20mph limits on the way
#62
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Slight difference. Preduhice against gay people was just esthablishment views that were completely nonsensical.
Prejudice against speeding is (arguably) based on saving lives.
Again, there isn't the life saving aspect (unless you are in charge of writing signs outside dangerous areas and cannot spell
)
Prejudice against speeding is (arguably) based on saving lives.
![Smile](images/smilies/smile.gif)
Last edited by PeteBrant; 21 May 2008 at 04:47 PM.
#68
Guest
Posts: n/a
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Different argument. My point was against speed cameras present for hypocritical reasons. Now you're saying what should I raise the limit to???? Keep to the points being argued rather than changing it - that's NOT being devil's advocate.
As for limit setting, we should return to the system we had before Nu Labia came in and that is that limits were set against a national framework/rules NOT according to the votes a local councillor could expect come council election time.
Dave
#69
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Ahh! It's more typing too fast for my poor hands than spelling problems ![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
The two are linked. If you aren't going speed, and don't want the limits raised, what possibie reason could you have against speed cameras?
Bear in mind, if people don't speed, then your reasons for not wanting them fall to bits.
They cease to become hypocritical, because they no longer raise revenue.
It is Dave, its just you aren't finding a decent enough argument against speed cameras.
They are set against a national framework, by and large, aren't they? -I mean you can drive in pretty much any area in the country and there will be a similar application of speed limits.
![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
Originally Posted by hutton_d
Different argument. My point was against speed cameras present for hypocritical reasons. Now you're saying what should I raise the limit to????
Bear in mind, if people don't speed, then your reasons for not wanting them fall to bits.
They cease to become hypocritical, because they no longer raise revenue.
Originally Posted by hutton_d
Keep to the points being argued rather than changing it - that's NOT being devil's advocate.
Originally Posted by hutton_d
As for limit setting, we should return to the system we had before Nu Labia came in and that is that limits were set against a national framework/rules NOT according to the votes a local councillor could expect come council election time.
#70
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
I think we should go back to the man (person these days) weaving a red flag in front of all moving vehicles. It made sense back then and even more so now with our increasingly crowded roads ![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
Lives will be saved (allegedly
) and the congestions and increase in fuel costs would make every (looney leftie) one happy. Jobs a good un
Petebrand can be the first paid flag waver. Hoorah for just laws!![Lol1](images/smilies/lol1.gif)
Just remember kids. Speed kills
![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
Lives will be saved (allegedly
![Wink](images/smilies/wink.gif)
![Thumb](images/smilies/thumb.gif)
Petebrand can be the first paid flag waver. Hoorah for just laws!
![Lol1](images/smilies/lol1.gif)
Just remember kids. Speed kills
![Freak3](images/smilies/freak3.gif)
#71
![Question](images/icons/icon5.gif)
Mind, these are very narrow twisty, technically demanding roads usually with a 60 mph limit. Clue - the answer is not that there are very few people about to mow down or no accidents involving a death.
#72
Scooby Regular
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
There are lots of 20mph areas around here.
Whilst I agree with the idea in principal, the way it is done is a nightmare. HUGE speed bumps, millions of wanring signs - its so difficult to use these 20mph roads that I avoid them and use another (residential) shortcut instead.![Wink](images/smilies/wink.gif)
They should just use the cameras, and then have the limits only at school time or buys periods.
Actually driving at 20mph in a performance car can be quite hard, very hard in my Pug![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
Had a small chuckle at that one, isn't that your sole purpose on SN Pete?
Whilst I agree with the idea in principal, the way it is done is a nightmare. HUGE speed bumps, millions of wanring signs - its so difficult to use these 20mph roads that I avoid them and use another (residential) shortcut instead.
![Wink](images/smilies/wink.gif)
They should just use the cameras, and then have the limits only at school time or buys periods.
Actually driving at 20mph in a performance car can be quite hard, very hard in my Pug
![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
Had a small chuckle at that one, isn't that your sole purpose on SN Pete?
![Wink](images/smilies/wink.gif)
#73
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
How many accidents are there on the average country road with a NSL, versus, say, an approach to a school?
What I am trying to get at, is that arguing against a 30mph limit is very very dodgy ground. Arguing against a 20mph one for school approaches etc is even more dodgy ground.
