Portsmouth = 1st city with a blanket 20mph limit

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

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">
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 shouldn't be the case, but 'should' isn't good enough. It is the case.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote 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?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Well, 'daddy Smith' is obviously wrong then isn't he. He seems to be wrong on just about everything else according to you.
I don't mean they lose concentration as in become tired, but in the sense that they (mistakenly) believe that they can do something else at the same time, like mobile phone, make up, etc.

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

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?

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

WELL I HAVE - you just haven't liked any of them. Less bunched up cars making it harder for pedestrians to cross, and the fact that drivers will think they can do other things while driving more and not concentrate on the road as much.
But in your world any argument you don't like isn't an argument.
So, presumably I have to PROVE conclusively that EVERY driver in the world WILL crash at some point during their lives if they're forced to only do 20mph and that they wouldn't have done otherwise? Otherwise it's a "silly hypothetical situation". Yeah right, dream on flower. I'm starting to believe you are *exactly* like those 3 grey cyclists with red orange and green helmets in that video.

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

Mister Paul · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

I don't mean they lose concentration as in become tired, but in the sense that they (mistakenly) believe that they can do something else at the same time, like mobile phone, make up, etc.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

So now you're saying that 20mph limits are responsible for making people use their mobile phones while driving.

__________________________________________________________
What we need is a new, national White Bicycle Plan

Mister Paul · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

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?

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

WELL I HAVE - you just haven't liked any of them. Less bunched up cars making it harder for pedestrians to cross, and the fact that drivers will think they can do other things while driving more and not concentrate on the road as much.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Slower traffic doesn't make it harder to cross Bonjy. It makes it easier.

And 20mph limits does not result in poor concentration.

__________________________________________________________
What we need is a new, national White Bicycle Plan

Mister Paul · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
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">

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

You'll notice that I was asking you exactly the same questions before any claims about your identity were made. It's made no difference to them. Except that you think it's given you an excuse to ignore them.

Like this...

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

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

So I take it that you still can't come up with any arguments against a 20mph limit then?

__________________________________________________________
What we need is a new, national White Bicycle Plan

Mister Paul · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

I believe in a world where responsibility should be assumed by the individual. The two positions are diametrically placed and will never meet.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

But cretin, in this real world we are in the situation that a proportion of drivers can't act responsible within the current allowances that the state gives them. You want to get rid of the boundaries before trying to improve driving standards. Otherwise you would conceded that there is a place for 20mph limits.

__________________________________________________________
What we need is a new, national White Bicycle Plan

Jaded · June 2007

Bonj, you've forgotten this one:

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

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

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

Jaded · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

I believe in a world where responsibility should be assumed by the individual. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Every time I drive I come across cocks that tailgate, cock on their moble phones, cocks with fog lights on in good visibility, cocks with silly typefaces on their numberplates, cocks that don't indicate, cocks with poor lane discipline, cocks with parts of their cars not worknig propoerly or legally, cocks who drive way too fast for the conditions, cocks who park whereever they want regardless of legality of the effect on others, cocks who buy tanks when minis would suffice, cocks who don't wear seatbelts.

Now - does this fit with your world where responsibility should be assumed by the individual, or is it what you hope to achieve? If the former, then bring on several tens of thousand more speed cameras I say. If the latter - can you explain how you are gonig to reach your world where responsibility should be assumed by the individual?

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

Cretin · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul
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">

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

You'll notice that I was asking you exactly the same questions before any claims about your identity were made. It's made no difference to them. Except that you think it's given you an excuse to ignore them.

Like this...

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

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

So I take it that you still can't come up with any arguments against a 20mph limit then?

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

You really are not worth talking to. Your estimation of your intellect is overshadowed only by the size of your ego.

Don't go away thinking that you've somehow 'won' anything, because I really couldn't care less. I know you'll find that very hard to believe but at least your 3 chums will be impressed.

Cretin · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jaded

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

I believe in a world where responsibility should be assumed by the individual. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Every time I drive I come across cocks that tailgate, cock on their moble phones, cocks with fog lights on in good visibility, cocks with silly typefaces on their numberplates, cocks that don't indicate, cocks with poor lane discipline, cocks with parts of their cars not worknig propoerly or legally, cocks who drive way too fast for the conditions, cocks who park whereever they want regardless of legality of the effect on others, cocks who buy tanks when minis would suffice, cocks who don't wear seatbelts.

Now - does this fit with your world where responsibility should be assumed by the individual, or is it what you hope to achieve? If the former, then bring on several tens of thousand more speed cameras I say. If the latter - can you explain how you are gonig to reach your world where responsibility should be assumed by the individual?

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

So how would you solve these problems? Would you force radar technology that stops tailgating, force automated high visibility lamps (they are not called foglamps), purchase of number plates only from DVLA (can you imagine the price), automated indicator technology, lane forcing technology (as seen on Mercedes and Lexus cars), MOTs that test to manufacturer's specifications on every single component (œœœœ), GPS controlled speed limiters, GPS controlled parking zones, having to justify car choice to the government, cars that refuse to move without the seatbelt clipped?

Would you rather have all that, or would you think, as I do, that its better to have a dedicated force of police officers patrolling the roads and penalising offenders appropriately?

Jaded · June 2007

I asked you a question, which you didn't answer. You didn't mention police in your utopia, you said you want individuals to take responsibility. Why on earth would you want police if you had your world where responsibility should be assumed by the individual?

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

Cretin · June 2007

I want individuals to assume responsibilty for their actions - not responsibility for their punishment for any consequences of those actions.

I think thats perfectly obvious, and yet despite your critisism you haven't bothered to answer my question.

Cunobelin · June 2007

Howzabout taking responsibility for youractions.

You have made claims that invalidate your IAM test, yet seem reluctant to raise this with the IAM - go on be responsible.

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.
(Unattributed Trad.)

Cretin · June 2007

I take full responsibility for my actions, which is why I took the IAM training in the first place. Have you?

Jaded · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

I want individuals to assume responsibilty for their actions - not responsibility for their punishment for any consequences of those actions.

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

So how do you make them assume responsibility for their actions? Or do you think they do already?

(This is my question - to which you blustered a question back at me then claimed I haven't answered the question. This isn't about me answering a question, it's about you taking reponsilitiy for the statement you made and answering the question that you were asked about it!)

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

Asterixcp · June 2007

Hmmm.. I just noticed this thread. I can't be bothered to read thru' all the posts, but having recently driven under 6 miles in York and taken 50 minutes, due to traffic congestion, 20 mph seems remarkably quick in a car. Obviously not quite so good on a bike..

Pour vivre heureux, vivons le v‚lo..

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

I don't mean they lose concentration as in become tired, but in the sense that they (mistakenly) believe that they can do something else at the same time, like mobile phone, make up, etc.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

So now you're saying that 20mph limits are responsible for making people use their mobile phones while driving.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Not responsible for MAKING people use them, but encouraging people who are irresponsible in the first place to.

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

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?

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

WELL I HAVE - you just haven't liked any of them. Less bunched up cars making it harder for pedestrians to cross, and the fact that drivers will think they can do other things while driving more and not concentrate on the road as much.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Slower traffic doesn't make it harder to cross Bonjy. It makes it easier.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

No it makes it harder, because when the traffic can only go 20mph the release from one phase of the lights overlaps with the release from the next phase, resulting in a 'constant stream' of traffic, rather than 'convoys', which pedestrians can cross between.

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

So I take it that you still can't come up with any arguments against a 20mph limit then?

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Cretin - **pssst** - just copy mine! I won't tell!

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

I want individuals to assume responsibilty for their actions - not responsibility for their punishment for any consequences of those actions.

I think thats perfectly obvious, and yet despite your critisism you haven't bothered to answer my question.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Why should I take responsibility for my actions? I just DO my actions.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jaded

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.

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

Like I've said, I don't know how I'M going to educate - I just know it's better than legislation because people are more likely to trust the government.
Even now, driver training courses are being used effectively.

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

Cretin · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jaded

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

I want individuals to assume responsibilty for their actions - not responsibility for their punishment for any consequences of those actions.

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

So how do you make them assume responsibility for their actions? Or do you think they do already?

(This is my question - to which you blustered a question back at me then claimed I haven't answered the question. This isn't about me answering a question, it's about you taking reponsilitiy for the statement you made and answering the question that you were asked about it!)<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

You make them assume responsibility for their actions by forcing upon them the standards of driving which all sensible people would aspire to possess - and the best way of doing that is by improved driver training (I have now said this many times in this thread), and more traffic police (again, repeating myself), and not to rely on automated enforcement or blunt legislation. You make them understand very clearly that if caught driving in an unsafe fashion the police may take a very dim view and their freedoms may be severely curtailed.

If by now you still need to ask this question of me then you obviously haven't read anything else I've typed, in which case you either don't care about the answer, or you're just trying to provoke a reaction.

Cretin · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

So I take it that you still can't come up with any arguments against a 20mph limit then?

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Cretin - **pssst** - just copy mine! I won't tell!

<hr noshade size="1">
CyclingIsPermittedAlongThisFootpath GenericPath

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

The world only has so many pixels, best not to waste them

Cunobelin · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> I take full responsibility for my actions, which is why I took the IAM training in the first place.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

But you make claims that the test waas carried out in contravention of the IAM standards, this would invalidate the test. You also claim that the IAM are misleading, and in fact lying when they say that they advocate driving within speed limits.......

You have been asked to put this to the test by checking that your test is valid, is here a reason you are reluctant to do so?

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.
(Unattributed Trad.)

Cunobelin · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">You make them understand very clearly that if caught driving in an unsafe fashion the police may take a very dim view and their freedoms may be severely curtailed.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

MAY?????

Surely this is meant as a joke?

You make them understand very clearly that if caught carrying a weapon the police may take a very dim view and their freedoms may be severely curtailed.

You make them understand very clearly that if caught beating someone up the police may take a very dim view and their freedoms may be severely curtailed.

This is a total abrogation of the duty of the police, however it does demonstrate and promote the "I want to break the law with total impunity" of the classic poor driver in denial of their own bad driving

If the vehicle is caught driving unsafely - deal with it, no ifs, buts, maybes - deal with it!

Training is not necessarily the answer.

There will always be those who think they do not need the training, or worse will claim that their driving is no longer dangerous because they are now qualified to drive in this manner. This is a matter which concerns the IAM, and many of the Fleet training schemes as they recognise that such an attitude undermines and devalues the potential benefit of advanced training.

For these individuals the only remaining answer is legal censure and in some cses the removal of the licence.

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.
(Unattributed Trad.)

Jaded · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jaded

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.

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

Like I've said, I don't know how I'M going to educate - I just know it's better than legislation because people are more likely to trust the government.
Even now, driver training courses are being used effectively.

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

Flim-flam wishy-washy nonsense. Very similar to the SS.

"Get rid of Speed Cameras! Get rid of Speed Cameras! Get rid of Speed Cameras! Get rid of Speed Cameras! Get rid of Speed Cameras! Get rid of Speed Cameras!"

OK. We have got that message, now what are you gonig to do instead of them?

"Oh, I'm not really sure. Educate, probably. I think."

So - we a re back to the question again:

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.

No more wishy-washy flim-flam please!

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

Jaded · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jaded

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

I want individuals to assume responsibilty for their actions - not responsibility for their punishment for any consequences of those actions.

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

So how do you make them assume responsibility for their actions? Or do you think they do already?

(This is my question - to which you blustered a question back at me then claimed I haven't answered the question. This isn't about me answering a question, it's about you taking reponsilitiy for the statement you made and answering the question that you were asked about it!)<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

You make them assume responsibility for their actions by forcing upon them the standards of driving which all sensible people would aspire to possess - and the best way of doing that is by improved driver training (I have now said this many times in this thread), and more traffic police (again, repeating myself), and not to rely on automated enforcement or blunt legislation. You make them understand very clearly that if caught driving in an unsafe fashion the police may take a very dim view and their freedoms may be severely curtailed.

If by now you still need to ask this question of me then you obviously haven't read anything else I've typed, in which case you either don't care about the answer, or you're just trying to provoke a reaction.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

OK - you want to enfore better drivier training. You've only asnwered part of the question.

How. Who pays for it. How do you monitor it. How do you enforce it.

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

Cretin · June 2007

So, having honestly and openly answered your questions about responsibility for driving, you completely ignore that and choose to switch to something else instead. Very well, this is a tactic that I'm fast becoming used to in this thread.

I have not claimed that my test was carried out in contravention of the IAM standards - I have claimed that elements of my test included driving that was technically illegal, and that the examiner agreed with me that it was safer for me to exceed the limit at that point. I have already stated in a previous post that to pass an examination of just about any kind, you do not need to attain a score of 100%. It is absolutely no different whatsoever to a standard driving test in which some actions earn a mark against you, and some actions earn you an instant fail.

My driving was to the required standard for a pass mark, I made quite a few mistakes all of which were pointed out to me and which I have since worked on to eliminate, and yet you are so sure of your knowledge of advanced driver training that apparently you haven't taken any training whatsoever - which in my eyes hardly qualifies you to speak authoritatively on the subject.

I have not claimed that the IAM are misleading in any way, and I have not said they are lying - these are your words not mine, and I'll thank you not to make things up that are obviously untrue.

You have asked me to test your assumptions, I have told you I do not need to because the qualification is meaningless in any financial sense - my only gain is that I know how to drive more safely. There is no reluctance on my part, only disinterest.

Does that answer your questions then, or would you like me to wait while you invent some more things?

Cretin · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jaded
OK - you want to enfore better drivier training. You've only asnwered part of the question.

How. Who pays for it. How do you monitor it. How do you enforce it.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

The driver pays for it in just the same way they pay for their licence and their test. It is monitored by regular appraisals or retests. It is enforced by police traffic patrols.

Fail the test, and you can't drive. Fail the retest and you're on probation. Drive unsafely and you get (at some point) stopped and reported by trafpol.

I cannot see any downside to these measures whatsoever. More skilled road users must surely equal safer roads.

Jaded · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

I cannot see any downside to these measures whatsoever.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

You really think drivers would be prepared to pay œ100 plus for this?

I don't think so - remember, they are the most overtaxed group of people in the universe!

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

Portsmouth = 1st city with a blanket 20mph limit

Comments

Categories