[BBC News]Police promise on school speeding

[Newsbot]

Police promise to "vigorously enforce" 20mph speed limits outside schools in the Isle of Man.

 

Source : http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/world/...man/5383412.stm

[stookie]

Quite right too, but what's this about "may" be prosecuted? It should be mandatory - or are they trying to give themselves an 'out clause' in case the offender is a friend of the Chief Constable, MHK, Deemster, the Bobby's missus, etc?

 

And while on the subject of policing motorists, can we have more cameras on traffic lights please? St Ninian's first, bottom of Bray Hill next, the list goes on. Again, no excuse - the amber light is a 'stop' light also IMO so any driver paying attention should have no difficulty stopping for a Red!

[Tuna Sandwich]

.. And cameras on traffic lights are going to help something? Anything (other than generating revenue)?

 

Looking at the 20mph situations outside schools though, look at Kewaigue school, the perfect example of poor traffic management. Several years ago they put a drive through in the school so kids can be dropped off in the grounds instead of at the road side. Since the road was clear the traffic sped up to the allowable 40mph. So an illuminated 20mph signs suddenly appeared, which nobody sticks to. Quite honestly the most dangerous people on that stretch of road at pick up/drop off time are the parents who cut across and pull out in front of you.

 

Prior to the drive through it was not possible to do 20MPH due to the stopped traffic, pedestrians and associated danger. That was good traffic management. Natural traffic calming at it's best.

[stookie]

.. And cameras on traffic lights are going to help something? Anything (other than generating revenue)?

 

If there is a certainty you are going to be caught and fined by going through a red light, I think you might actually not do it, so the camera would be a very effective deterrent?

 

I am not in favour of cameras replacing actual police, but this is not a subjective area such as in a lot of motoring issues - you go through a red, you should know it will cost you. The funds raised could be used to put a few more bobbies out there on the streets

 

The 20 zones around schools are a good idea, because they allow a more appropriate limit outside the drop off/pick up times. I'm happy to stick to 20 by Braddan School at certain times of the day if it means I can have a realistic limit of 40 at other times - mind you, most muppets still haven't realised there is a 40 limit there at all, sticking to their usual dawdle

 

20 is also a good idea where lots of children are concerned - it's not their fault their parents can't drive with respect for other road users and often don't seem capable of thinking at all!

[Tuna Sandwich]

Stookie, as far as red lights are concerned, I cannot recall the last time someone running a red light injured or killed someone. In fact apart from annoying law abiding motorists (like us), what harm does it do? Is it really worth spending 10s of thousands of pounds on? Or would it be better to spend that money on more appropriate measures to cut crashes?

 

To be honest, what really gets me is the inappropriate use of speed limits in some areas. For example, at Cooil Road round about, why are the 30mph signs so far away from the actual round about? They are about 1000 feet away. There are no hidden junctions or drives and other limits are already in force. It is ridiculous.

 

How about the Old Castletown road? Yes, there have been some accidents and fatalities along there and in some areas the new limits are appropriate. However, Who's daft idea was it to put the extra wide centre line at the Douglas end? What about pedestrians? People actually have to walk along that stretch of road. The extra wide centre line "forces" cars as far as possible to the side of the road. Many years ago I took an advanced motorcycling course and one thing that I was told was to ride 1/3 of the way across the carriageway (not lane as appears to be the curent teaching). This puts me towards the centre of the road. There are several reasons, one of which is that children, animals etc. tend to come out from the side of the road not the middle, this gives you more time to see and avoid them, and for them to see you. Forcing traffic to the sides is asking for trouble. When a pedestrian is knocked down there, the traffic will get the blame but it is the DOT who will have caused it.

 

Enough ranting for now.

[rallybug]

And while on the subject of policing motorists, can we have more cameras on traffic lights please? St Ninian's first, bottom of Bray Hill next, the list goes on. Again, no excuse - the amber light is a 'stop' light also IMO so any driver paying attention should have no difficulty stopping for a Red!

 

The amber light is not a 'stop' light per se, it is a 'stop' light with provisos, as the Highway Code states "AMBER means 'Stop' at the stopline. You may go on only if the AMBER appears after you have crossed the stop line or are so close to it that to pull up might cause an accident" so I do stop on amber if the road conditions, speed, proximity to lights etc allow.

[John Wright]

Until people get to grips with the fact that there is a human right to life and personal safety but not one to drive motor cars, and certainly not to speed, this debate, and the speed limit debate will get nowhere.

