GhostRiders Posted March 10, 2016 Share Posted March 10, 2016 I have and had one for about 3 years (though only 125cc)[/Quote] And did you ever actually use it? I only ask because I don't know one, not a single biker (and I know a hell of a lot of bikers) who would make the statement you did about people not looking. On an average day, even if I'm just commuting the ten minutes to work and back I see at least three examples of people who think motorcycles are completely invisible. People not looking, especially at junctions is one of the most commonly discussed things amongst bikers, you only have to look at the number of Bike inspired meme's that are out there saying things like 'open you're ******* eyes' to realise how big an issue it is. It's a way of talking, I didn't mean literally. Ditherers slow the flow of traffic down in all junctions[/Quote] I know it's a way of talking, the fact remains that unless you're travelling at peak time it doesn't take all day to safely get out of that junction. You obviously never driven a taxi. You people think that you just go and pick someone up, take them somewhere, drop them off, get paid, job done? I've got complete strangers in the car, who are all very different. Some people just get in the back and play on their phones, sometimes I've got 4 rowdy people in the car who may make me uncomfortable, sometimes people are aggressive, and some people even try and 'assist' (i.e. saying things like 'you're ok this side' (I don't like people interfering with my driving). These things are called distractions, and I manage to drive 500 miles a week on Sheffield roads like this, so enough of the 'shouldn't be driving malarky'[/Quote] Actually no, if you're driving dangerously, regardless of whether you drive five miles or 1500 miles a week you shouldn't be driving. I drive for my job, just because I drive at work it doesn't give me carte blance to act like a buffoon and take risks. I'm out of this one anyway. It doesn't look like we can have a rational discussion[/Quote] I thought we were having a rational discussion. Please point out why you think we're not. I don't take risks, if anything, because of my insurance cost, I sway more to a ditherer[/Quote] I've never suggested you personally do, there are however many taxi drivers that drive like complete imbeciles regardless of the insurance costs. The facts are there though, it's a tricky junction at busy times, and there are a lot of accidents. It is a tricky junction, I've not denied that have I (in fact I have mentioned it myself) I'm not quite sure what your point is. It was MY argument that this was the most dangerous part of this particular road and therefore reducing the 60mph limit further down wouldn't necessarily make the road safer. As I said before you've not actually given me anything to suggest that the 60mph limit should be reduced (which was my whole argument) in fact all you've done is confirm what I've been saying all along, that the majority (just for clarification as you had difficulty with it earlier that doesn't mean there are more than average on this road) of accidents don't occur on the 60mph stretch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scutts Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 Just been down the road tonight and the National Speed limit has been replaced by 50mph along the whole stretch. The signs seem to be on every lamp post so you can't miss them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 I strongly believe the speed limit is wrong. Perhaps a 50 limit would be more suitable. Just been down the road tonight and the National Speed limit has been replaced by 50mph along the whole stretch. The signs seem to be on every lamp post so you can't miss them! At last somebody is listening..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metalman Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Just been down the road tonight and the National Speed limit has been replaced by 50mph along the whole stretch. The signs seem to be on every lamp post so you can't miss them! So Sheffield Council's campaign to eradicate every bit of NSL road continues... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostRiders Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 At last somebody is listening..... Apparently to people who make silly arguments. I wish we had access to the accident figures, it would be my guess (and I'd happily put ALOT of money on it) that reducing the road to 50 won't reduce the number of accidents and that the majority will still happen at the junction with Deep lane which is outside the affected area. Answer me this, do you genuinely believe making it 50 will stop people driving on it at 30 and stop those who are going to be idiots anyway trying to overtake them? Do you genuinely believe reducing it to 50 will stop people driving inappropriately in bad weather? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 Answer me this, do you genuinely believe making it 50 will stop people driving on it at 30 and stop those who are going to be idiots anyway trying to overtake them? Do you genuinely believe reducing it to 50 will stop people driving inappropriately in bad weather? 1.....No 2.....No Answer me this... Does the law prevent knife crimes/stabbings? (two in Sheffield today). Does gun law prevent shootings in the city? If you answer honestly...your response will also be No. So.... What do you suggest? Do we abandon all laws? Create a society with no laws? Fact...speed kills! If 99% of people abide by the new restriction it will be a safer road for all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostRiders Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 1.....No 2.....No Answer me this... Does the law prevent knife crimes/stabbings? (two in Sheffield today). Does gun law prevent shootings in the city? If you answer honestly...your response will also be No. So.... What do you suggest? Do we abandon all laws? Create a society with no laws? Fact...speed kills! If 99% of people abide by the new restriction it will be a safer road for all. How? Considering we've already established (well we were doing, you ran off half way through the discussion using the old, and worst get out clause for anyone losing an argument 'we'll have to agree to disagree' (nothing but short hand for I've run out of evidence so I'm offski)) We've already established that the fatalities occurred due to inappropriate driving in bad weather (something that a 10mph speed reduction will in all likelihood not prevent, because as you rightly point out the law doesn't alter the behaviour of those who will do something anyway) We've also established that most accidents on this road occur outside the area this restriction has been implemented in. So the only 'fact', based on the evidence to hand, is that more people will be driving slower (like me, who usually travels at between 50 and 60 on there) which will mean that someone will be right up my bum flashing there lights trying a dangerous overtake on a road totally inappropriate for overtaking on. So EXACTLY how, rather than simply quoting 'speed kills' (If this is the case why not make it a thirty complete with speed cameras and double white lines) will a ten mph reduction make it safer? Will it stop (1%, on that road, really) those who are going to try a dangerous overtake from doing so? Especially considering that more cars will be going slower so the, ahem 1% will be getting even more frustrated. Will it stop the low speed collisions (which as far as I'm aware make up the majority of accidents on there) outside the speed restricted zone? Regarding your questions to me no, I don't suggest we abandon all laws, considering the speed previously on the road were appropriate for that road there was no need to change the limit. I've already made my suggestions, double white lines (which according to another poster the council won't do because the road isn't long enough which I suggest is a policy that should be reviewed to take into account each road on its own merits) and I'm also not averse to speed cameras on there to stop the (oh my) 1%. I'm waiting with baited breath for your response to my questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudds1 Posted March 25, 2016 Author Share Posted March 25, 2016 If cameras were to be installed on there I think it would have to be the average speed types but even those would not deter some people judging by amount of drivers that wiz pass me on stocksbridge bypass . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DT Ralge Posted March 26, 2016 Share Posted March 26, 2016 Fact...speed kills! If 99% of people abide by the new restriction it will be a safer road for all. Speed does not kill and, in stating it, you undermine your second assertion (which I believe to be worth a try, as do the authorities). Rapid acceleration and/or deceleration in an impact is what kills. By reducing prevailing speeds on a given road, their hope is that there will be fewer impacts and any that do happen will be of a massively lower order of impact/exchange of kinetic energy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostRiders Posted March 26, 2016 Share Posted March 26, 2016 How?.... I'm waiting with baited breath for your response to my questions. And I'm still waiting. 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