20 mph speed limits.

custardy

AdrianC wrote: »

The near-collision was not because of the reversing.


People choose to work night shifts, in full awareness of the disruption on their lives caused by working outside of normal hours.

No the near collision was due to a vehicle and its driver being unsuitable for the conditions.
Yet you are fine with the same driver blindly reversing into a junction,likely on a pedestrian phase of the lights.

Many people dont 'choose' nightshift,same as many dont choose to live in an area impacted by construction noise/traffic.
However thats just how it is in cities.

Bigphil1474

I live in a small town on the edge of a large city. We had a blanket 20mph speed limit put in place a couple of years ago - may have been last year. There are 2 roads that go either side of the town which weren't included.
At times it's a bit of a pain, mainly because, like many other drivers, I don't want to be slowed by pesky speed limits. It has, however, noticeably reduced the speed of cars on the main roads through the town and main street. It is not difficult to drive at 20mph in third gear (in a fiesta anyway). To be honest, I've never seen anyone enforcing the speed limit, but I suspect it has slowed down those who think it's okay to drive at 35 in a 30, to driving at 25 in a 20. Some of the roads have speed bumps and humps, some don't. Most of us don't lose anything from slowing down, a touch. To me, it doesn't matter if it only saves 1 life or a 1,000 - it's not worth worrying about, given it only adds about a minute (if that) to the start and end of my journey to and from home.

Exemplar

Norman_Castle wrote: »

I'm occasionally female, on Saturday nights with my closest friends I become Norma.


20 limits are only needed because the 30 limits are being ignored often by a large margin. If drivers were more responsible / less ignorant 20 limits wouldn't be needed.

Have we met? Tiffany-Chardonnay here?? Last Saturday night?

Male over 50 driver here.

No issue with the 20 MPH limit. As others have said if it's 30 people do 33-35. If it's 20 and enforced correctly people may do 23-25? (all as an example, not based on fact - just observation).

If it saves a life it is worth it.

Johno100

custardy wrote: »

Now now John. One would accuse you of derailing the thread...........

(Didn't click the link,no need)

You mean this thread about 20mph limits not some London social media cycling cause c!lèbre?

custardy

Johno100 wrote: »

You mean this thread about 20mph limits not some London social media cycling cause c!lèbre?

you mean the thread about Londons road safety policy?

A BLANKET 20mph speed limit is set to be enforced throughout the central London Congestion Charge Zone, as part of the Mayor’s plans to heavily reduce the amount of road deaths in the city.

I would say bang on topic. You on the other hand allow your usual bias and 'keeping this how they have been' mindset colour your view.

AdrianC

custardy wrote: »

No the near collision was due to a vehicle and its driver being unsuitable for the conditions.

How else do you expect the load to be moved?

Yet you are fine with the same driver blindly reversing into a junction,likely on a pedestrian phase of the lights.

If you're going to continue to deliberately and wilfully misrepresent what I've clearly said several times, this is pointless.

Many people dont 'choose' nightshift,same as many dont choose to live in an area impacted by construction noise/traffic.
However thats just how it is in cities.

Of course they do. Everybody has absolute choice over where they live and what work they do.

Norman_Castle

AdrianC wrote: »

But she was not riding sensibly and defensively, which contributed to the near miss. She could have easily prevented the situation.

Choosing not to take the lane does not mean she was not riding sensibly and defensively. Claiming she is partially responsible is nonsense. From 13 to 19 seconds she is in clear view of the wagon who is about to cross the lane.
If there had been an accident I suspect the driver would be prosecuted for lack of due care as a minimum based on his speed and lack of observation.


On the opposite side of the road there is a 20 mph sign although it is unclear if this is a 20mph zone.
https://twitter.com/JustJevens/status/1022040299277873152

custardy

AdrianC wrote: »

How else do you expect the load to be moved?



If you're going to continue to deliberately and wilfully misrepresent what I've clearly said several times, this is pointless.


Of course they do. Everybody has absolute choice over where they live and what work they do.

So you are either fine with the manoeuvre or not?
Are you now saying they shouldn't be reversing there?

So if people have a choice where they work and live,they cant moan about loads getting moved at 'odd' hours. sorted.

AdrianC

custardy wrote: »

So you are either fine with the manoeuvre or not?
Are you now saying they shouldn't be reversing there?

I think it's fairly clearly explained.

So if people have a choice where they work and live,they cant moan about loads getting moved at 'odd' hours. sorted.

People who choose to work outside core hours make that decision in full light of the knowledge that they will be out of time-sync with the rest of the world.

custardy

AdrianC wrote: »

I think it's fairly clearly explained.


People who choose to work outside core hours make that decision in full light of the knowledge that they will be out of time-sync with the rest of the world.

Feel free to quote the post that clearly explains.
You are either fine with the vehicle blindly reversing or not
I would argue given the lack of observation/vision leading up to that manoeuvre it's not a safe scenario.