The Department for Transport (DfT), has published its 2017 figures and their data shows most motorists aren’t keeping to the speed limit when driving through 20 miles per hour (mph) zones.
While the DfT statistics show drivers break the law across all speed limits, the slower speed zones are the areas where they’re more inclined to spurn the law, which causes one to ask—are 20mph speed limits a waste of time?
Eighty-six per cent break the law
In 2017 the DfT examined 446.6 million journeys on 74 roads within England and found that 46% of the journeys monitored were in breach of the speed limit. The number of car drivers violating the speed limit went up as the speed limit lowered with 86% of journeys observed within 20mph zones above the legal limit.
Speeding within 20mph zones wasn’t only limited to drivers of cars though. Eighty-five per cent of motorcyclists, 77% of ‘long’ bus drivers, and 53% of ‘short’ bus drivers were also guilty of breaking the law, as were 84% of drivers of light commercial vehicles (LCVs) or vans and 75% of HGV drivers—all travelling at an average speed of 26mph in the 20mph zones.
It seems the night is a more tempting time for exceeding the speed limit in 20mph zones with 94% of car drivers exceeding the maximum speed at 2 am and 98% of motorcyclists breaking the law at midnight.
The DfT’s annual speeding data shows a somewhat steady picture of speeding over the last seven years, although the 2017 figures show more drivers exceeding 20mph zones than in the two previous years.
The study saw 52% of car drivers and 54% of motorcyclists exceeding the limit in 30mph zones, despite these restrictions being in place across residential areas.
Sixty mph zones are where motorists are most cautious, with just 9% of journeys recorded as over the limit.
Forty-eight per cent of the 34 million journeys monitored on the motorway exceeded the 70mph speed limit, 11% exceeded 80mph, while 1% of journeys exceeded 90mph.
‘Waste of money’
Last month, in response to a news story by The Sun newspaper that 20mph limits have cost over £11 million of taxpayers’ money, the motoring organisation, the AA described implementing these zones as a ‘waste of money.’
Edmund King, AA President said:
“Spending over £10m to put in blanket twenty-speed signs on over 1,500 miles of road without targeting is frankly a waste of money.
“If drivers understand the reason for the speed limit, they are more likely to obey it.
“Rather than spending millions on signs that are ignored, it would be safer to improve dangerous junctions and put in pedestrian crossings.”
Yet, road safety advocates insist 20mph zones improve safety, referring to data that shows a 6.2% fall in traffic accidents with each 1mph reduction in average speed.
In July this year, The Mayor of London, the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS), and Transport for London (TfL) published London’s first ‘Vision Zero’ action plan, which set out plans to end deaths and serious injuries from London’s transport network.
The core of the strategy includes a plan to lower speed limits to 20mph on London’s roads.
Josh Harris, Director of Campaigns at Brake, the road safety charity, said:
“The Mayor is right to focus on speed reduction and the rollout of 20mph limits—simply put lower speeds save lives. If you are hit by a car at 30mph, you are more likely to die, if you are hit at 20mph, you are more likely to survive. This stark fact should be reason enough for all to welcome the introduction of safe 20mph limits across the capital. London is setting an example the rest of the UK should follow and we urge the Government to make 20mph the default speed for built-up areas across the UK, helping make streets across the country safer and more welcoming.”
Frustrated drivers
The UK introduced 20mph zones in 1991 to address the problem of child pedestrian
casualties in and around residential areas. The government later allowed local highway authorities to impose limits without the need to apply to central Government for permission.
Many, though not all, 20mph zones are outside schools. The rationale behind 20mph zones is that motorists are less liable to have a collision when moving at this lower speed and pedestrians will have a greater likelihood of survival if hit by a vehicle travelling at or below 20mph. So, are these zones successful?
There’s much-reported data stating that not only did the rate of road deaths and accidents not decrease in most of the areas where councils installed 20mph limits, but they increased. This may be, in part, due to frustrated motorists taking risks to get past slow-moving vehicles.
Yet, a major study by the British Medical Journal determined that, after introducing 20mph limits, road casualties dropped by 42%, and the number of children who had serious injuries or died fell by 50%.
We’re all aware it’s more dangerous to get hit by a vehicle travelling at 30mph than by one travelling at 20mph but can we guarantee that, should we get knocked down in a 20mph zone, the driver will be sticking to the speed limit?
Do you think 20mph speed limits are excessive or necessary? Are there 20mph zones in your area that frustrate you? Would you like to see a 20mph limit introduced on a particular road? Tell us your opinion in the comments.
No policing = no observance
Not quite.. people will observe when necessary. Its the unnecessary 20 mph zone where there are no schools etc, pedestrian traffic is light to none existent and limited junctions… You will find then that drivers wont stick to the 20 mph limit.
And has been previously been said, the police are so short on numbers…..
That’s quite sad, when we think about it, isn’t it?
Has any reliable research been carried out into the effects on vehicle emissions when running in the lower gears necessitated by 20mph limits?
Research has shown that pollution around Schools, where many 20mph zones are, is higher than other areas in the vicinity. The main cause could of course be the school run
Ban traffic around schools in school time, particularly dirty diesels displaced by cleaner electric vehicles.
sorry William but don’t believe all you read in the newspapers about dirty diesels! our 2.0L dirty diesel as you call it chucks out less emissions than most 1.6 petrol engines so without being rude theres an old saying, stick that in your pipe & smoke it! That probably chucks out more as well /:-)
Yes. Add in road humps and you’ve got the constant accelerate then brake adding to both exhaust and particulate e.g brake dust pollution not to mention wearing out of the suspension leading to earlier replacement.
We’ve had humps around our village & local town for a number of years now. Guess what, at my last MOT in August I had to have a new offside spring fitted, and I drive over them slowly. They’re a complete menace.,
Just another incompetent driver. If you are driving at the correct speed for the road and with a legal car, ie not one with dropped suspension, there should be no reason to break at every speed bump. In fact breaking for every speed bump only damages your car, you should in fact excelerate slightly as you get to the speed bump as it reduces the impact of the bump.
Tony, the only incompetent part of your comment is the fact you wrote it
Lower gears, means higher revs on the engine for the same speed that equals higher pollution
40 mph is the most efficient as wind resistance begins to outweigh gearing
The most efficient speed is 40 mph, according to a study done by what car a few years back. Above 40 mph and wind resistance factor is greater than higher gearing.
No relevance to the subject
No policing of the limits mean no observance
Exactly!
But do we want to live in a police state? As to enforce these unintelligent limits on every street would result in that. It would also make driving more dangerous, as drivers would be constantly checking their speedos instead of observing what’s happening outside.
“Yet, road safety advocates insist 20mph zones improve safety, referring to data that shows a 6.2% fall in traffic accidents with each 1mph reduction in average speed.” So if the speed limit is reduced by around 16MPH there will be no traffic accidents? This is just a bit of manipulation of statistics to justify a cause.
Perhaps in stead of picking on motorists constantly they should look at pedestrians and the old fashioned thing called the high way code, pedestrians these days feel it is there right to just walk into the road, usually with a phone or some kind of music device stuck too their ear not a single glance for a vehicle, runners who just run across in front of you again not a single glance as they are aware that if you hit them it is automatically the drivers fault.
Cyclists who never look for you at all, ride through red lights and crossings, skim past you almost taking mirrors off the list is pretty much endless for both pedestrians and cyclists, yet legislation is always levelled at the motortist.
Evan at 16mph we will still run them over, simply because the pedestrian does not take charge of their own well being and don’t actually bother to look for any traffic.
Totally agree with all your points Chris! Pedestrians always seem to think crossing a road is their right of way and in my experience, commonly with earphones on, or looking at their mobiles. More focus on road safety should be aimed at pedestrians on how to cross a road (remember the Green Cross Code from the 1970’s?) I get very annoyed at the assumption that all motorists are the dangerous, speeding culprits. I drive for a living and I see the majority of motorists obeying speed restrictions and acknowledging road safety but pedestrians, particularly young people, are showing absolutely no concern for the dangers of ‘jay-walking’.
And don’t get me started on cyclists!!…They think they own the road and I’ve encountered so much aggression from a huge majority of them. Often they are huge risk-takers and their arrogance leads them to make many shocking safety errors. When they cause an accident, they simply swear and cycle off, leaving no way of being traced. The law must be changed to ensure they are forced to pass a road safety test,. They should have a cycle licence and clear legal identification if they want to use the roads as motorists do. They must face the same penalties as a motorist does for dangerous road use.
Oh shut up. I had to read that in my best Alan Partridge voice for full effect! I’m a cyclist and car driver in London and having to read the turgid dross that the self-proclaimed law abiding folk churn out about the danger cyclists bestow on the roads exists purely in your head. The so called dangerous cyclists are dangerous to who exactly? If a cyclists hits you in your car who is going to come off worse? Surely a win-win situation for you right? So relax and go and get a life and keep your whining to yourself. It’s people like you who create a nanny state where no one has any common sense in the first place (see your first paragraph) but the paradox is always lost on your type.
and who pays for the damage the cyclist causes……? Maybe cyclists should be required, by law, to have insurance? Not all cyclists are bad, but neither are all car drivers. But too many of all persuasions are too impatient / inconsiderate of other road users etc.
That is how they get away with it, they are no accountable for their actions be it good or bad, where as we are.
imagine a car knocking someone over on a crossing, then driving off with out stopping. hunted springs to mind.
registrar the bike to the owner, give it tag plates like our reg number and make it insurable that way they will be accountable for their indiscretions like we are as drivers.
Bicyclist not following traffic laws is the police fault for not siting bicyclist no enforcment. there are to obey all traffic laws except spped and all other vichicles are to pass them usiing slow vehicle laws to pass that mean below speed limit when you pass a slow moving vehicle that car driver not aware of law,
with motorize bicycle it going to be that and has started
If you are a nui…sorry, cyclist in London. Please please stay there. I find them totally unruly. There’s nothing worse than driving behind a middle-aged man in Lycra with his a**e breaking out like two boiled eggs in a hankie staring at you, who then waggles all over the road because it’s hilly, and he can’t make it, making you swerve into oncoming lorries, or almost stalling as you can’t get past. They seem to ignore the laws of the road, think that red lights can’t possibly apply to them, and they seem to decide when or where they drive either on the pavement or road. They don’t have lights, aren’t insured, and don’t pay any road tax. They are a blooming nuisance. Oh, and as you have guessed. I’m not a cycling fan. Haha.
Interesting rant. Last week I stopped at temporary traffic lights on my bike, the car behind me also stopped, but the SUV behind them overtook us both to jump the lights. Who are all the perfect drivers who only ever see cyclists breaking the rules?
what is road tax? Current Vehicle excise duty is based on the CO2 emissions of the vehicle, no emissions – NO Tax, whether it is a bicycle or electric car/Bus/motorbike.
Road tax was abolished in 1937.
Ignorant cyclists are a danger to pedestrians. My six year old granddaughter was very nearly hit by a cyclist as she stepped out from behind (from the cyclists viewpoint) a footpath-mounted pilllarbox as he was riding along the pavement. I have myself nearly been hit on a pelican crossing by another cyclist ignoring the red stop light and have had a mouthful of abuse from him to boot. I have also witnessed another case where a pushchair was narrowly avoided by a cyclist. I have even witnessed the abomination of a red-light jumping cyclist actually weaving through a throng of legally crossing pedestrians. If we cyclists want a fair hearing for motorists, then we must put our own house in order, too.
Thats an awful lot of nearly’s…. but not actual collisions !!!!
I was nearly hit by a car on Tuesday as I was using a pedestrian crossing and the driver jumped the red light.
I am sure the old lady knocked over on a crossing by a Ummm “careful” cyclist would some what disagree with you as would the chap whom called the ambulance for her. was cyclist caught NO he was off like a shot, never to be seen again, rather typical. I believe he broke her shoulder should you care.
As I would disagree also concerning the idiot on a bike that cost me £210 for a passenger mirror he kindly removed as he flew by on the inside whilst rest of us silly car drivers where stuck in a que. hopefully he hurt himself quite a lot, did he stop to offer reimbursement NO!!! did he stop and say sorry for colliding with my stationary car NO did he heck, he had a major wobble and carried on a quick as he could to get away.
As a car driver what would happen to me should I drive away from an accident knowingly…. you work it out.
I don’t create a nanny state, I don’t want a nanny state what I and most drivers want is a level playing field when YOU take charge of your own actions I want people to know that if you step out in that road with out looking you will be hurt, just as if you put your hand in fire and stop hiding behind the usual wine “it’s your fault” that I was on facebook.
What a complete **** you are Sir. Another member of the ‘Holier than Thou’ cyclists group I presume – or do you obey all traffic signs and signals, look behind you before pulling out into the road to overtake parked vehicles or other obstructions, clearly signal when you intend to change direction (e.g. turn right), have lights front and back which are bright enough to be seen but not blindingly so (nor flash which is contrary to the Highway Code if they are the only lights on your bike) and offer all other road users and pedestrians due courtesy and consideration?? Oh, I’m sorry, my mistake. Like Unicorns and the Tooth Fairy, they don’t exist. Silly me!
I have never been hit by a car as a pedestrian but have been hit by two cyclists in the last three years while walking along a country lane, in dawn’s light, on the correct side of the road with a hi vis jacket but the idiots were looking at their front wheel rather than the road ahead
i think its you that needs to shut up!! Cyclists do not pay to use the same tarmac as all motorists do! why should you be able to cause accidents (which cyclists do in untold numbers), and then have no comeback?
if people wish to use the roads, they should ALL pay. Why is so much emphasis being put on the safety of pedestrians and cyclists? neither pay to use the roads, and yet they cause a high number of the RTAs reported.
I totally agree with a previous comment made, what ever happened to the green cross code? Schools were advised to stop teaching it to the kids, so ultimately these people are at fault for not educating youngsters of the dangers faced when crossing a road!!!
As for 20mph zones, these are a complete fallacy and will only contribute to air pollution due to slowing sown, stopping in these areas!
Any that have speed cameras are just cash cows for local authorities!
The upkeep of roads is paid for out of general and council taxes. If you pay either or both of those, you pay for the upkeep of the roads, whether or not you own a car.
The subject of paying to use the roads often comes up in discussions.
The Vehicle Excise Duty is based on emissions and is a levy placed on a vehicle directly relating to the amount of pollution caused by the vehicle.
Many cars and vans do not pay VED because they cause no harmful emissions.
The answer is simple:
If you dont want to pay to use the roads buy a clean car and stop polluting the planet.
You seem to be unaware of the fact that motoring and fuel taxes do not cover the cost of motoring to the country.
The motorists in this country are actually subsided by the taxpayers, including cyclists.
https://www.racfoundation.org/assets/rac_foundation/content/downloadables/fuel%20for%20thought%20-%20ifs%20observation%20piece.pdf
Far as I’m concerned, they should place some kind of tax and opinsurance on cyclists. Oh, and horses for that matter.
At last someone with a bit of common sense cyclists should be made to register she’s have to pay road tax and compulsory insurance
Where I live cyclist seem to think they have a right to ride on the pavement.
All cyclists should pay road tax there a nuisance and they don’t pay road tax why not they use the road just like the rest of us
The upkeep of roads is paid for out of general and council taxes. If you pay either or both of those, you pay for the upkeep of the roads, whether or not you own a car.
The subject of paying to use the roads often comes up in discussions.
The Vehicle Excise Duty is based on emissions and is a levy placed on a vehicle directly relating to the amount of pollution caused by the vehicle.
Many cars and vans do not pay VED because they cause no harmful emissions.
The answer is simple:
If you dont want to pay to use the roads buy a clean car and stop polluting the planet.
You seem to be unaware of the fact that motoring and fuel taxes do not cover the cost of motoring to the country.
The motorists in this country are actually subsided by the taxpayers, including cyclists.
https://www.racfoundation.org/assets/rac_foundation/content/downloadables/fuel%20for%20thought%20-%20ifs%20observation%20piece.pdf
Buy a clean car?
No such thing – there are manufacture pollution, electricity supply losses, tyre debris, etc, and where do I get £20,000 from to replace my aging car?
ermmm cyclists are a danger because cars swerve to avoid them and end up crashing into something else. Many cyclist ride without using any common sense and I see many squeezing down blind side of lorries and buses and it’s no surprise when they sadly end up under wheels or something.
And yet not so long ago a cyclist In London went to prison for killing a pedestrian. All too often I get undercut by cyclists and then have to overtake again 100 yards down the road. Wait in the queue like everyone else. If I knock one over when turning left, even though they are breaking the law it becomes my fault
A female pedestrian in the process of texting walked into my car the other day and fell to the ground badly grazing her arm. I wasn’t even moving…..
So, having just read an article packed with statistics that show flagrant disregard for speed limits, you claim that ‘the majority of motorists obey speed restrictions’. Seriously! The only time I ever see the majority of drivers obeying speed restrictions is when there is a speed camera, or better, an average speed camera. It’s amazing how vigilant drivers become when there’s a real risk of points and a fine.
Well yes, but half of these 20mph limits are bloody silly, either on a little side street were your a idiot or lucky to get past 15mph unless you like to crash, to miles of a larger open road being 20mph for no reason what so ever other than a school at one end, fine 20 mph past school, but for the next 3 miles? Really?
It’s about time cyclists were picked up by speed cameras. You can often see them, arse clenched, head down peddling like a demented windmill, downhill for gods sake, all to try and go faster, and I can assure you, they can easily hit over 20 or 30 mph, which means they can break the speed limit.
The official response to this suggestion of speeding is that because there is no legal oblication to have cycles fitted with a device to measure speed, there is no offence of exceeding a speed limit on a bicycle that is not required to have fitted a device to inform the rider of the speed they are travelling at.
That said, this comment set is about 20mph speed limits and there are official statistics that show that although the number of accidents reduces in 20mph speed zones, the number of serious or fatal accidents goes up. My local council has admitted that is the case in more than half of the 20mph zones they introcuced, but claim that there is insufficient funds to remove all the signs they put up.
Clearly we are not talking about all drivers.
they do have the right away look it up
Absolutely. Nowadays, heaven forbid that a kid might possibly do something wrong and run out into the road. Mine never did, because I taught them how to approach and cross a road safely.
The 20 zones were originally around schools where pedestrians are not able to take responsibility for themselves, or children. Now they are all over the place that have list that edge they first had, where a 20 zone was not very common and for a good reason
100% agree I think they should bring in jay walking laws especially for those on phones or who push buggies in the road without making sure road clear first.
they do have the right away on any road without a sidewalk that is residential pedestrian have 3 feet in most states of the road also most state laws say there is no reason to hit a pedestrian . they have the right away . pedestrian have the right away at all stop sigh intersections to go 1st before any car in any directions but no one follows that. people in cars who think pedestrian should be watch the cars and stay out of there way. is the person who run into other people and is there fault but says watch where I am going and back sure i dint run into you. Seriously dont hit pedestrians that have right too!
Not only that, if 86% of journeys observed within 20mph zones were above the 20mph limit then the fall in traffic accidents has little to do with 20mph. As you say it is manipulation of statistics. Edinburgh council has created huge zones where 20mph applies and even the buses regularly exceed that so the fall in accidents where pedestrians are involved has little to do with the speed and more to do with driver awareness.
Good comment. Signage could be improved!
However, although people are shown to speed in 20mph limits, the number bandied about is 26mph, now who would do 26 mph in a 30 limit? In my experience, most people drive at somewhere between 35 and 40mph in 30 limits, so if a 20mph sign reduces their speed from 35mph to 26mph then that’s got to be a good thing. I’d much rather take my chances with a car travelling at 26mph than a car travelling at 35mph, wouldn’t you? Any reduction in speed is beneficial, even if it’s not strictly within the law. And I speak as a driver, and occasional pedestrian, who has children, living on a road that has a 30mph limit on it that is rarely adhered to. It’s not me that will get hit, but my children, who do not play on the road, obviously, but that’s how accidents happen, because unexpected things happen….
That is exactly what happened in my village. Originally 30 zone, and cars regularly did 35-45. Now we have a 20 zone and traffic calming and cars do 20-30mph. So it has actually worked, and the village is now a more pleasant place to walk around, and there have been no more fatalities of pedestrians. The fact that many motorists are still breaking the law is beside the point.
Fully agree – 20mph speed limits lowers the overall speed of motorists who would otherwise be going 10 miles an hour faster. We fought hard to get our ‘rat run’ windy lane reduced to 20 and it’s made a big difference to those of us who live along it.
Only problem with slow speed limits such as 20mph is that exhaust pollution increases as most engines are only just above idle speed, add to this speed bumps and the pollution generated is even worse.
So speed related fatalities and injuries are reduced but pollution illnesses are potentially increased for those living within these zones. A no win situation.
There would be deaths – due to vehicles polluted for much longer. At 10 mph that is twice as long, but add in the extra congestion and they could be polluting for 4-6 times as long.
Driving at 10mph instead of 20mph would reduce congestion, not increase it, because more moving vehicles can be fitted into the same road space (vehicles travelling at half the speed can safely drive closer to the vehicle in front) and there is less stop-start driving.
PJR, your comment is a complete myth. Research the cause of pollution levels in built up areas and you will discover that pollution is the highest where congested traffic is moving at a slow speed. It only takes one or two vehicles to stop or slowdown to cause other vehicles to do the same. If we lived in a perfect world then your comment would be true but alas we do not.
I believe the optimum speed for capacity is about 12 to 15 mph.
Worked out from braking distances in the highway code.
What a load of bollocks.. Look how the motorway fouls up when some idiot pulls into the middle lane and drives slower than everyone else.
They will find that a lot of people go a different way
We will soon be back to having a man with a red flag walking in front to prevent driving at more than 4mph!
I’d vote for that.
The 6.2% fall is from the accident rate just prior to each 1 mph reduction, so it won’t reach zero with a 16 mph reduction. For example, given an arbitrary accident rate of 100, a 6.2% fall for each 1 mph drop in speed with an overall drop of 16 mph would reduce it to around 36 (a reduction of roughly two-thirds).
Having said that, the accident rate varies with speed (and other things), so there will not be a constant drop in accident rate for each 1 mph drop in speed. If they’re taking the average for a 1 mph reduction all speeds (and roads, etc.), the figure will be so vague as to be next to useless for predicting the result in some specific situation.
I don’t have a problem with 20 mph speed limits but they need to be used in appropriate places i.e near schools and not on roads nowhere near schools or maybe play parks.
I have never seen anyone monitoring these 20 mph limits. Complete waste of public money.
I have seen them being monitored by an officer hiding behind a plain car at the bottom of a hill and almost everyone got flashed by him which is entrapment. Luckily i was not one of them but thought that he was surely doing his job illegally.Join the discussion…
They’re necessary, but unenforced and, mostly ignored in my area! I’ve even had people overtake me when I’ve been observing the 20mph – that’s how much people care about the damage they could do!
I’ve been undertaken by a car driver in a 30mph zone passing a secondary school.
I wouldn’t make the straw man arguments fallacy that all people do this, that would be a silly claim.
I do not believe that the only reason we obey laws is because there are police around to enforce them. We obey laws that we understand and that we think are sensible. Most 20-mph limits are totally unnecessary and so too are speed humps and other speed reduction measures. We spend millions on trying simultaneously to ease traffic flow and also to slow it down. Nonsense!
I drive a car which is quite low and I’m constantly driving over speed humps which are too high and I consistently scrape the underneath of my car, even though I drive very slowly over them and I feel they will cause damage to my car which I’ll have to pay to be repaired and at considerable cost. In most cases I have no alternative route unless I’m prepared to drive an extra 10+ miles to avoid. ☹️
I totally agree with you Marco, these speed humps or ‘sleeping policemen’ as I’ve heard them called are a nightmare. If I were you I would claim from the local council for any damage caused to your car. I wonder if there is any actual legislation which enables councils to install these monstrosities. They all seem to vary in height also! I heard an MG sports car go over one recently, and he was going at a walking pace and it scraped the underside of his car. If your car is damaged lodge a claim from the council responsible.
I agree. After sustaining damage that cost me over $400 a few years ago, I now do not straddle the humps but have one set of wheels over the centre. It has not only protected my underside and and front wheel toe-in but I no longer damage the side walls of my low profile tyres through scraping on the edges of roughend /damaged humps.
Then your car is clearly unroadworthy and therefor illegal.
Rubbish. All sports cars are low slung, some front spoilers almost touch the floor, yet they still,pass an mot, so therefore they must be road legal.
My car is a Rover 75. Not entirely a low slung sports car. If I straddle speed humps, in the vast majority of cases, the plastic moulding protecting the sump will scrape, it can be very disconcerting! I always run the offside wheels over the middle of the hump – no scraping and it ensures your tracking doesn’t get put out of line.
However, I also think that speed humps and 20mph restrictions are overused.
The problem with 20 mph zones is that if they cover wide areas and not just areas where they really help the driver has to keep checking his speedometer to check that he is not exceeding the limit. This can cause more accidents than if the limit is not in place. Speed restrictions should only be put in place where they really help. This problem of checking your speed too often also occurs in average 50 mph zones.
Yes we have most of the roads around were I live with the (20 mph limit ) for which I agree with most definitely. The only problem is there are to many BRAIN DEAD drivers on the road, that think this do’s not apply to them. Keep up the good work.
20MPH zones are everywhere, but there are no police or cameras to deter impatient motorists. In theory 20mph is ideal in built up areas, but there are some motorists who believe they won’t get caught.
The vast majority of 20mph area in my locality are at the schools. At start and kick out time you would be lucky to do 5 mph as parents block the roads and pavements making it dangerous for both children and other car users. During the remaining 22 hours, weekends and School holidays there is no need for a 20mph limit. It would make far more sense to operate a variable speed limit in these key, rather than operating a blanket speed reduction that is not required 95% of the time. Crossing patrols turn on the school crossing lights, just add the 20mph speed limit sign at the same.
Totally agree Mike and when drivers can see that the lower limit is for good reason they are more likely to abide by it.
I agree with all you say Mike.In Germany they have 20mph limits when the schools are open.
That would be great then, as school always seem to be in bloody holiday.
I have added my response here but could have added it to most comments. 20MPH achieves nothing. Pedestrians take more chances (not to mention lack of Green Cross Code knowledge) because they can see cars poodling along, so do other drivers who will suddenly pull out much more frequently possibly causing more accidents. I live in London and some boroughs’ have almost blanket 20MPH limits, Hackney and Islington come to mind, this includes main routes. You are constantly watching the speedometer which to me is no different to using a mobile phone. Also my car, and I suspect a lot of cars, are not geared for this. I find it almost impossible to do 20MPH. I am either in a gear that is too low and will cause more noise and pollution or in a higher gear which means the car can run away quite easily into a higher speed. Also normal driving patterns to avoid other road users etc. means you will definitely go over that speed. If it is a short section near a school etc. then that can work as I have always slowed down near schools even prior to this speed limit. So it needs to be applicable only at certain times. I also believe that drifting along at these low speeds causes you to lose attention and have small prangs. You tend to get that on motorways when they have long sections of 50MPH. Do a google maps view of the M1 near Milton Keynes and you will see icons with the word Car Crash on that section every single day as everyone is trying to obey the speed limit and slowing down suddenly and braking etc. This happens in the 20MPH zones too you end up developing tunnel vision where you just alternate your gaze from the speedometer to the car in front, forget using your mirror, you are too busy making sure the car in front does not suddenly slow down and you are obeying the speed limit.
…but accidents have gone down.
Join the discussion…whether they have gone down or not where there are 20 mph limits on roads outside of council estates which are just normal ex 30 mph limits everyone is driving at least 30 mph still, so reason why accidents have gone down doesn’t mean that it is because the road speed is now 20 mph which no one is obeying any way.
Probably becaus the drivers have either gone a different way, or given up. This happened to me with Meadow Hall Shopping Centre. It used to take me abot 12 to 15 minutes to get ther ( about 17 miles down the M1, but then, when the cameras on these so called “Smart” motorways were installed, it began to take up to 40 minutes for the same journey at certain times. I just gave up, and now I don’t go.
Add on Southwark
In Australia the speed limit is 20mph at school time . All other times normal 30mph..
Not wishing to sound like a cynic but all they had to do was watch and observe. I’ve be trying to seek assistance from my local Borough and County Council to reduce and enforce the speed limit in my road. And they go through the No Entry the wrong way.
Limits without inforcement is a waste of time on any road. And when passed by others significantly faster than I it pulls everyone faster especially at higher limits even in the variable limit areas.
Shows how ill informed these road safety people are.
London setting an example? Glasgow has had 20mph in the city centre for a while now. It’s made no difference huge waste of money.
Why don’t we do something sensible, like have VARIABLE speed limits? In France on a motorway, if it’s raining you can do 110kmph and if it’s not, you can do 130kmph. Common sense, isn’t it. Same true of 20mph zones. If they’re in a school area, on a school day, during school hours, then by all means let those signs flash 20mph. If it’s during the Summer Hols or at 2am, well no, let’s revert to 30mph.
Much of the reason for introducing 20mph zones is, in any case, because people of all ages (not just kids) do not seem to know any basic road sense. They’ll happily gabble into mobile phones without looking and children dash out, unaccompanied, into the road. Whatever happened to public information films and parents (and schools) drumming into little-ones the basics of road safety. Once you’ve learned it, you don’t forget it.
Variable limits according to the weather, but who decides if it’s rain or spray or just a wet road? and in a journey of just a few miles the conditions can change from pouring rain to bright sun and dry road. Who will police these new rules, the police are far to busy chasing hate crimes!!!
Agree Caroline. The mental attitude of everyone….drivers of all vehicles, cyclists, pedestrians – old and young…needs to change. Speed kills and an appropriate speed is necessary on different roads and at certain times. Motorways need variable speed limits according to weather and traffic volume; while a big decrease in speed (30mph) is vital when entering any residential area, whether in cities or villages on the main highways. These should be decreased further at specific times/places to say 20mph outside places of education, hospitals, and places where the elderly and disabled are resident. If these measures are not adhered to, people should be heavily fined immediately…zero tolerance. LIFE IS PRECIOUS so let us all use our highways safely with common sense and respect for others at ALL TIMES.
Speed itself does not kill. Inappropriate use of speed for the conditions does.
An echo of what I have said for years
Exactly, which is why speed is an OUTPUT of the driving equation, not an input.
I would also say there’s a case for introducing a system I saw in the Netherlands for many traffic lights. At night (or or even outside of rush hour) they just flash amber, which means you can go, but you must take care of other traffic as you would at a non-traffic light junction. It would prevent needless hold-ups when there’s no other traffic around. It worked, and had that thing which councils and governments seem to lack – ‘common sense’.
Agree on variable speeds, based in weather too. In for, drivers seem to believe an invisible hand will protect them driving fast so that they cannot stop within the visibility difference.
The twenty mile per hour speed limit, in force throughout the area where I live, has a major and serious flaw in that it is not enforced. Motorists, like myself, who try and stay within the posted limit, are almost always ‘tailgated’ and intimidated. The ‘tailgating’ drivers know that there is not, and never will be, anybody about to enforce the law and stop their bullying.
Simple truth, if there is not a camera for it, to guarantee a prosecution, then it is no longer a motoring offence in the eyes of the police.
If it is not enforced it then becomes a complete waste of time and money
Or maybe they have the sense to realise that the limit is stupid and you are being a bit a of a pain. At what point do you stop being compliant and stand up against the stupidity? When it’s down to 5mph? When you need a man with a red flag in front?
Before reducing speed limits, we should enforce compliance with existing limits then see what happens to accident rates. Our road networks are not designed for the current levels of traffic and if we followed H&S guidelines for industry, pedestrians would be segregated from traffic. This would also allow more efficient use of highways, reduce emissions and lower fuel usage as well as shortening journey times. Motorists would then be more tolerant of slower speed restrictions on the “final mile” of their journey instead of being frustrated by continual speed limit changes!
Ever noticed a lot of roads are now being speed reduced, build a road 70, stick houses near 60 or 50, then build next to road 30, oh now let’s add a school 20. NO, build away from the road nor on it no need to slow traffic then.
I’d much prefer to keep looking at road than glancing down to see if I’m doing 20mph. If i’m doing a bit more but looking at road more likely to stop and not hit anything where as that couple second glance to check speed could be the difference in hitting something or someone. We all know when we should slow down but surely more dangerous trying to see if we are dong exactly 20 or 30 mph.
One reason I like my Molly Maps (satnav) is so that I can flick my eyes across to the screen which, being on the dashboard, means I’m not adjusting my eyesight there and back to and from the speedo. I believe that satnavs are pretty accurate with regard to speed.
SAT-NAVs ? can only indicate you speed from satellites, they are never correct to the degree of your speedo, especially if you have a digital one, using your sat nav to check your speed could end up with a speeding ticket be careful!
Actually, Satnavs are more accurate than speedos. The speed sensing tech for speedos is common whether the readout is digital or analogue. Speedos, by law, must not under-report the speed, but may over-read the speed by up to 10%. This is to account for varying tyre wear and pressures (and why you must have the correct overall diameter and so circumference of tyre for the car, regardless of inner rim size). This means you may be actually going up to 10% slower than your speedo readout shows. Satnavs on the other hand are not affected by environmental conditions such as tyres, and give an absolute and accurate readout (albeit averaged over 1 second intervals), otherwise it would not position you on the map correctly
sound, you found that, I found this:
“On a straight and level road, at constant speed, the GPS-derived speed reading will be accurate.
However, there is usually some lag in the reading, and accuracy can be affected by GPS signal quality, bends in the road, inclines and speed changes.”
Personally I would rather use the device which has been purposely built to record speed instead of a device made to calculate routes, with a reasonable error margin in my favour, but that is just me.
We could discuss this for weeks dependant on which nav system be it aftermarket, factory fitted, age, software etc, for example I had a VDO nav on my screen which broke so I now have a TomTom both show different speeds by roughly 3mph yet my speedo show bang on 30 one old (VDO) one new (TomTom).
You could also spend days discussing positioning, your speedo in mostly large and in a position where in can be viewed, screen navs are small and suffer sun glare, factory fitted are usually in the dash where your radio normally is so you have to look down for a rather small figure when some idiot whilst updating his status on facebook walks into the road in front of you.
Its all personal preference, but I have to wonder at your faith in the positioning on the map correctly quite often mine puts me on the A55 when I am travelling next to it and that can last up to 60 odd seconds before it recalculates and as for factory ones we quite often have them in for software updates due to them putting the vehicle in Devon when its actually in North Wales.
As said its down to personal preference as to which one you want to put your trust in concerning your speed.
Sounds like another Theresa May, two pathalogical lairs
And Jeremy Core Bum is not?
I actually admire May, she’s battle with the exit, battled with internal fools constantly, at the start of the exit she had an election, and got in again lets not forget this, where were the other parties, hiding because they did not want a bar of this exit so they let her back in. only now are they starting to raise their heads and whinge.
To me a non political you would have thought the gravity of what we are doing would have sunk in with these so called educated people, we are leaving the EU, the 1st country to do so, a massive step, so you would have hoped these politicians would have put their agendas and their showboating to one side and work as a team to get the UK out of this with the best deal we could hope for… nope! in stead the once most powerful country in the world can’t even make a decision now on what’s for dinner, pathetic, to the point you have labour publically announcing to vote against anything May says good or bad, WOW that’s they way to a good deal! we are the laughing stock of the EU, and all those morons who want us to vote to stop Brexit , brilliant…. and what kind of a deal do you think we would get for that? I thin kit rhymes with TWIT but stats sh!
I think we should all rally around and support May not for the best conservative deal, not for the best labour deal but for the best UK deal as this is the most import part the UK as a whole, wants its done they back to the silly inter party bickering about who would have done it best, now is the time to rally, and as someone once said “fight them on the beaches”
stop talking claptrap like may & MPs in general & answer the question you fool & stick to the subject, you’d obviously make a good/bad MP like the rest of them!
What if they’re broke, or can’t get a signal, or don’t recognise a road?
Exactly, how many updates do you do to your cars speedo, opposed to your sat nav? its not all maps, it is also satellite rendering and signal speed navigation base software, most people never update the device if it is not free.
I didn’t with the VDO as it was only maps you could buy on an SD card, satellite software was never updated which is possibly why it was showing a difference in speed to the now TomTom I now have with free updates, it just matter of preference on where you are comfortable looking.
Even if you on a road it does not recognise it still works out the speed. Its just a case 3d trig based on two successive reads, which on most units are 1 second apart.
I Believe the car’s speedo is set 2 mph faster than satnav
The sat nav is far more accurate than your speedo which by law must never under read. I validated my Tom Tom (ps I don’t work for them or get any payment for this) against the average speed cameras and it was within 0.1mph of the recorded speed.
last night we went out in my wife’s car so out of interest with all the comments on how wonderful sat navs are, my wife’s car has a factory fit tomtom up to date maps and software, so I plugged my tomtom Via in as well again free updates on this so up to date.
set the post codes in both and commenced trip both tomtoms only showed the same speed once during the journey (Below 25mph)most times there where 1 to 2 mph of difference between them, so which one do you trust?
42mph factory one (not clever enough to use the cars speed sensors)
44mph via stuck in window
both showing full satellite signal.
Interesting, if somewhat boring experiment, wasn’t repeated on the way home due to severe lack of interest.
if you changed worn wheels for new is your speedo corrected, put chuncky tyres on can change your speedo
You were clearly never taught to drive properly. The UK system of driver training is of a lower standard than some in Africa. You should be looking ahead most of the time while doing quick checks of the following speed, left mirror, right mirror, rear view mirror in sequence. eg Ahead – speed – Ahead – left mirror – Ahead – right mirror – Ahead – rearview mirror – Ahead – speed etc. And you dynamically adjust the system based on circumstances, maybe an extra speed check or mirror check if something has caught you attention.
Good drivers know what’s in front of them for over 2 seconds driving and whatever speed you do people check it. At higher speeds one covers longer distances.
I use my cruise control
.Does not work at 20mph I have found 27mph is the lowest it will work at.
20mph limits are a very necessary requirement in areas where there are children playing and also it tends to be an area where older people are a lot slower crossing roads, it would not be practical to have zebra crossings on every street, drivers should obey speed limits they are there for a very good reason, there are too many drivers on the roads who think that just because they have fast cars they should be able to drive them at speed. I would love to see an invention that would automatically slow down cars to the speed limit for the roads that they are driving along. ps. I am a driver.
To be fair, a modern Suzuki Celerio of Ford Ka is probably more “capable” than a 1960’s sports car. yet despite these advances in comfort and performance, roads and legislation are much slower in their advancement. Within the next few years – before the technological dream of self driving cars there is a greater possibility that in-car GPS (in a factory-fitted sat nav) could be linked to a speed governor. mainly because its an easier technological challenge. It’s not technically difficult at all for new cars (in the future) to have such devices – it would not be perfect but would cover a high percentage of instances where people feel the need to speed. Then, collision detectors are becoming more common and again these could be mandated by law – in much the same way that seatbelts became mandatory. This combination would be even more effective. There are lots of clever technological things that could be done but if we look at the lowest common denominator then, pragmatically, we could go a long way to reducing deaths and accidents. Further, network communication between cars (we are into self driving car territory here) could mean that we could do away with junction signals and traffic lights which could greatly increase traffic flow and therefore most peoples reason to speed – where that reason is time. There are others that just like the thrill of going fast or going hard round corners – the fairground was invented for such people.
Hopefully the police will lead by example and fit such speed governors to their cars. It’s essential to keep our officers safe.
Actually GPS is woefully inadequate in built-up areas. The technology for remote control is years off. Civil liberty campaigners will be up in arms (ironically if we still had ID cards the whole Windrush saga wouldn’t have happened). So don’t get your hopes up. Plus you’d need an “ambulance mode” for rushing someone to hospital (and yes it is legal to break road traffic laws if you are transporting a patient in an emergency as the legal definition of an ambulance is quite vague).
Indeed. My car’s top speed is limited by the manufacturer to 155mph, so I can’t legally drive it to its full potential on German Autobahns.
Are you saying that in the absence of a 20mph speed limit you would ignore the children and the elderly? Are you really telling us that you are are incapable of behaving responsibly without a law forcing you to do so?
Or are you a saint and all those other people are wicked?
20mph speed limits are not necessary for safety. They are not the correct instrument, as speed cannot ensure safety. Observation and *appropriate* speed is. “OARC” – Observation, Anticipation, Reaction, Control. 4 words that do the most to ensure safe driving, and safe pedestrians. Speed is an OUTPUT of that process, not an input.
A neighbouring village to mine has just had a blanket 20mph limit imposed. For what? In the 20+ years driving through it, I’ve never once encountered or even heard of there being a problem. All the roads have parked cars meaning traffic is already restrained, including in the vacinity of the local primary school. Restricting to 20mph also makes passing cyclists more dangerous and obstructive to other traffic, as you can’t pass them quickly enough to not be an obstruction and keep traffic moving.
Placing a 20mph restriction past schools during the morning and afternoon periods when the children are entering or leaving does have merit, except the increased number of parked cars on the ‘school run’ outside the local school already means traffic is slower than 20mph anyway, so sill a futile exercise.
We live in a rural community and we have a few 20mph areas especially around our local schools.
Unfortunately, I have had to inform the head teacher on a number of occasions of my experience as it is in some cases parents who have or are dropping their children off at the school who not only ignore the limits set up for their child’s benefits but also they are very bad at acknowledging the road markings when it comes to parking.
I also see parents allowing their children to alight the car on the traffic side of their cars.
Then there are the ‘white van’ drivers who ignore the speed limits in our village as though they are not meant to.be for them.
Well said!
Yes they are. The money should be spent on teaching pedestrians road safety and children. When you have council’s like Oxford turning the Cowley road into a pedestrian zone while still allowing buses, lorrys, cars etc to then zig zag between islands and pedestrians now thinking they have the right of way over larger vehicles then yes you are going to cause more accidents not reduce. My Dad has always said the ROAD IS FOR CARS,THE PAVEMENTS FOR PEDESTRIANS. You cannot start mixing it up as a shared bit of tarmac. Another idea is why not spend the money on BANNING PEDESTRIANS WEARING EARPHONES AND STAREING AT THERE MOBILE PHONE SCREEN. THE AMOUNT OF TIME I HAVE HAD TO SUDDENLY BRAKE BECAUSE SOME IDIOT OR WORSE OFFENDERS ARE CHILDREN,HAVE WALKED STRAIGHT OUT IN FRONT BECAUSE A.THEY NEVER HEARD ME AND B.THEY NEVER SAW ME BECAUSE THEY WERE STAREING AT THEIR PHONE SCREENS. AS USUAL ITS THE POOR MOTORISTS WHO ARE BLAMED. AND WE ALL TALK ABOUT QUALITY OF AIR IN CITY CENTRES BUT IF YOU REDUCE ALL TRAFFIC SPEED LIMITS TO 20MPH WON’T THAT CAUSE MORE CONGESTION SPREAD OVER A LARGER AREA AS IT WILL HAVE A KNOCK ON AFFECT. ITS JUST A GIMMICK TO LINE SOMEONES POCKET IN PARLIAMENT AGAIN. IN OXFORD THAMES VALLEY POLICE HAVE SAID TIME AND TIME AGAIN THE 20MPH IS NOT ENFORCEABLE AND WONT WASTE TIME AND MONEY THEY HAVEN’T GOT TO SIT IN EVERY SIDE STREET AND PADESTRIANISED ZONE TO CATCH SOMEONE DOING 21MPH. TEACH PADESTRIANS AND CHILDREN ESPECIALLY TO BE MORE CONSCIOUS OF THEIR SURROUNDINGS WHEN THERE ARE MOTORVEHICLES ABOUT. A CAR OR BUS DOESN’T WALK OUT IN FRONT OF A PEDESTRIAN SO WHY ARE PADESTRIANS ALLOWED TO WALK OUT IN FRONT OF CARS AND BUSES AND THEN BLAME THE DRIVER.COME ON GROW UP.
COULD NOT AGREE MORE!
Agreed. It is now time also to get rid of electric cars, as they are silent runners so pedestrians wearing earphones will have no chance whatsoever.
Much cleaner air and as we say, pedestrians shoukd use their eyes.
Perhaps they pick on the motorist as no-one would be able to spell pedestrian properly to enable them to put up road signs.
What we need is variable speed limits according to time of day. We all agree that during school hours the speed limit should be 20 mph. But outside these hours and during school holidays the limit could revert to 30mph. Surely we can have solar powered signs to cope with this and remove the frustration of crawling along when most drivers exceed the #0 mph limit
If you observe the 20mph limit you get under and overtaken by cyclists on any road with a slight gradient. Cyclists will not be targeted as it would put more people off riding a bike.
I live in Dunstable. blanket 20 MPH on all roads except the 2 main roads. I too have been overtaken by cyclist’s. Most Drivers seem to fluctuate between 20 & 25 including myself as they try to keep to 20 There are fixed speed camera’s set only a couple of MPH over 20 as a friend of mine found out being”flashed” Twice in 2 months doing 24 mph result one speed awareness course and 3 points on his licence after 40 yrs clean licence. Nice little earner for the police and council . I avoid the fixed camera roads as its so easy to make a mistake. You get no reply from the council if the 20 limit has actually reduced accidents, and justified the huge expense of putting it in in the first place.
I always keep to the speed limit in 20 and 30 mph zones, I understand the reason for them. I am far more likely to speed on national speed limit roads, especially when it is a good clear road with good visibility. I think people just need to use their brains a bit more.
The problem in the UK is a mental attitude, most car/van/lorry drivers once they are in a motorised vehicle cannot control their emotions, unlike myself I always drive below the speed limit. Driving at 15mph in a twenty zone is very easy for a intelligent person such as myself, unlike it would seem by 99.9% of the so called motorists on this web site, and any one who whingers that their vehicle cannot cruise at below 20 mph should not be in control of a vehicle that kills other humans.
“I always drive below the speed limit.” This can cause road rage.
Ah, but you’re not one of the most are you? It’s all the other people who are evil.
It is wise to keep well below the speed limit if you are using your mobile phone.
If we continuously follow the ‘logic’ that every 1 mile per hour reduction in speed saves more lives we will end up creating a vast new employment opportunity of people walking in front of cars waving red flags.
Motorists seem to generally view road legislators as a money grabbing enemy. This is kind of supported by a visible increase in appalling driving that now goes undetected because the focus is on speed cameras not cops in patrol cars.
If the legislators took a more intelligent approach and used powers of persuasion rather than threats and fines the roads would be safer and probably less congested.
Giving people opportunities to behave well, rather than higher detection of bad behaviour or harsher punishment of it works far better, apparently.
I’m out & about on a fairly regular basis after midnight. At that time of night I ignore 20 mph limits & drive to the conditions. In other words I read the road & use my brain, in some places I might be doing 15 mph, in others 30 mph, it’s known as road craft, something we were taught when I passed my test in 1966 & my HGV class 1 in 1985. Blanket 20 mph zones are ridiculous & pointless. 20 mph outside of schools even on a wide main road is fine, but NOT at 2.00 am. During the day with more people around, again I drive to the conditions. It’s far safer to be constantly looking ahead for possible dangerous situations, than looking down at your speedometer making sure you don’t get caught doing 22 mph. Then there’s the extra pollution caused by having to stay in lower gears to keep at 20 mph, but that of course is another discussion…………………..
Here here!! My thoughts exactly!!
to even consider making people slow down to 20mph on a straight road, going past a school during the holidays is ridiculous. When a thing like that is ridiculous, people then do not respect other notices or restrictions that might not be quite so silly.
I try to keep to the speed limit, most especially in 20 & 30mph areas, but I am constantly being “pushed” by tailgaters to go faster, which I refuse to do. It can be quite scary when the vehicle behid is an HGV.
I, and many others I suspect drive in fear of being caught for speeding, constantly looking at the speedo.i.e. taking the eye of the road momentarily, causing accidents. I think there should be an investigation into this.
Who constantly looks at their speed?
Good drivers know that speed slows unless you push the accelerator or you go downhill etc.
I, and many others I suspect, live in fear of being caught speeding, constantly looking at the Speedo, i.e. taking the eye of the road momentarily, causing accidents. I think this sort of thing should be investigated.
The real problem is the lack of personal responsibility of pedestrians, and this includes parents who fail to look after their children. What pedestrians need to realise is that if you step out in front of a car, without looking as many do, it is going to hurt, even at 20 mph. Many pedestrians think that they can just step into the road and it’s up to the driver to avoid them. What we need is the offence of jaywalking as they have in the US. We also need to improve awareness of pedestrians, especially children of the dangers of walking into the road without looking. Remember the Green Cross Code adverts?
Exactly, take responsibility of your own well being instead of expecting car drivers to do it for you, we have enough to do just driving, cyclists are just as bad at this as well, even if you slowed us right down to 5mph it wont stop people being hit simply because you have still not targeted the source of the problem:
PEOPLE, being more aware of their surroundings and take more responsibility foe their actions.
tackle this and accidents will drop.
The big menace to drivers, and danger to pedestrians, is the sheer volume of people with earphones in listening to music so they can’t hear traffic.It makes them think they are impervious and safe – WRONG!! The other ridiculous scenario I’ve experienced is a pedestrian stepping out to cross the road without looking and not seeing the silent electric car. She walked straight into it, them remonstrated with the driver – as if it was his fault!! Pedestrians have a greater responsibility to keep themselves safe, which is in their hands. Remember the Green Cross Code?
Mobile phones and car drivers, anyone?
Yes, an people are still to thick, in the 1920s an MP said we need a ruling about these motorcars because of all the people being run over. Another MP said how many sheep or goats did you run over on your way in? None was his reply. MP number one said see, if animals can learn so can the people! Alas in the 100 years since they have got worse with headphones an iPods on!!!
They have jaywalking as an offence because the roads are so huge, it makes sense. We don’t need people being fined for crossing roads over here, they’re tiny in comparison.
There’s that phrase often bandied about, “responsible adult”. It seems the so-called road safety campaigners have conveniently omitted that element. If they really do believe ‘prevention is better than cure’ they would be championing the ‘Green Cross Code’ campaign that was very high profile when I was a child, which worked, and ensuring those responsible adults to live up to their responsibility to properly train the children in their care in road safety. Instead, the campaigners project this lack of responsibility onto the motorist. I have never forgotten the Green Cross Code message, and always look both ways twice before crossing.
Weren’t there more accidents in the past than now, though?
So there is a reduction in casualties on roads which have a 20 mph limit is there? Well then, all that needs to be done is to put a 20 mph speed limit on ALL roads and ‘hay presto’ hardly one will ever be killed or injured on our roads again. magic.
It would certainly have a significant impact on the 1,800 road deaths and 5,000 serious injuries every year.
In this technological age all cars should be fitted with automatic speed control systems, I am sure more than half of drivers don’t know what that dial is with an indicator that moves across and back, even on motorway road works with average speed limits a lot seem to think it only applies to others not them, 20mph zones, done’t make me laugh very few abide by those,
So…. Either all these drivers are all homicidal maniacs in the grip of some terrible mass hysteria or maybe – just maybe – the speed limits are unnecessarily low…
That’s a false dichotomy and excludes the wide range if possible combinations.
When the speed limit in cities was a uniform 30mph motorists knew what the limit was. In Edinburgh 20mph is now the limit on some streets and 30 on others. In driving on a single journey across the city, the limit can change half a dozen times. Trying to work out whether the limit is 20 or 30 on the road that you are driving on can be a serious distraction, especially at night.
Yes Neil, It’s an absolute nightmare! Our town, just outside Edinburgh, has also recently introduced a blanket 20mph. It’s confusing for the residents never mind any tourists to the area. Can anyone honestly say that their car is designed to drive at this speed? I personally struggle to find a suitable gear. I think that most of us are in agreement that a blanket speed like this doesn’t work for many reasons.
How can a blanket limit be confusing?
‘Rear view camera in operation’. So says the sign in my back window. Along with a camera facing the rear. This combination causes a rarely seen phenomena on British roads. Backing off and following at a safe distance.
Nothing discourages the bully more than being filmed doing it. The signs cost 99p on a well known site. The camera doesn’t even have to be working. As the saying goes “It’s the thought that counts”.
Quality. Uncertainty increases caution, perhaps?
Virtually the whole of Southport’s B roads are now 20mph. There are very few people that observe the speed limit. I would say most are doing 26/28 mph, so it has probably lowered speeds by about 10mph!
It is almost a sport now to drive at 21mph and see how long it takes the person behind to get annoyed, when they should be content to be doing the same speed.
🙂
I fully agree with 20 mph zones outside of schools, but they must be the ones that come into effect when lights flash not just a blanket restriction. We have an area close to where I live that used to have a limit outside of the school, not with flashing lights, this has now been made 20 mph throughout the whole area of the town and its surrounding area. Extremely frustrating would be an understatement.
20 mph is a ludicrous limit to stick to. How about teaching pedestrians road safety – it is a road for cars after all. Or better still,p pedestrianise where you can, far more pleasant for all.
Roads are for everyone – cars are only there by licenses! One for the driver and the other for the vehicle.
my car uses more fuel at 20 mph, therefore, it pollutes more! Why do we need these ludicrously low limits in the early hours and late at night!
40 mph is the most efficient speed.
Imagine how much money we’d save, and increased security we’d have if we changed speed limits to 40mph give or take 5mph, less reliance on Wahhabi funding oil or the Russians?
20 mph zones cause pollution as it’s to high engine speed for 2nd and to low for third so the higher the engine revs the more pollution especially round schools 25mph would attain the correct speed for the right gear therefore cutting pollution and more likely to be adeherd to
Bring on electric vehicles and ban dirty diesels then.
You will always get the individuals who travel at 40 and 50 in 30 zones so is it any suprise that they will me moaning about 20. These will be the same impatient people who drive through pedestrian lights while people are still crossing on flashing amber, who jump red lights just because it is more important that they are ahead of everyone else than the lives of other people. But to those of you who are law abiding citizens and who care about other people, I emplore you to try driving in these residential streets, shopping areas, school zones (which are normally residential anyway), to just try 20 for couple of months. You will find that driving at 30 in these areas is then much too fast. You will also find that those idiots who come racing past you will not be any further ahead but waiting at the next junction.
One problem is that on most cars cruise control will not work at 20mph.
Perhaps having a man walking in front with a red flag is the way to go
20mph limits outside schools, during school hours, are understandable and eminently sensible; there’s a density of pedestrians, many with little or no road sense, so a low speed limit is essential. 15mph would be even better.
But on other urban roads 20mph limits are just silly. Cars run less efficiently so there’s more pollution, and if a previous 30mph journey is driven at 20mph it’ll take 50% longer, resulting in 50% more traffic on the road. Somewhere we have to put the responsibility on drivers and pedestrians to take responsibility for there own safety. Otherwise you could enforce a 5mph speed limit and there’d probably be no accidents at all – result! Except that life would grind to a halt.
When a proposal to introduce a 20mph zone across our estate was announced I wrote to our council to say that the speed limit would be completely ignored by the majority of drivers in the area and was a waste of time and money.
This has proved to be the case and it doesn’t take the use of any electronic devices to see this.
I know what 20mph looks like and all vehicles I see in the area are exceeding this limit including commercials and buses.
Many speed cameras across the whole area would be needed and then the council would be accused of using it as a cash cow.
Prior to the speed limit change the roads in the area were in a terrible state with many potholes which caused drivers to slow down.
The whole area had its roads resurfaced to a high standard and then the 20mph speed limit was introduced. It was very clear what the result would be.
I have only known of one 20mph limit that makes any sense. When lights flash speed is 20 mph at all other times ie school holidays or midnight lights remain OFF, common sense wish this happened across the board. Theres far to many limits these days, one trip I need to do has no less than 23 limits 30 to 50 then one place upto 60 back down to 30 then upto 40 back to 30 upto 50 back to 30 etc etc confused dot dot ??????????
The whole speed limit controversy misses out the obvious and better solution – teach children (and adults with mobiles) not to walk out in front of cars and motorcycles. The solution of reducing speed limits means that you are increasing the amount of time drivers spend in vehicles and thus effectively reducing their active lifespan. The USA determined that overall useful life expectancy dropped as speed limits dropped which is why the 55 mph limit has been raised to 80mph in many areas. The same logic applied to sunburn would have us building a shield out in space instead of teaching people to use umbrellas and sunscreen. Parents need to take responsibility for their children and stop expecting the government, or nanny state as it has become, to do it for them.