When did 30mph become too fast?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Also there is much less chance if they stay out of the road when vehicles are on it.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

Yeah!

It's not like they were there first or anything.
 
Yeah!

It's not like they were there first or anything.
? Pedestrians tend to use footpaths, vehicles roads, unless pedestrian is crossing when they have duty of care, so why are all the restrictions being placed on the motorist?

Perhaps we should restrict trains to 20mph for the same reasons! On the other hand income cannot be generated by speed traps on railway lines.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
 
? Pedestrians tend to use footpaths, vehicles roads, unless pedestrian is crossing when they have duty of care, so why are all the restrictions being placed on the motorist?

Perhaps we should restrict trains to 20mph for the same reasons! On the other hand income cannot be generated by speed traps on railway lines.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
Having been a pedestrian a lot more frequently over the last couple of years I have been surprised at how selfish most motorists are and I include myself in that statement.
 
Having been a pedestrian a lot more frequently over the last couple of years I have been surprised at how selfish most motorists are and I include myself in that statement.
I don't see too many motorists using the pavements or influencing how they are used, perhaps a pavement fund tax could be introduced for those that don't already pay Council Tax or would that be selfish [emoji848]

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
 
I don't see too many motorists using the pavements or influencing how they are used, perhaps a pavement fund tax could be introduced for those that don't already pay Council Tax or would that be selfish [emoji848]

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
Oh dear.

I see motorists using the pavement every day, how else do you think we get around once we have disembarked from our 4 wheeled gin palaces?

Who are you referring to who don't pay council tax?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's not about pedestrians making the odd mistake, of course that's going to happen. It's about pedestrians overall taking a share in the responsibility for their own safety. I wonder how many of them realise the highway code applies to them as well as motor vehicles. The current trend seems to be moving away from any sort or awareness as many perambulate about in a gadget absorbed other dimension. I don't believe speed limits should be lowered just to accommodate the cult of mobile phones and ipods.
 
Oh dear.

I see motorists using the pavement every day, how else do you think we get around once we have disembarked from our 4 wheeled gin palaces?

Who are you referring to who don't pay council tax?
Oh dear.

Once you disembark from your vehicle you are no longer a motorist and become a pedestrian. Not sure about gin palaces though[emoji57]

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
 
Oh dear.

Once you disembark from your vehicle you are no longer a motorist and become a pedestrian. Not sure about gin palaces though[emoji57]

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
Eh?

Isn't that just what I said?
 
So pedestrian makes a mistake and steps into the road, instant death seems a rather harsh punishment.
Thank God none of the members of this forum have ever made a mistake.
Might be harsh but the pedestrian will not make the same mistake again [emoji849]

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
 
Might be harsh but the pedestrian will not make the same mistake again [emoji849]

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
I'm not thinking harsh, more about limited thinking - one dimensional if it makes you feel better.

I am reminded of Toad if Toad Hall only charmless.
 
Sorry the thread makes it look like my above comment is aimed at dr feelgood, nothing could be further from the truth, I am in full agreement with dr feelgood.
 
Sorry the thread makes it look like my above comment is aimed at dr feelgood, nothing could be further from the truth, I am in full agreement with dr feelgood.
Fun(un)cle , your user name is spelt differently in your avatar than in your title - which is correct ?
 
It's ironic that they say that you are more likely to survive if you are hit at 20mph rather than 30mph. You only survive if the driver of the vehicle applies the brakes in a timely fashion.

If you asked two children to lie down in the road, and you ran over one of them at 30 mph and the other one at 20mph, they'll both die of crush injuries. The fact is that at 20mph, you are more likely to apply the brakes and stop before your car rides over their stunned carcass.

Some of the people around here are so slow that by the time they've realised they need to apply the brakes, they've already travelled 5 miles more.

In fact, you could argue that if a vehicle is travelling slowly enough, pedestrians may be confused into thinking that the vehicle is stationary, when it is actually moving. Maybe the authorities should up the speed limit to keep pedestrians on their toes.

Complacency is a killer...
 
It is obvious that the slower the vehicle's speed is, the safer it is in terms of impact damage in a collision with a pedestrian or another vehicle. In fact it's not rocket science that a vehice speed of 0 mph is the safest.

The question is which speed offers a sensible compromise between safely and the need to make progress.

30mph might be it, or 20mph might be it, I don't know. But I don't think that those who argue for 30 or for 20 know either.
 
Statistics show there were less pedestrian deaths when no speed limits were in force, therefore should we simply do away with speed limits altogether?

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
 
It is obvious that the slower the vehicle's speed is, the safer it is in terms of impact damage in a collision with a pedestrian or another vehicle. In fact it's not rocket science that a vehice speed of 0 mph is the safest.

Technically, you are right, but we are dealing with human beings, some of which are completely stupid.

Just because something is stationary doesn't mean it is safe. Many here would have seen that Youtube clip where a cyclist, so preocupied with his bikes computer, ran into the back of a parked vehicle. Even pedestrians can hurt themselves running into other pedestrians.

Basically, we are living in an age where we can get distracted to the point that we don't recognise danger. There are too many distractions such as smart phones and smart watches. Remove many of these distractions and the world will become a safer place.

Distraction has to be one of the worst vices we have. People need to keep their eye on the ball. If they do, this world becomes a safer place. After all, someone will survive a collision with a car at 20mph, but they'd survive even more if they bother to look and NOT step into the path of an oncoming vehicle.

Of course, the exception to the rule is when someone drives their car along the pavement, mowing down pedestrians, but this is a rare case indeed, and the driver can get prosecuted for not using due care and attention, something pedestrians should be charged with if they step in to the road into the path of an oncoming vehicle.

(When was the last time a pedestrian was prosecuted for causing a collision?)
 
Statistics show there were less pedestrian deaths when no speed limits were in force, therefore should we simply do away with speed limits altogether?

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
When was that?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom