No Access to Home without Several Speed Humps

Hintza

Lum wrote: »

Also, Hintza, you should post the rest of that article. It's a very good article.

I decided it was too big.

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers!

Strider590 wrote: »

If the limit is 30mph, then 30mph is the safe maximum speed.... If speed bumps make it unsafe at that speed then the limit needs to be reduced OR the bumps removed....

You're making the classic mistake of presuming that speed limits have any relationship to safety.

serjoe

Speedbumps are there for a reason. 1 of every 3 roads in residential areas got them. I am driving 93 golf and there is no issues with speedbumps...and its a low rider! I am sure if you had the chance you would of carry your car on your back over speedbumps or jumping out and pushing it over at the slowest speed possible... They are there to stay- live with it!:beer:

johnson293

Strider590 wrote: »

If the limit is 30mph, then 30mph is the safe maximum speed.... If speed bumps make it unsafe at that speed then the limit needs to be reduced OR the bumps removed....

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

So is 30 in a 30 not acceptable given the conditions??

And given perfect conditions is it not unreasonable to expect to be able to travel at 30 without disscomfort or damage??

If people stuck to speed limits, be it 20 or 30 in built up areas, there would be no need for any speed bumps, but they dont - there will always be a number of motorists who think they can drive over the speed limit, and they won't cause an accident, and will get away with it.

Hence, speed bumps are installed - a measure that forces motorists to drop to a speed lower than the speed limit in order to drive over them without the risk of causing damage to the car.

If they made the speed bump suitably low, so that you could drive over them at 30mph 'without discomfort or damage', it wouldn't be long before the same speeders were driving over them at a higher speed than the limit.

Dont blame the councils for installing them, blame the motorists who broke the speed limits in built up areas, and made it necessary for these to be installed.

Hintza

johnson293 wrote: »

Dont blame the councils for installing them, blame the motorists who broke the speed limits in built up areas, and made it necessary for these to be installed.

iscriminatory
Humps discriminate against the severely disabled, elderly frail people, and those with serious back or neck problems.
Disabled people may have to travel in a wheelchair strapped into a vehicle. Jolts from speed humps may cause such persons severe pain, and even permanent injury, as a result they may be unable to traverse humps safely and are thus prevented from using the road altogether. Humps in residential areas may effectively prevent these people from leaving their own homes by vehicular means.

• "RCDA (Redcar and Cleveland Disability Access) oppose the introduction of traffic calming measures such as speed humps due to the impact they have on disabled drivers and passengers." As quoted by Redcar & Cleveland Borough Council
• This issue is discussed in great detail by RADA (Road Access for Disabled Americans).
  We thoroughly recommend you visit this site.

eadly

“Between 1972 and 1975 I was a senior police officer in Swindon, Wiltshire. During that time, the town's road safety officer had a speed hump installed at a multi-road junction outside the fire station. Within a few days, a woman cyclist rode out of the fire station, turned left and struck the hump at an angle. She lost her balance and was killed by a motor vehicle. The accident was wholly attributed to the speed hump, which was removed very soon afterwards.”

L.S., Chingford, in a letter to the Daily Telegraph, 18 Mar 2006

On June 21, 1994, 18 year old Amy White of Julian, California, stopped to get flowers for her parents' anniversary. When the flowers didn't fit in the back of her friend's car properly, Amy sat in the very back of the car to hold them in place. After taking a short ride, the car hit a speed bump and Amy was thrown from her seat, hitting her head. For the next three years Amy suffered from her injury. On November 4, 1997, Amy died at home.

Article from the Daily Aztec (San Diego State University Student Newspaper)

eceitful
Councils invariably claim that speed humps have been installed 'in response to local demand', and that an 'extensive consultation' has been carried out. Local demand usually consists of one local busy-body who writes to the council demanding that 'something must be done'. Many councils positively incite such actions by inviting people to complain about 'speeding' on their websites.