If you object to speed cameras in these circumstances, you are effectively arguing against those set limits, or you are arguing that people should be allowed to get away with speeding (in the eyes of supporters).
#74
Scooby Regular
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Pete, why do you think there are thousands of miles of B roads without speed cameras?
Mind, these are very narrow twisty, technically demanding roads usually with a 60 mph limit. Clue - the answer is not that there are very few people about to mow down or no accidents involving a death.
Mind, these are very narrow twisty, technically demanding roads usually with a 60 mph limit. Clue - the answer is not that there are very few people about to mow down or no accidents involving a death.
There isn't a SINGLE speed camera on the whole stretch, and I have never seen a copper on there either even though it claims huge amounts of lives each week.
![Frown](images/smilies/frown.gif)
#76
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
Actually no - Most of the time I am actually of the opinion as I indicate on a given subject - It;s just that most of the time, the majority of scoobynet is wrong
![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
However, on this one I am deliberatley being contrary - Not to troll, just to try and come up with a good argument against cameras.
#77
![Exclamation](images/icons/icon4.gif)
Give me the stats then. Feel free to trough the interwebby fruitlessly ![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
Do you not think?
How many accidents are there on the average country road with a NSL, versus, say, an approach to a school?
What I am trying to get at, is that arguing against a 30mph limit is very very dodgy ground. Arguing against a 20mph one for school approaches etc is even more dodgy ground.
If you object to speed cameras in these circumstances, you are effectively arguing against those set limits, or you are arguing that people should be allowed to get away with speeding (in the eyes of supporters).
How many accidents are there on the average country road with a NSL, versus, say, an approach to a school?
What I am trying to get at, is that arguing against a 30mph limit is very very dodgy ground. Arguing against a 20mph one for school approaches etc is even more dodgy ground.
If you object to speed cameras in these circumstances, you are effectively arguing against those set limits, or you are arguing that people should be allowed to get away with speeding (in the eyes of supporters).
#78
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#79
Scooby Regular
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Do you not think?
How many accidents are there on the average country road with a NSL, versus, say, an approach to a school?
What I am trying to get at, is that arguing against a 30mph limit is very very dodgy ground. Arguing against a 20mph one for school approaches etc is even more dodgy ground.
If you object to speed cameras in these circumstances, you are effectively arguing against those set limits, or you are arguing that people should be allowed to get away with speeding (in the eyes of supporters).
How many accidents are there on the average country road with a NSL, versus, say, an approach to a school?
What I am trying to get at, is that arguing against a 30mph limit is very very dodgy ground. Arguing against a 20mph one for school approaches etc is even more dodgy ground.
If you object to speed cameras in these circumstances, you are effectively arguing against those set limits, or you are arguing that people should be allowed to get away with speeding (in the eyes of supporters).
And I answer your first question with 100% fact above. The A682 averages at least one crash pretty much every week, my local school never has any incidents (I live across from it).
#80
Scooby Regular
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
The 20mph areas I use with the bumps are horrendous, you have to slow down to almost standstill in any sort of decent performance car. However those with crap old cars and 4x4's just merrily fly over them without a care in the world.
A working camera system would FORCE every single driver to slow down in these areas and it would be easy to drive them as well without the speed bumps.
I don't know if I support the 20 limits or not though, I would prefer road safety to have more spent on it - pedestrians, including kids need to take responsibility as well.
#81
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Why of course
But you're painting with a very broad brush. This usually shows a lack of clarity regarding the range of issues involved. Sorry if I cant be more specific, but as someone who's used the roads (vigorously) for over 30 years without killing or maiming anyone, either with fast cars or fast bikes, well I have my views on speeding and the speed kills mantra.
![Smile](images/smilies/smile.gif)
#82
Guest
Posts: n/a
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Dave
#83
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Absolutely not. Arguing against speed cameras is not arguing against *appropriate* limits, set for the *appropriate* reasons with the *appropriate* punishment(s) for transgression. But as I said earlier, speed cameras are put up for reasons which are hypocritical. As for reasoned arguments against speed cameras, they've been aired on SN and countless other places but that is not the point being argued here. Again, you're changing the argument so that you're *one step* ahead ......
