[gamingboy]

Anyone else feel like they are the only ones to slow down coming into a built up area?

Coming from a 60mph into a 30mph.

Car driving up my arse in the 60mph anyway. I'm doing 60mph. So start to slow down as we approach the 30mph. To be fair you can see far ahead before it actually becomes built up and there is a bus stop etc. (So it becomes 30mph and the road is the same as the 60mph) To me though people can come from nowhere so regardless of what you think you see you should do 30mph. I'm not able to brake as they are so close that I just carry on easing off. I had started to ease off, but not so early to impede progress from 60mph. They then shake their head at me and gesture and continue to tailgate.

What is wrong with some people?

[IronGiant]

Was it FZR? I'm surprised he didn't overtake

[gus607]

Stick to the speed limit whatever it is. Your license, your points.

[mjn]

Originally Posted by IronGiant

Was it FZR? I'm surprised he didn't overtake

Doubt it, IIRC, he wants more camers in 30 and 40 zones.

[IronGiant]

But gamingboy wanted to slow down to 30 before he left the 60mph zone, which I didn't think was allowed under FastZingerRules, you must stay within at least 5mph of the limit at all times while you are in it.

[CAS FAN]

To be honest I think that the 30 mph speed limit should always be obeyed. There is a lot of sense behind it and speeding in built up areas is a big no no for me. I live in a village and tend to pull out in front of cars who are at a safe distance for me to pull out of they are doing 30. The issue is that they are usually speeding so get rather annoyed when they end up right on my bumper. One idiot gestured at me as he flew through the village the other day so I just signalled for him to slow down and shook my head.

The speed limit in contrast is too slow for motorways under normal driving conditions and that is probably why they are looking at the increase to 80mph. I appreciate that both driving 40 in a 30 and 80 in a 70 are breaking the law but I see a huge issue and risk with one and feel that the other is not an issue.

[FZR400RRSP]

Originally Posted by mjn

Doubt it, IIRC, he wants more camers in 30 and 40 zones.

Correct, I'd be happy with cameras every 50 yards in 30/40 zones.
Urban speeders are the biggest driving bell-ends around.
Where I live, people often 'rat-run' through our village to avoid congestion on a bypass.
In doing so, they completely ignore the 30mph limit.
If I'm not in a hurry to get home, I'll often drive through our village at a cruise-controlled 30mph, holding up a line of these inconsiderate twits in a seething chain behind me.
It's fun, and I hope it might put them off trying it again.

EDIT- I'd also like to see urban speeding attract 6 points instead of 3.

[DPinBucks]

Originally Posted by CAS FAN

To be honest I think that the 30 mph speed limit should always be obeyed. There is a lot of sense behind it and speeding in built up areas is a big no no for me. I live in a village and tend to pull out in front of cars who are at a safe distance for me to pull out of they are doing 30. The issue is that they are usually speeding so get rather annoyed when they end up right on my bumper. One idiot gestured at me as he flew through the village the other day so I just signalled for him to slow down and shook my head.

The speed limit in contrast is too slow for motorways under normal driving conditions and that is probably why they are looking at the increase to 80mph. I appreciate that both driving 40 in a 30 and 80 in a 70 are breaking the law but I see a huge issue and risk with one and feel that the other is not an issue.

I agree with most of that. The big issue for me is not the limits, or the enforcement of them, but the sheer inappropriateness of many of them. A speed limit should always be the best compromise between safety and the need to move along. Only a zero limit has no danger at all. And the vast majority are needed to protect pedestrians, to limit dangerous driving on narrow or bendy roads, or to keep traffic flowing on busy roads.

I'm convinced that many limts are put there simply as money-spinners, without regard to the actual 'best compromise' limit which should be in place. There should be some mechanism to allow limits to be challenged, either up or down. In any case, there should be an overall review of them. Only then I think will they start to be taken seriously without the need for draconian enforcement systems.

We all know roads where limits are stupidly low. My worst cases are:

• The A40 Western Avenue between Northolt & Hangar Lane. 40 mph at present. It could easily be 50;
• A short stretch of the A33 from the M4 south for about 1 mile. Several lanes wide, 40 mph. There's no need for a limit at all there. Not only that, but the 40 signs on the M4 exit are hidden away and lost in all the other road furniture.

[FZR400RRSP]

Originally Posted by DPinBucks

I'm convinced that many limts are put there simply as money-spinners

The 'money-spinner' argument for speed cameras is destroyed by our village scenario.
If they were to install a camera/cameras, they'd make an absolute mint.
And even though I'd undoubtedly know a lot of the guilty parties, I'd laugh my head off at every one.

[gibbsy]

Originally Posted by CAS FAN

To be honest I think that the 30 mph speed limit should always be obeyed. There is a lot of sense behind it and speeding in built up areas is a big no no for me. I live in a village and tend to pull out in front of cars who are at a safe distance for me to pull out of they are doing 30. The issue is that they are usually speeding so get rather annoyed when they end up right on my bumper. One idiot gestured at me as he flew through the village the other day so I just signalled for him to slow down and shook my head.

Same problem with my village and I have to pull out of a blind S bend to join the main road. The amount of rubber on the road tells it's own story.

Originally Posted by FZR400RRSP

Correct, I'd be happy with cameras every 50 yards in 30/40 zones.

EDIT- I'd also like to see urban speeding attract 6 points instead of 3.

Our friend has just got 'clipped' by a speeding woman on a zebra crossing and has landed up with a broken leg. It could have been so much worse as she was flung against the car that had already stopped. Just to top if off the woman that clipped her in a Honda CRV(?) was doing 50 and on the phone. Think she may get a little more than 6 points.

[FZR400RRSP]

Originally Posted by gibbsy

Just to top if off the woman that clipped her in a Honda CRV(?) was doing 50 and on the phone.

Good grief, that's horrendous.
I hope they throw the book at that moron.
It has to be said though, most of the urban speeders I see around my place are women.
The 'harrassed mother', late for school etc.etc.
The ones that would be oh so vocal if one of their kids were knocked down by a speeder.

[Greg]

My favourite is the people you get stuck behind doing 40-50 in a 60 zone, then when they get to a 30 zone, you slow down and they just keep doing the same speed!

[FZR400RRSP]

Originally Posted by Greg

My favourite is the people you get stuck behind doing 40-50 in a 60 zone, then when they get to a 30 zone, you slow down and they just keep doing the same speed!

It's a story I've mentioned on here before, but I was once following a police Range Rover through a 30mph zone and the woman in front was clearly accelerating away from us both.
Therefore, clearly breaking the 30mph limit, right under their noses.
"Aye aye" I thought, I'll be seeing the blue lights soon.

Nope...

I was so angry that they'd let her go that I flashed my lights, got them to pull over and asked them why the hell they ignored a woman blatantly breaking the law in front of them.
All I got was bluff, bluster and attempts at intimidation.

[gamingboy]

Slow and Steady.

[richard plumb]

taking the Clarkson approach, I think urban areas should be 60 zones, and cars should have spikes fitted to the front. With more councils adding 20 zones, pedestrians often don't pay attention these days. Just yesterday I was turning left into our close, and someone approached the corner and walked straight across, head down, not looking where they were going. You could tell they were going to do that as you approached them, so I didn't have to suddenly brake or anything, I had my 'assume everyone else is going to be an idiot' hat on.




(I do think that 30mph zones should be strictly stuck to, 40+ occasionally a little variance)

[IronGiant]

It's something I've noticed a lot too lately, pedestrians who don't even make any attempt to look around, it's as if the presence of a junction hasn't even impinged on their consciousness. Either they are from the planet Krypton, assume cars will stop for them, or more worryingly have no idea they need to look before stepping out into the road.

[lmccauley]

Originally Posted by IronGiant

It's something I've noticed a lot too lately, pedestrians who don't even make any attempt to look around, it's as if the presence of a junction hasn't even impinged on their consciousness. Either they are from the planet Krypton, assume cars will stop for them, or more worryingly have no idea they need to look before stepping out into the road.

We need to bring back yocal Darth Vader or Tufty!

[richard plumb]

Originally Posted by IronGiant

It's something I've noticed a lot too lately, pedestrians who don't even make any attempt to look around, it's as if the presence of a junction hasn't even impinged on their consciousness. Either they are from the planet Krypton, assume cars will stop for them, or more worryingly have no idea they need to look before stepping out into the road.

trouble is, if more people get knocked down, campaigners will use that stat as a reason to introduce more 20mph zones. They'll automatically blame drivers rather than encourage pedestrians to be more aware - very important these days with walkmans and those sorts of new fangled thingies

[Kebabhead]

Originally Posted by richard plumb

trouble is, if more people get knocked down, campaigners will use that stat as a reason to introduce more 20mph zones.

I agree although the onus has always been on the driver in the one tonne killing machine

[FZR400RRSP]

Originally Posted by IronGiant

It's something I've noticed a lot too lately, pedestrians who don't even make any attempt to look around, it's as if the presence of a junction hasn't even impinged on their consciousness. Either they are from the planet Krypton, assume cars will stop for them, or more worryingly have no idea they need to look before stepping out into the road.

Personal responsibility is a thing of the past.
You knock them down, it's your fault mate.
Not only that, they'll sue you.
Apparently, this will make up for the pain associated with bouncing off a bonnet.
Look where I'm going?
Pffft....

[Molliwopp]

Originally Posted by richard plumb

trouble is, if more people get knocked down, campaigners will use that stat as a reason to introduce more 20mph zones. They'll automatically blame drivers rather than encourage pedestrians to be more aware - very important these days with walkmans and those sorts of new fangled thingies

At the end of the day it has no bearing whether or not its a pedestrians fault. The only reason for any speed limit is to ultimatly protect life. Trying to teach kids and teenagers to pay more attention is going to be hard and very hit and miss. Lowering limits is very direct and more importantly works.

[FZR400RRSP]

Originally Posted by Molliwopp

Lowering limits is very direct and more importantly works.

It works, if people stick to it (or are forced to stick to it)
20mph is being discussed for where we live.
As I said at one of the meetings though, it's pointless without enforcement.
Our 30mph is ignored, as proven by a survey right next to my house using those wires on the road.
They showed the average speed was nearer 40mph.
What did that proof of the limit being ignored result in, in the way of enforcement?
Nothing, zilch, nada.
So what the hell change in behaviour do they expect from 20mph circles on the road...?
WIthout enforcement, it's waste of paint and signs.

[gibbsy]

Originally Posted by FZR400RRSP

20mph is being discussed for where we live.

We've already got them for about quarter of mile each side of the local school. On the main road the 20 limit is enforcable when twin orange lights are flashing. In the smaller side streets there are also speed humps with permanent 20 restrictions throughout the village.

The one school on the main drag is like a madhouse at chucking out time. Cars parked everywhere and mothers that are late are like lunatics. Even the lollipop lady takes her life in her hands when she steps into the road.

After a number of complaints last year a mobile camera caught quite a few speeding up the hill towards the school, but I haven't seen it there lately.

[CAS FAN]

Originally Posted by DPinBucks

I agree with most of that. The big issue for me is not the limits, or the enforcement of them, but the sheer inappropriateness of many of them. A speed limit should always be the best compromise between safety and the need to move along. Only a zero limit has no danger at all. And the vast majority are needed to protect pedestrians, to limit dangerous driving on narrow or bendy roads, or to keep traffic flowing on busy roads.

I'm convinced that many limts are put there simply as money-spinners, without regard to the actual 'best compromise' limit which should be in place. There should be some mechanism to allow limits to be challenged, either up or down. In any case, there should be an overall review of them. Only then I think will they start to be taken seriously without the need for draconian enforcement systems.

We all know roads where limits are stupidly low. My worst cases are:
[*]The A40 Western Avenue between Northolt & Hangar Lane. 40 mph at present. It could easily be 50;[*]A short stretch of the A33 from the M4 south for about 1 mile. Several lanes wide, 40 mph. There's no need for a limit at all there. Not only that, but the 40 signs on the M4 exit are hidden away and lost in all the other road furniture.

Yes agreed, there are some roads which could be higher. The A1079 which I travel on regularly was always a 60 road but then they made parts 50 and now it's nearly all 50 with some 40 bits on the stretch I travel on. Sometimes you get bits of road where there are residential houses and yet it's a 40 zone and then get areas which are not residential and are 30!

[CAS FAN]

Originally Posted by Greg

My favourite is the people you get stuck behind doing 40-50 in a 60 zone, then when they get to a 30 zone, you slow down and they just keep doing the same speed!

Yes exactly, get that all the time where I am. There's a 60 road from the town to my village and the amount of folk who drive at 40 down there, only to keep doing the same speed through the village (not even slowing when they set off the 30 sign) is ridiculous!

[DPinBucks]

Originally Posted by richard plumb

...pedestrians often don't pay attention these days. Just yesterday I was turning left into our close, and someone approached the corner and walked straight across, head down, not looking where they were going. ...

I assume you mean the pedestrian was on the main road and walked across the entrance to your close as you were going to turn in?

If so, then he had absolute priority. It was completely your responsibility as a driver to anticipate his movements and give way, whether he was paying attention or not.

[CAS FAN]

Originally Posted by DPinBucks

I assume you mean the pedestrian was on the main road and walked across the entrance to your close as you were going to turn in?

If so, then he had absolute priority. It was completely your responsibility as a driver to anticipate his movements and give way, whether he was paying attention or not.

Wouldn't surprise me if the above was true to be honest. I fully agree that car drivers should pay close attention to what is going on around them and if they turn into a road where say a pedestrian is already crossing then sure the pedestrian should have right away. That said, they shouldn't just have the right to walk out onto any public highway and have automatic right of way over the traffic (unless say on a zebra crossing/pedestrian crossing). There should be a responsibility on the pedestrian to only cross when safe to do so as you could take it to the extreme and if someone runs out in front of your car leaving you no chance to stop when you are obeying the speed limit, then they could have the right to sue you (assuming they survive) despite the incident being purely their fault. For a car driver to be completely removed from fault in this extreme situation then he or she would have to be stationery (which kind of goes against the point of a road).

Like I say, you could be as vigilant as possible and be driving below the speed limit and someone could deliberately run out from cover into your car. I know that this would be very unlikely but technically it could happen.

[FZR400RRSP]

Originally Posted by CAS FAN

Like I say, you could be as vigilant as possible and be driving below the speed limit and someone could deliberately run out from cover into your car. I know that this would be very unlikely but technically it could happen.

Not unlikely at all, people 'deliberately' getting themselves run over is (or was) a popular insurance scam in the states.

[CAS FAN]

Originally Posted by FZR400RRSP

Not unlikely at all, people 'deliberately' getting themselves run over is (or was) a popular insurance scam in the states.

Yeah I guess that was my thinking as we already have the idiots who overtake and slam on the brakes to cause an accident in which the driver behind is automatically at fault due to running into the back of the other car.

[FZR400RRSP]

I expect these 'roadhawk' type dashboard cameras to become more popular here.
Internet video sites are full of examples of scams (or genuine accidents) being caught on them.