Consultations usually consist of a microscopic notice in the back of the local paper, an A4 notice with normal size text fixed to a lamppost for a few days, and a letter drop to the few houses beside where the speed humps are to be installed. Drivers are not notified because councils don't want them to object. Councils in this country no longer believe that drivers should be involved in the democratic process when it comes to anything to do with roads.

Strider590

Speed bumps get put in because of complainers.

I've got a video somewhere of car swerving hard in front of to avoid an old guy standing in the middle of the road giving him the middle finger and signalling him to slow down when we turn into his street doing less than 20mph. He then does the same to me and the 2 cars behind me.

It's these fools who have built in radar speed detectors in there head's that then go whining to the council and get speed bumps installed.

The number of speeding drivers in 30mph limits is minimal, most people drive at between 25 and 32 mph.....
If the road is such that 30mph limit is stupidly low then yes people might belt through at 40.

Inactive

Strider590 wrote: »

The number of speeding drivers in 30mph limits is minimal, most people drive at between 25 and 32 mph.....
If the road is such that 30mph limit is stupidly low then yes people might belt through at 40.

So that's OK then?

Rossy.

Hintza wrote: »

“Between 1972 and 1975 I was a senior police officer in Swindon, Wiltshire. During that time, the town's road safety officer had a speed hump installed at a multi-road junction outside the fire station. Within a few days, a woman cyclist rode out of the fire station, turned left and struck the hump at an angle. She lost her balance and was killed by a motor vehicle. The accident was wholly attributed to the speed hump, which was removed very soon afterwards.”

What it doesn't say here is whether it was a full "sleeping policeman" or one of those small square speed bumps. If it was the latter, and as harsh as this sounds, why would she ride over it when she could have rode between it?. Even if it was the first type of speed bump, it is not a mountain to ride over and given the size of a push bike, she should have easily negotiated the bump without loosing balance. I refuse to believe someone lost their balance and died as a result of the speed bump. To state the death was "Wholly attributed to the bump" is nonsense in my opinion. Maybe the car was driving to fast and didn't give enough room "just in case" the cyclist made an error

Hintza wrote: »

On June 21, 1994, 18 year old Amy White of Julian, California, stopped to get flowers for her parents' anniversary. When the flowers didn't fit in the back of her friend's car properly, Amy sat in the very back of the car to hold them in place. After taking a short ride, the car hit a speed bump and Amy was thrown from her seat, hitting her head. For the next three years Amy suffered from her injury. On November 4, 1997, Amy died at home.

2 points here.

This is in America where their laws maybe different regarding speed bumps placement/hight etc so it's got no relevance to us in the UK at all

and secondly

She obviously had no seat belt on as this would have stopped her from violently moving inside the vehicle. Her friend would have had to of hit the bump at serious speed to create the forces needed to eject "Amy" out of her seat.

So many varied view on speed humps. Like i say i'm not for them but i'm not against them. They serve a purpose to which i feel they serve pretty well. Maybe the council's have over used them in certain areas but anything that kills speed, saves lives and that's a fact.

thescouselander

Speed bumps are there because there is a perceived higher risk on that part of the road - as an additional safety measure I suggest you sound your horn every time you get to a speed bump in case there is an unseen pedestrian waiting to run under your car. Safety first!

cyclonebri1

johnson293 wrote: »

Hence, speed bumps are installed - a measure that forces motorists to drop to a speed lower than the speed limit in order to drive over them without the risk of causing damage to the car.

And that in my view is equally as socially unacceptable as speeding itself, talk about a scatter gun approach.


There was a new type of hump trialed a few years ago, a pnuematic device like a sausage. It was valved to allow air from the section the tyres ran over to migrate away from that point, in effect deflating. It could be calibrated to allow traffic unhindered progress at 20, 30 or 40mph etc, hit it a couple of mph above that and you would need to see a dentist;)

Guess what?, the maintenance costs were too high so it was abandoned. I wonder if the complainers would complain if they had to fund the bumps themselves, I somehow think not:mad: