road deaths in England and Wales through to 2020.

"The major changes to the driver training and testing process will create better prepared drivers while our plans for the next 10 years aim to make the roads and vehicles they use safer and so prevent many of the terrible crashes which cut short lives and tear families apart."

There will be a new section in the driving test where candidates will be asked to drive without being directed by the examiner. Young learner drivers who opt to take a new pre-qualification course will be allowed to sit a shorter driving theory test.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8009364.stm

I don't really see how any rational person can argue with these proposals

 

[Dup]

What are people doing in the road to get hit by a car. Greater pedestrian training is needed tbh.

Seriously, hitting someone in a 30 area or less is almost always the story where nobody was looking. Anything more tragic and it was becasue someone was going 50+ in a 30. If they are doing 50+ in a 30, what's to stop them doing it in a 20? The same applies for 60 zones.

It's hard to quantify the reasoning for dropping the speed limit. The most I hear of country road accidents is where someone has been impatient with the slow driver in front so has overtaken in a stupud place taking an oncoming vehicle out or they have been driving well over 60 and have binned it through a hedge. These accidents are the result of not giving a toss about the speed limit, not becasue the 60 speed limit is too fast.

I'd also have to question the research of hitting someone at speed. Anyone who hits someone is going to be in shock (I would hope) but would never say they were speeding and they would say they were going slower. They may however not mention using the phone, fiddling with the radio or eating a big mac. The most time I've only ever come close to someone being in front of my car whilst is moving is the drunk people at kicking out time who just stand in the road and let you wait there forever while they fumble around giving you abuse.

I don't think anything will change with these new limits if any councils take the iniciative up. Country road limits is what affects me as I won't drive in any major built up areas as i deem it pointless and stressful. How they are going to enforce a country lane limit is also beyond me. The ones that are real life takers are tight windy and not at all suited to accuraterly get a speed reading.

 

[Jonnycoupe]

According to BBC Online today:I don't really see how any rational person can argue with these proposals

Road safety researchers say only one in 40 people who are hit by a vehicle at 20mph die, compared with one in five at 30mph.

Lets start with the fact that neither speeds are the national speed limit on the majority of UK roads.

Then we can move onto the roads are for cars not people.

Some select speed limit reductions along with better crossing points including bridges are just as viable.

 

[Glaucus]

I love it, their plan is to reduce deaths by a third. how are they going to achieve this? By lowering speed limits so more people survive, rather than actually tackling the cause of crashes . We need Guy Fawkes back. It's just a money making scheme I wonder how they will enforce these new stuupid limits.

 

[Booner!]

Can't they spend more on hospitals, nurses, doctors and ambulance crews... that will save far more lives. Then just up the test process so that it covers rural roads, built up areas and motorways, possibly to passplus level so that drivers are better aware of conditions and also their vehicle?

Surely cars are far safer now, then when the limit was introduced back in 19XX??

 

[stockhausen]

Lets start with the fact that neither speeds are the national speed limit on the majority of UK roads.
...

Yet

...
Then we can move onto the roads are for cars not people.
...

I suspect that it is pretty much unheard of for a stationery car to kill anyone, even less to exceed the speed limit, and since when did cars start paying for the construction and upkeep of the roads?

...
Some select speed limit reductions along with better crossing points including bridges are just as viable.

I think that the former is what is proposed. As to the latter, since it would probably be cheaper and just about as effective, why not just place pedestrian crossings every 20 yards?