tzijlstra Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 (edited) No, you'd still get idiots speeding...... and as for people wandering into roads whilst on their mobile phones........£&@£&@@&£ @&£@&, nuff said And yet in the Netherlands the introduction of 30km zones in residential streets has seen a huge drop in accidents. Edited February 9, 2016 by tzijlstra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 Last year child deaths and serious accidents on the road rose for the first time in 20 years with 1,730 children killed by motorists: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/05/figure-for-child-road-deaths-and-serious-injuries-rises-for-first-time-in-20-years Slow down people. Was there some evidence that the increase in accident rate was caused by an increase in speed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogets Posted February 9, 2016 Author Share Posted February 9, 2016 Speed kills Lowering the speed limits works If I hit a person at 15 mph then that person has abetter chance of survival than they would if I hit them at 80mph. If it prevents a sad faced person bouncing off the roof of your bonnet then surely it was to be worth considering Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagel Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 And yet in the Netherlands the introduction of 30km zones in residential streets has seen a huge drop in accidents. Ah yes, the Netherlands. Land of logic where everything is better. To be serious, wouldn't there be a decrease in deaths for every mile per hour reduction in speed? If you wanted zero deaths on the roads you would set a limit of 0 mph, in other words ban driving, which is not practical. So the decision should be made about how many deaths on the road are acceptable, whether a reduction in speed is worth the lives saved. At some point you have to accept that deaths on the road are the price we pay for easy mobility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLAR Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 Was there some evidence that the increase in accident rate was caused by an increase in speed? There is ample evidence that the seriousness of accidents is linked to speed. The square of the speed, actually:rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
husk297 Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 I think 15 mph is far to slow causing drivers to not concentrate through bordom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 Ah yes, the Netherlands. Land of logic where everything is better. To be serious, wouldn't there be a decrease in deaths for every mile per hour reduction in speed? If you wanted zero deaths on the roads you would set a limit of 0 mph, in other words ban driving, which is not practical. So the decision should be made about how many deaths on the road are acceptable, whether a reduction in speed is worth the lives saved. At some point you have to accept that deaths on the road are the price we pay for easy mobility. I am pleased my lessons have come through to you Nagel! Well done In all seriousness - it is a case of planning roads, simple as. residential streets feed into main-streets, feed into main-roads. Respective speed limits: 30km/h, 50km/h, 80km/h. Take Hillsborough as an example - why should people do 30 on Taplin Road - nobody in their right mind does anyway. But because it is allowed, there is little one can do when someone decides to skip over the horrible road-surface at that speed. Why not just set it, and the side roads, to 15mp/h? Holme Lane/Bradfield Rd to 30mp/h and Penistone Road 40 or 50 mp/h - that way people living on, for example, Oakland Road would still be in the city a lot quicker than if everything was 30 as it is now. What the council have done so far in this area is set 'main streets' for want of a better word, to 20 mp/h WHILST LEAVING the roads feeding into it at 30. Absurd and nonsensical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
husk297 Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 Driving at 15 mph is another part of the nanny state Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLAR Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 Driving at 15 mph is another part of the nanny state You could be right. However, some of us seem to be in serious need of a nanny, so it isn't all bad:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
husk297 Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 I guess the speed bumps will not do as much damage ---------- Post added 10-02-2016 at 00:03 ---------- We could save some of the trees the council is cutting down at 15 mph they are not any danger ---------- Post added 10-02-2016 at 00:19 ---------- lets all get a bike and flog our selves up the seven hills ---------- Post added 10-02-2016 at 00:22 ---------- Lets get rid of the roads and have cycle ways Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now