Dave
Dave
What is the appropriate limit? What are the appropriate reasons? It seems that the outlined areas for 20mph limits are pretty well reasoned.
What makes speed cameras hypocritical? Again, if you stick to the limit, then you won't get any trouble - Where does the hypocrisy come into it?
Just to be clear, I absolutely agree where there is no cause for safety concerns, on a stretch of road, that is say designated at 40, when it should clearly be a NSL, it drives me barmy, especially when there is a speed camera there, seemingly with the express purpose of catching the unwary motorist.
But....
I know the limit is what it is on that stretch of road, I know if I go over the limit I am willfully breaking the law, I know if I get caught, then I have no one to blame but myself, not the government, not the police, not the local council - Me.
The limits don't become irrelevant just because I happen not to agree with them.
If I had my way, we would almost have an Isle of man situation, 30mph limits that are rigourously enforced, with higher limits on Motorways and dual carriageways, and a re-assesment of the 40/50 limits.
#85
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Absolutely not. Arguing against speed cameras is not arguing against *appropriate* limits, set for the *appropriate* reasons with the *appropriate* punishment(s) for transgression. But as I said earlier, speed cameras are put up for reasons which are hypocritical. As for reasoned arguments against speed cameras, they've been aired on SN and countless other places but that is not the point being argued here. Again, you're changing the argument so that you're *one step* ahead ......
Dave
Dave
If I may be pedantic for a minute, you keep saying it's hypocirisy, I'm fairly sure thats not the right word. For it to be hypocritical those that want us to slow down by putting cameras up, would themselves ignore the speed limits. A better word might be disingenuos
Cheers
Martin (the housewives favourite)
![Smile](images/smilies/smile.gif)
Last edited by Martin2005; 21 May 2008 at 11:20 PM.
#86
Guest
Posts: n/a
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Dave
#87
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
![Smile](images/smilies/smile.gif)
Here what you said about hypocrisy
Originally Posted by Dave
People *moan* about speed cameras because of the hypocrisy. They are there for *safety* reasons, as stated by those who *make the law*, but all the evidence is that they are in fact purely for revenue raising purposes.
Dave
What is it you want? No cameras and people be allowed to speed?
#88
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Why? Because I don't agree with you? I reserve the right to do that - Don't like it? Tough ![Smile](images/smilies/smile.gif)
Here what you said about hypocrisy
Now, if people obey the law, then they won't raise any revenue. If people stick to the speed limits then there will be no consuquences. Where is the hypocrisy?
What is it you want? No cameras and people be allowed to speed?
![Smile](images/smilies/smile.gif)
Here what you said about hypocrisy
Now, if people obey the law, then they won't raise any revenue. If people stick to the speed limits then there will be no consuquences. Where is the hypocrisy?
What is it you want? No cameras and people be allowed to speed?
Saving those speedcams for worthy places such as schools etc. where they will do a much better job of slowing people down in an area where they can see the need for it would work far more effectively. If they don't make money it means they are doing the real job in hand effectively. 20 mph limits in areas where they are not needed is plain daft!
Les
#89
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Saving those speedcams for worthy places such as schools etc. where they will do a much better job of slowing people down in an area where they can see the need for it would work far more effectively. If they don't make money it means they are doing the real job in hand effectively. 20 mph limits in areas where they are not needed is plain daft!
Les
Les
Like I say, I am playing devils advocate on this one. People need to write to their MPs and local councillors if they want anything changed, but in order to do so, you have to be prepared for the "don't speed, don't get caught out" argument, and so far, no one, myself incuded, has come up with a decent enough argument against that point.
#90
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
I agree with what you say here entirely,
Like I say, I am playing devils advocate on this one. People need to write to their MPs and local councillors if they want anything changed, but in order to do so, you have to be prepared for the "don't speed, don't get caught out" argument, and so far, no one, myself incuded, has come up with a decent enough argument against that point.
Like I say, I am playing devils advocate on this one. People need to write to their MPs and local councillors if they want anything changed, but in order to do so, you have to be prepared for the "don't speed, don't get caught out" argument, and so far, no one, myself incuded, has come up with a decent enough argument against that point.
Les
![Smile](images/smilies/smile.gif)