Jump to content

Manchester Road Accident now - more chaos


Recommended Posts

Just to play a bit of the devils advocate on that last comment.

 

1) they have no pedestrians.

2) they have no cyclists weaving in and out of the traffic.

3) 99.99% of the traffic on them is heading in the same direction and does not normally meet oncoming traffic or parked cars.

 

Now as for how much safer travelling at twenty is regarding accident reduction it could be a bit of a two edged sword. The result of any collision between motorists and anything/anybody else would be lessened.However the potential for distraction at the lower speed would be increased as people would be lulled into the false sense that it was safer at lower speeds and concentration would diminish. How many times have people stated on here seeing people using mobile phones to send texts while driving and that is at the "normal" speed limits. How much more prevalent would this become at lower speeds I wonder.

 

As with all surveys the wording of the questions asked are dependant on the result desired. :roll:

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 128
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

What Inky says hits the nail on the head. The motorist has been treated as a cash cow by successive governments for far too long.

Cyclist, noun: Someone who spends 20 years moaning like hell because he wants a specially-built cycle path that's set back from the traffic, and then, when the budget's approved and the bloody thing i

Good idea. I'll park in Widnes and walk to the shops.

Yes its was a great front page article and is testament to the way that communities around the country are campaigning for and implementing lower speed limits on residential  and urban streets. The following day the Independent published the following editorial :-

 

 

Editorial: The logic of 20mph speed limits

 

That more than a third of local authorities have either already instituted a 20mph speed limit on some residential roads, or have plans to do so, can only be applauded. And with public support for more stringent restrictions in built-up areas now running at more than 60 per cent, as reported by this newspaper this week, it can only be hoped that 20mph will soon become the new normal.

The most compelling argument is, of course, the question of safety. Not only do drivers travelling at slower speeds have more time to react. The damage inflicted by hitting a pedestrian at 20mph, as opposed to 30mph, is also markedly reduced. Indeed, the human skull's ability to withstand impact drops sharply beyond 20mph, perhaps because that is our own top speed.

 

Statistics on accidents point the same way. More than half of deaths and injuries occur in 30mph zones, so the effect of a blanket 20mph limit in residential areas would be far from marginal. It might also help shift Britain from the top spot in the European league for pedestrian fatalities. Indeed, with the most recent figures showing sharp rises in accidents involving pedestrians and cyclists (up by 5 per cent and 9 per cent respectively), it is difficult to argue convincingly in defence of the status quo.

 

Safety is, however, not the only consideration here. There are also broader environmental benefits. Motorists' reservations might be shaken, for example, when they consider that traffic is more likely to keep flowing if cars maintain a steady (albeit more leisurely) pace, rather than moving faster but braking more often. Pollution – both noise and particulate – also noticeably decrease at slower speeds.

 

There is a downside, of course: journeys may take slightly longer. But it is a matter of less than a minute, on the average urban journey, when congestion, traffic lights and so on are taken into account. Set against the trauma of broken bodies and ruined lives, a few seconds longer in the car is surely a price worth paying?

 

The articles have been bouncing around the internet since then.

 

Regards

 

Rod

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes its was a great front page article and is testament to the way that communities around the country are campaigning for and implementing lower speed limits on residential  and urban streets. The following day the Independent published the following editorial :-

 

 

 

The articles have been bouncing around the internet since then.

 

Regards

 

Rod

 

The independant writes rubbish,

 

Traffic is more likely to flow, get real here we are talking about towns were you have to stop for traffic lights, rounabouts, on coming vehicles and so on.

 

As for the skull injuries I* do not know enouth about this to comment but suspect mmany off the skull injuries occure to occupants inside the car at high sppeds and from the fall after being hit, it is the jolt to the brain that causes most deaths and brain injuries not damage to the skull

 

It is easy to write trash articles like the one in the independant, given a little time I could write one that increasing speed limits to 40mph would reduce accidents and casualties, but printing pointless figures  proves nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...