Forum home Road cycling forum Campaign

Portsmouth = 1st city with a blanket 20mph limit

1232426282935

Posts

  • Mister PaulMister Paul Posts: 719
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Cretin</i>

    Ah right. Now we're down to crude slurs and sexual innuendo. Pathetic. Really, truly pathetic, the behaviour of children.

    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Hmmm. Not completely. You'll see that in the midst of people reacting to the fact that you've been outed, there are still questions that remain unanswered by you.

    Questions which you were asked right at the beginning. Reasonable and useful questions.

    But you choose to ignore them and instead start throwing toys.

    So are you going to answer them, or have you given up with your argument?

    __________________________________________________________
    <font size="1">What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font id="size1">
    __________________________________________________________
    <font>What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font>
  • Mister PaulMister Paul Posts: 719
    So Cretin's true identity is revealed. So he spits his dummy and then disappears. With several questions crucial to the SS campaign unanswered by him.

    How predictable. Smeggy has done it a few times, and even the great Smithy himself ran, and is too afraid to return.

    Anyone would think there were fundamental flaws in the campaign that they couldn't answer.

    __________________________________________________________
    <font size="1">What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font id="size1">
    __________________________________________________________
    <font>What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font>
  • The BosscpThe Bosscp Posts: 647
    Repeat the questions and I'll answer them for him, I'm interested to know what these unanswerable questions are.


    <hr noshade size="1">
    CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpathGenericPath
  • CunobelinCunobelin Posts: 11,792
    Rearrange......
    Calling
    The
    Pot
    Black
    Kettle
    The

    Your record of answering questions is not that good either.




    <b><i>He that buys land buys many stones.
    He that buys flesh buys many bones.
    He that buys eggs buys many shells,
    But he that buys good beer buys nothing else.</b></i>
    (Unattributed Trad.)
    <b><i>He that buys land buys many stones.
    He that buys flesh buys many bones.
    He that buys eggs buys many shells,
    But he that buys good beer buys nothing else.</b></i>
    (Unattributed Trad.)
  • Mister PaulMister Paul Posts: 719
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>

    Repeat the questions and I'll answer them for him, I'm interested to know what these unanswerable questions are.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    You've tried. And you couldn't.

    1)Problems with 20mph limits?

    2)Why can't 20mph limits limit the current risk alongside a concerted effort to improve driving standards. Any speed limits for that matter. If standards ever improve to the point that speed limits are not needed, <i>then</i> this can be considered.

    __________________________________________________________
    <font size="1">What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font id="size1">
    __________________________________________________________
    <font>What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font>
  • CunobelinCunobelin Posts: 11,792
    Just to reiterate - this has nothing to do with driving standards per se.......

    This is about people who have asked for the speed limit in their local area to be lowered in response to a perceived risk.

    If the local community feels this is achieved with an improved quality of life then that is the easure that should be accpted as the main issue.

    <b><i>He that buys land buys many stones.
    He that buys flesh buys many bones.
    He that buys eggs buys many shells,
    But he that buys good beer buys nothing else.</b></i>
    (Unattributed Trad.)
    <b><i>He that buys land buys many stones.
    He that buys flesh buys many bones.
    He that buys eggs buys many shells,
    But he that buys good beer buys nothing else.</b></i>
    (Unattributed Trad.)
  • The BosscpThe Bosscp Posts: 647
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Mister Paul</i>


    1)Problems with 20mph limits?
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    My answer: none in practice, but in principle <b><i>why can't we educate rather than legislate</i></b>. It perpetuates the myth that there is a direct unwavering correlation between slowness and safety, and to some bad drivers (not me I might add) it 'feels boring' and they thus don't pay as much attention, because a lot of today's modern range rovers and audis and what not have got doors about a foot thick and huge bullbars over everywhere and they must make the drivers feel really safe. Whereas what should be happening is the driver being forced to adapt their speed all the time in relation to the surroundings and the potential hazards - not just setting off, getting up to 'the limit', whacking the cruise control on and daydreaming till they get to work.



    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Mister Paul</i>


    2)Why can't 20mph limits limit the current risk alongside a concerted effort to improve driving standards. Any speed limits for that matter. If standards ever improve to the point that speed limits are not needed, <i>then</i> this can be considered.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Exactly. Have speed limits, but instead of demanding money every time one is broken, which isn't going to teach people, invent a cleverer way of punishing them but that instead of a direct punishment as such it is more about something that is actually going to educate them. My pet hate is audi drivers.
  • The BosscpThe Bosscp Posts: 647
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Cunobelin</i>

    Just to reiterate - this has nothing to do with driving standards per se.......

    <b>This is about people who have asked for the speed limit in their local area to be lowered</b> in response to a perceived risk.

    If the local community feels this is achieved with an improved quality of life then that is the easure that should be accpted as the main issue.

    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    You mean it is about a community in which people have been <i>told</i> they've asked for the speed limit to be lowered.


    <hr noshade size="1">
    CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpathGenericPath
  • CunobelinCunobelin Posts: 11,792
    No.....

    It is genuinely about people who want to improve their quality of life and local environment.

    Like it or not this is a grass roots movement by local residents, and the reduction asked for by the residents.




    <b><i>He that buys land buys many stones.
    He that buys flesh buys many bones.
    He that buys eggs buys many shells,
    But he that buys good beer buys nothing else.</b></i>
    (Unattributed Trad.)
    <b><i>He that buys land buys many stones.
    He that buys flesh buys many bones.
    He that buys eggs buys many shells,
    But he that buys good beer buys nothing else.</b></i>
    (Unattributed Trad.)
  • JadedJaded Posts: 6,663
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Mister Paul</i>


    1)Problems with 20mph limits?
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    My answer: none in practice, but in principle <b><i>why can't we educate rather than legislate</i></b>. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    OK - you have the floor. In a few paragraphs, explain how you are going to educate. How you are going to measure the success of the education. How you are going to pay for it. Lastly how you are going to enforce it given that you and your SS gang spend 95% of your time campaigning against enforcement.

    --
    <font size="1">[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one</font id="size1">
  • CretinCretin Posts: 266
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Cunobelin</i>

    No.....

    It is genuinely about people who want to improve their quality of life and local environment.

    Like it or not this is a grass roots movement by local residents, and the reduction asked for by the residents.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    You're one of the more sane people here, as far as I'm concerned Mister Paul, Rothbrook and Tourist Tony are pretty much this lot:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAOHhV1EFe4

    I've nothing against people wanting to improve the quality of life, but unfortunately most people today don't understand anything they're not told to understand, which sums up the residents of Portsmouth IMO.

    Anyway it will be interesting to see what happens. Personally I don't think anything will happen. The idea is based on ignorance.
  • The BosscpThe Bosscp Posts: 647
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jaded</i>


    OK - you have the floor. In a few paragraphs, explain how you are going to educate.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Well, actually banning someone for a week but with no imposed financial consequence is going to make them think about it a lot more than sending them a œ60 fine will, but I'm not saying that idea's perfect - it's just one alternative.

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jaded</i>



    How you are going to measure the success of the education.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    You see that's just it with you lot isn't it, all you speed camera lobby all you're bothered about is statistics, and how it's going to <i>look</i>. What about - er - if number of accidents / seriousness of accidents per 100 miles driven drops?

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jaded</i>


    How you are going to pay for it. Lastly how you are going to enforce it given that you and your SS gang spend 95% of your time campaigning against enforcement.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    It wouldn't even cost that much more than the current system. Sending someone a week long ban notification in the post would cost no more than to send them a fine.
    Extra resource needed to spot-check people would be more than paid for by the fewer police investigations you would need due to accidents and savings on hospitals and ambulances due to having less accidents where people would be injured. Any further cash needed could be raised by putting a 12-episode reality series out on BBC1 and there are 12 contestants at the start, and they all have to undertake driving-based challenges, and at the end of each one, you have a big text-in / phone vote (this is where the money comes from) to vote one of them off.
    The situations could be something like driving in stop-start traffic with deliberately annoying people in the surrounding cars, cyclists undertaking idiot manoeuvres (obviously actors doing it deliberately really). The public love a good row, so any beef between contestants and road-rage would naturally have to be encouraged as this would rake it in.


    <hr noshade size="1">
    CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpathGenericPath
  • BigBrenBigBren Posts: 145
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Any further cash needed could be raised by putting a 12-episode reality series out on BBC1 and there are 12 contestants at the start, and they all have to undertake driving-based challenges, and at the end of each one, you have a big text-in / phone vote (this is where the money comes from) to vote one of them off.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Is he a clever troll, or a genuine moron? I can never quite decide...

    Bren
  • JadedJaded Posts: 6,663
    Boss/Bonj.

    You haven't really answered my question, you've just talked about looking at offenders. Surely the crux of the SS position is to educate ALL drivers, not just the ones that get caught by the foul cameras...?

    --
    <font size="1">[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one</font id="size1">
  • JadedJaded Posts: 6,663
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>

    What about - er - if number of accidents / seriousness of accidents per 100 miles driven drops?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Yeah, what about that eh?

    You mean like it has done over the last 15 years or so and continues to do so? Doh!

    --
    <font size="1">[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one</font id="size1">
  • domd1979domd1979 Posts: 526
    Because a lot of the time it doesn't work. Example: seatbelts.

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>
    My answer: none in practice, but in principle <b><i>why can't we educate rather than legislate</i></b>.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
  • CunobelinCunobelin Posts: 11,792
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Well, actually banning someone for a week but with no imposed financial consequence is going to make them think about it a lot more than sending them a œ60 fine will, but I'm not saying that idea's perfect - it's just one alternative.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Yet one "road safsty group" advocates that this is victimisation and that this would be justification for a number of illegal activities by "otherwise law-abiding motorists"

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">You see that's just it with you lot isn't it, all you speed camera lobby all you're bothered about is statistics, and how it's going to look. What about - er - if number of accidents / seriousness of accidents per 100 miles driven drops?
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Yet when "Quality of Life" was suggested in Portsmouth as an assessment of the value of the success of 20 mph limits - you immediately went back to accident rates............ Are you now saying that an improved quality of life for the community involved (the main stake holder) <i><b>IS</i></b> now a valid measurre for the success of 20 mph limits.

    Finally, although laudable, the same flaw exists as with the present system... thehard line "otherwise law abiding" motorist "forced to drive" without a license and insurance by this gross victimisation.

    <b><i>He that buys land buys many stones.
    He that buys flesh buys many bones.
    He that buys eggs buys many shells,
    But he that buys good beer buys nothing else.</b></i>
    (Unattributed Trad.)
    <b><i>He that buys land buys many stones.
    He that buys flesh buys many bones.
    He that buys eggs buys many shells,
    But he that buys good beer buys nothing else.</b></i>
    (Unattributed Trad.)
  • Mister PaulMister Paul Posts: 719
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Mister Paul</i>


    1)Problems with 20mph limits?
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    My answer: none in practice, but in principle <b><i>why can't we educate rather than legislate</i></b>. It perpetuates the myth that there is a direct unwavering correlation between slowness and safety, and to some bad drivers (not me I might add) it 'feels boring' and they thus don't pay as much attention, because a lot of today's modern range rovers and audis and what not have got doors about a foot thick and huge bullbars over everywhere and they must make the drivers feel really safe. Whereas what should be happening is the driver being forced to adapt their speed all the time in relation to the surroundings and the potential hazards - not just setting off, getting up to 'the limit', whacking the cruise control on and daydreaming till they get to work.



    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Mister Paul</i>


    2)Why can't 20mph limits limit the current risk alongside a concerted effort to improve driving standards. Any speed limits for that matter. If standards ever improve to the point that speed limits are not needed, <i>then</i> this can be considered.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Exactly. Have speed limits, but instead of demanding money every time one is broken, which isn't going to teach people, invent a cleverer way of punishing them but that instead of a direct punishment as such it is more about something that is actually going to educate them. My pet hate is audi drivers.

    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    D'oh!

    You've not read the post through properly before jumping in to answer the first point.

    FWIW there is a direct link between speed and safety. You've got a physics degree, so you know what I'm talking about. The trouble is, you speed apologists say "Fool!! It's not the only issue!!!" when no-one ever suggested that it was.

    All your other stuff about concentration is irrelevant, as it can apply at any speed. You need to stop listening to Smithy's childrens stories.

    And on the contrary, fining people for speeding <i>is</i> working. Incidents of second offences are falling.

    __________________________________________________________
    <font size="1">What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font id="size1">
    __________________________________________________________
    <font>What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font>
  • Mister PaulMister Paul Posts: 719
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Cretin</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Cunobelin</i>

    No.....

    It is genuinely about people who want to improve their quality of life and local environment.

    Like it or not this is a grass roots movement by local residents, and the reduction asked for by the residents.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    You're one of the more sane people here, as far as I'm concerned Mister Paul, Rothbrook and Tourist Tony are pretty much this lot:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAOHhV1EFe4

    I've nothing against people wanting to improve the quality of life, but unfortunately most people today don't understand anything they're not told to understand, which sums up the residents of Portsmouth IMO.

    Anyway it will be interesting to see what happens. Personally I don't think anything will happen. The idea is based on ignorance.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    No, Simon. The idea is based on physics, which you can't really argue, and statistics which suggest that 20mph limits where appropriate are successful in reducing injury.

    You still haven't been able to come up with an argument against 20mph limits, nor explained why you don't think they can be used alongside your idea of improving driving standards.

    You'll ignore this, because it's me talking. What a convenient way of ignoring a question that you can't answer.

    __________________________________________________________
    <font size="1">What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font id="size1">
    __________________________________________________________
    <font>What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font>
  • CretinCretin Posts: 266
    I've already told you that I am not that Simon person. Since you demand sources and proof for practically everything you read (aside from your own arguments), I demand you prove I am this person.

    I tell you what, register on his website and ask him to come here. Then ask an admin to compare the IP addresses and their locality and tell you for sure.

    Until you do otherwise I shall consider anything you say to be a slur, and you can go and share the room with Rothbrook and Tourist Tony.
  • rothbookrothbook Posts: 943
    Interesting debating technique Cretin.

    You post summat blatantly untrue.

    You are corrected.

    You refuse to engage in discussion with the person who corrects you.

    Do you always run away when you lose an argument?
  • The BosscpThe Bosscp Posts: 647
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Mister Paul</i>

    FWIW there is a direct link between speed and safety. You've got a physics degree, so you know what I'm talking about. The trouble is, you speed apologists say "Fool!! It's not the only issue!!!" when no-one ever suggested that it was.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Note the difference between that and what I said, which was 'direct <i>unwavering</i> link'. There may be a direct link GENERALLY, but people will always make an exception for themselves, in that their logic goes 'well I was driving at 30mph this morning, and I was perfectly safe - so therefore if I was driving at 20mph I couldn't have been any <i>more</i> safe, so therefore 20mph is unnecessarily slow, therefore I've got some concentration spare to do other things'.
    Like I say, that's not how <i>my</i> logic goes, but some people do think that, which is one example of a negative side of 20mph speed limits. But like I say, when you say "there aren't any disadvantages", what you actually mean is "there aren't any disadvantages <i>that you like</i>". It's all very well to say there aren't any, and when one is posted, to say that you don't like it and pretend that that means it doesn't exist.
    They may not outweight the advantages, that will have to be seen. But it doesn't mean disadvantages don't exist just because YOU don't consider them significant or agree with the logic of them.

    <hr noshade size="1">
    CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpathGenericPath
  • The BosscpThe Bosscp Posts: 647
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Mister Paul</i>

    All your other stuff about concentration is irrelevant, as it can apply at any speed. You need to stop listening to Smithy's childrens stories.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    People are always going to be concentrating when they are driving at the speed they think is appropriate. That doesn't in itself mean that that's what speed they should be driving at, and neither does it mean that they shouldn't have to concentrate at a lower speed, but the greater the difference between the speed they think they should be travelling at and the speed you are making them travel at, the greater the drop in concentration. That <i>shouldn't</i> be the case, but 'should' isn't good enough. It <i>is</i> the case.



    <hr noshade size="1">
    CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpathGenericPath
  • rothbookrothbook Posts: 943
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> It is the case. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Source please.

    Points deducted if you claim "Common sense innit".
  • Mister PaulMister Paul Posts: 719
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Cretin</i>

    I've already told you that I am not that Simon person. Since you demand sources and proof for practically everything you read (aside from your own arguments), I demand you prove I am this person.

    I tell you what, register on his website and ask him to come here. Then ask an admin to compare the IP addresses and their locality and tell you for sure.

    Until you do otherwise I shall consider anything you say to be a slur, and you can go and share the room with Rothbrook and Tourist Tony.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    So you're going to continue to use that tactic to ignore the perfectly legitimate questions, central to your position?

    I see...

    __________________________________________________________
    <font size="1">What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font id="size1">
    __________________________________________________________
    <font>What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font>
  • Mister PaulMister Paul Posts: 719
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Mister Paul</i>

    FWIW there is a direct link between speed and safety. You've got a physics degree, so you know what I'm talking about. The trouble is, you speed apologists say "Fool!! It's not the only issue!!!" when no-one ever suggested that it was.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Note the difference between that and what I said, which was 'direct <i>unwavering</i> link'. There may be a direct link GENERALLY, but people will always make an exception for themselves, in that their logic goes 'well I was driving at 30mph this morning, and I was perfectly safe - so therefore if I was driving at 20mph I couldn't have been any <i>more</i> safe, so therefore 20mph is unnecessarily slow, therefore I've got some concentration spare to do other things'.
    Like I say, that's not how <i>my</i> logic goes, but some people do think that, which is one example of a negative side of 20mph speed limits. But like I say, when you say "there aren't any disadvantages", what you actually mean is "there aren't any disadvantages <i>that you like</i>". It's all very well to say there aren't any, and when one is posted, to say that you don't like it and pretend that that means it doesn't exist.
    They may not outweight the advantages, that will have to be seen. But it doesn't mean disadvantages don't exist just because YOU don't consider them significant or agree with the logic of them.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Bonjy. Hit something at 20 and you'll do less damage than if you hit it about 30.

    Please tell me where the wavering is in that...

    __________________________________________________________
    <font size="1">What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font id="size1">
    __________________________________________________________
    <font>What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font>
  • Mister PaulMister Paul Posts: 719
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Mister Paul</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Mister Paul</i>

    FWIW there is a direct link between speed and safety. You've got a physics degree, so you know what I'm talking about. The trouble is, you speed apologists say "Fool!! It's not the only issue!!!" when no-one ever suggested that it was.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Note the difference between that and what I said, which was 'direct <i>unwavering</i> link'. There may be a direct link GENERALLY, but people will always make an exception for themselves, in that their logic goes 'well I was driving at 30mph this morning, and I was perfectly safe - so therefore if I was driving at 20mph I couldn't have been any <i>more</i> safe, so therefore 20mph is unnecessarily slow, therefore I've got some concentration spare to do other things'.
    Like I say, that's not how <i>my</i> logic goes, but some people do think that, which is one example of a negative side of 20mph speed limits. But like I say, when you say "there aren't any disadvantages", what you actually mean is "there aren't any disadvantages <i>that you like</i>". It's all very well to say there aren't any, and when one is posted, to say that you don't like it and pretend that that means it doesn't exist.
    They may not outweight the advantages, that will have to be seen. But it doesn't mean disadvantages don't exist just because YOU don't consider them significant or agree with the logic of them.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Bonjy. Hit something at 20 and you'll do less damage than if you hit it about 30.

    Please tell me where the wavering is in that...

    Oh, and you still haven't given an example of a problem with 20mph limits. You've just done your usual thing of making up a hypothetical situation. Which isn't an example. What are you going to suggest next? That a 20 mph limit is dangerous because some elephants might be chasing you and the could catch you up?

    __________________________________________________________
    <font size="1">What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font id="size1">
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    __________________________________________________________
    <font size="1">What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font id="size1">
    __________________________________________________________
    <font>What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font>
  • Mister PaulMister Paul Posts: 719
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Mister Paul</i>

    All your other stuff about concentration is irrelevant, as it can apply at any speed. You need to stop listening to Smithy's childrens stories.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    People are always going to be concentrating when they are driving at the speed they think is appropriate. That doesn't in itself mean that that's what speed they should be driving at, and neither does it mean that they shouldn't have to concentrate at a lower speed, but the greater the difference between the speed they think they should be travelling at and the speed you are making them travel at, the greater the drop in concentration. That <i>shouldn't</i> be the case, but 'should' isn't good enough. It <i>is</i> the case.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Now that's very interesting. Because daddy Smith claims the opposite. He says that if you force someone to drive in an unnatural state (which for him is below the speed limit) then you unnerve them. If you unnerve them then they're not relaxed and so don't lose concentration.

    Now, who do I believe? One road safety expert or another?

    __________________________________________________________
    <font size="1">What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font id="size1">
    __________________________________________________________
    <font>What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font>
  • CretinCretin Posts: 266
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Mister Paul</i>
    So you're going to continue to use that tactic to ignore the perfectly legitimate questions, central to your position?

    I see...
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Do you consider it a perfectly legitimate tactic to guess my real life identity and then use that guess to place doubt on anything else I say?

    Its truly pathetic, even more so because the person involved is offensive.

    As for the argument about 20mph limits, nothing of yours that I have read over the last few months has demonstrated that you have anything but an unwavering belief in your own opinions and superiority - and therefore I simply will not waste my time helping you to inflate your ego. You believe in a world where responsibility should be abrogated to the state. I believe in a world where responsibility should be assumed by the individual. The two positions are diametrically placed and will never meet.
  • rothbookrothbook Posts: 943
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> I believe in a world where responsibility should be assumed by the individual. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Then why don't you take responsibility for the lies you told about the "official police report" you claimed exonerated the Rhyl driver?

    Refusing to admit you lied means nothing you say can be trusted.
Sign In or Register to comment.