Wiltshire Council Speed Review

[alanTDM]

Wilts Council are reviewing speed limits on certain A and B roads info can be found here http://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/parkingtransportandstreets/speedlimitreview.htm

[FJ_Biker]

Thanks for the link Al

[Geordie Stu]

Good info. will take a bit of reading going by the number of A & B roads ::)

[BB]

Useful link and we should all try and take the time to read - and object if necessary!

BB

[Roll_on]

Very interesting starting now to plough through all the roads I use regularly, thanks for the link

[Uber Dave]

There was an article in Bike magazine which I read this morning and its a country wide thing. The govt has asked all councils in the UK it would seem to review their speed limits and come back to them by 2011 with some recomendations.
According to the article it is all part of the idea by the Govt of reducing the national speed limit to 50 down from 60, however rather than a blanket reduction in speed they are looking at just changing roads which are a higher risk.

[Thorkill_The_Tall]

Not many proposed decreases for the roads I usually use, just one reduction from 60 to 50 as you drop down into Warminster from the A36/A350 services. I can't really think of a valid argument to oppose that one.

I am suprised that many of the perceived accident blackspots are not being considered for any reduction, as usually speed gets blamed for everything, rather than a poor standard of driving.

Am I being particuarly myopic, or is the A36 totally absent from this review?

[Scotty]

....
According to the article it is all part of the idea by the Govt of reducing the national speed limit to 50 down from 60, however rather than a blanket reduction in speed they are looking at just changing roads which are a higher risk.
Hmmm... :-? Could it be a "stealth" measure, introduce it piecemeal, a bit at a time, and before we know it, the 60 limit is a minority thing, and then extinct? The myopic vote-chasing tossers that infest government will always do things the British way - as cheaply and nastily as possible, proclaim what their own twisted statisticians say "speed is a contributing factor in 33% of all accidents..." and all that bull****. I ask you this, when was the last time that two stationary vehicles were involved in a collision? There has to be an element of movement, and therefore, velocity, on the part of at least one of them in the first place. Velocity is the proper term for speed. The speed nazis use it as an excuse to be reducing limits and go planting speed cameras like saplings along our roads on this false pretext. If the accident and casualty figures are examined in depth, their 33% contains all the typical SMIDSY collisions where the cause is "failure to judge the speed of the oncoming vehicle..." Whether it's doing 130mph or 30mph, the car-driving dimwit fails to judge the closing velocity and begins their manoeuvre with the all-too-common consequences, and the cause is listed as a failure on the part of the car driver, but because it contains the word "speed", the speed nazis seize upon it as another excuse to restrict our liberties further... The government should concentrate time and money on better driver training and harsher punishments for those who kill on the roads, but that's not as easy as speed cameras and reduced limits (and hence greater revenues) is it?
Happy New Year everyone ;)

[Thorkill_The_Tall]

Here, ladies and gentlemen, we have a perfect example of a nail being hit firmly on the head. I couldn’t have put it better myself, Scotty.

The endless assault on vehicle speeds is driven by many things and you can bet our safety is, in reality, pretty low down on the list, compared with revenue generation and our present government’s desire to endorse it’s own green credentials within the international community.

Vehicle pollution is probably the biggest contributory factor of our nation’s carbon footprint. Reduce vehicle speeds and in theory we should reduce our carbon emissions. Local authorities will welcome the chance to share in a further revenue bonanza, so will embrace lower speeds and more speed cameras with gusto.
It’s a win-win situation, for them at least.

The fact that the recent instalment anti global warming soap opera, which jetted dozens of world dignitaries, plus their entourages, plus the world media to Copenhagen and produce more carbon emissions than the annual carbon quota of a medium sized African country is beyond them and sadly, not even noticed by the rest of us poor suckers. They operate along the same guidelines that has persuaded us to throw all our incandescent light bulbs away yet still do nothing about China opening, allegedly, one new coal powered power station every week, along with India and the U.S.A. probably producing more pollutants than the rest of the world put together.

Get used to it, my friends. Things are certainly not going to get any better.

[Last Train]

Excellently written Scotty and 3T..... [smiley=tekst-toppie.gif]

It is, alas, 'just' one more erosive attack on our, at best, translucent, grip of our sensibililties.


Happy New Year everyone ;)

pmsl.... :)

[Mark_Able]

Saying 'speed' is the cause of road accidents is like saying 'flying' is the cause of air accidents. The only way to eliminate deaths or serious injuries from our roads is if we limit every vehicle (cycles included) to 10mph. Even then, there'll still be somebody who is unfortunate enough to land on their head. Whilst the government will have you believe 33% of accidents are attributed to excessive speed, the actual figure is closer to 7%. In the reports I've seen, 9% of accidents were caused by mothers trying to control their kids in the car! The only logic the government can apply is to say, if they slow everyone down, there'll still be accidents, but less will be serious or fatal. I for one accept that there is an element of risk involved in taking to the roads, and as I accept that risk, feel that I should be the one to make the decision as to what is a safe speed for that road and conditions. I get fed up with having the decision taken away from me because some numpty has wrapped himself round a lampost three years previously.

I need to drink less coffee... :-X

[Dabz]

it's all just a very unfortunate result of living in a nanny state. People will still go at whatever speed they want to go regardless of the number it says in the little round red sign - it just means when those people get caught they'll get more points

[Mark_Able]

Yep... >:(

Not that I've got any points... [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

[bazacasa]

slower speeds mean less wear and tear on roads and less maintenance costs - not an anti bike issue but aimed at volume of traffic which is cars. As usual they are either raising taxes as "fines" or stopping spending money by slowing us down !! :D

[Dabz]

no points for me either...somehow! luck I think...

[Uber Dave]

it's all just a very unfortunate result of living in a nanny state. People will still go at whatever speed they want to go regardless of the number it says in the little round red sign - it just means when those people get caught they'll get more points

Wait till either our Govt or the EU get round to making it compulsory to have GPS linked electronic speed limiters fitted to all vehicles and then we will have no option but to stick to the limit.......

[Dabz]

I'm sure someone will work out a way of getting round it...like 'accidentally' wrapping the gps unit in tin foil...