 

A car is a large weapon of potential mass destruction. Its use has to be regulated, ie driving tests, speed limits, standards.

 

Except in the most exceptional circumstances peole do not go out to deliberately kill or maim, but when accidents happen speed inevitably makes the damage and injury worse. Road safety has to be about 2 things, making cars safe for their occupants and making the roads safe for all users, in vehicles or on foot.

 

I an not saying that speed causes accidents, just that at lower speeds many accidents would not happen or their consequences would be much less serious.

 

 

I firmly believ we have to look at it from the point of view of the cost, in finacial and environmental terms, to the public as a whole. From that viewpoint there should be strict speed limits on the Island and road traffic regulations including speed limits, traffic lights etc should be enforced.

 

At the end of the day driving is a privilege. We have to excercise it responsibly.

 

I say as I have previously posted

 

All Island speed limit 50 mph on open sections TT course, all other roads out of built up areas 40mph, built up areas (through routes) 20 mph and residential streets 15mph.

 

in practice these are the average speeds achieved anyway.

 

So a few people will not, without penalty, be able to do 90 on the mountain. In England the limit would be 60 anyway. I don't see it as privilege which is so important as to over ride safety considerations so as to be kept.

 

Losing that privilege has no cost, it may have large savings.

[Albert Tatlock]

Losing that privilege has no cost, it may have large savings.

A sweeping statement neglecting many issues associated with civil liberties and self-responsibility.

[Mr. Sausages]

A sweeping statement neglecting many issues associated with civil liberties and self-responsibility.

 

Do you think the same applies to, for example, gun ownership? Are the rules that restrict access to guns a violation of our civil liberties?

[Cret]

I believe the discussion topic was about 20 limits by schools, not a requirement for an absurd national speed limit designed for the lowest common denominator.

 

I'm all for enforcement of 20 limits outside schools & residential areas as they are setup in most cases at present. It's logical, and people disregarding them should beautomatically given points/fines.

[John Wright]

Not wanting to hijackthe thread but why is 50 and 40 absurd?

 

The gun analogy is great, Mr Sausages, thanks

[Mr. Sausages]

...absurd national speed limit designed for the lowest common denominator...

 

ALL laws are geared toward the lowest common denominator.

[Albert Tatlock]

A sweeping statement neglecting many issues associated with civil liberties and self-responsibility.

 

Do you think the same applies to, for example, gun ownership? Are the rules that restrict access to guns a violation of our civil liberties?

By definition - yes they are. However, the gun analogy is over simplistic, just as "locking up murderers is against their civil liberties" would also be over simplistic.

 

The question in any society about anything that has inherent risk (guns, alcohol, cigarettes, cars etc.) is where do we draw the line? Where that line is drawn on a variety of issues, and more importantly who is allowed to draw it, represents the difference between living in a democracy and a dictatorship.

 

Setting and enforcing a limit outside a school where children are less likely to be able to judge speed and not cross the road without assistance would be perfectly acceptable in a democracy to most drivers and civil libertarians. It is commonsensical.

 

I smell a lawyer in this thread. One of the major drivers of 'political correctness' are our lawyers, who are continually developing an ever-litigeous society, which can only inevitably lead to us being scared to do anything at all. Notice how these people stir the risk and associate it with, what are in fact, quite different issues.

 

We are all civil libertarians at heart Mr Sausages. It just takes some of us a little longer to realise what is going on untill we actually start to stand up against some of those things. If no one had the courage to stand up for our civil liberties in the past - we would no doubt be having this debate in German, if we were able to have it at all.

[Tuna Sandwich]

Not wanting to hijackthe thread but why is 50 and 40 absurd?

 

The gun analogy is great, Mr Sausages, thanks

 

 

50 / 40 is going to be ignored because it is too slow, just like 60 is ignored in UK. I do think that if they put a national speed limit of 60 on all roads (as per UK) but left it as unlimited on the mountain then the anti speed limit brigade would accept it. However, I would only agree to it if they took away some of the silly limits put in places like on the old Castletown road, the 50 bit on Ballamodha, etc. amd the 50mph limit on vans.

 

For me it does not matter. I know it will not be patrolled and life on the roads will become a race between the cameras, just like it is in England. It will do nothing for road safety, infact I will expect a rise in fatalities as frustration comes into play.

 

As for the gun analogy, guns do not kill people. People kill people.

[Mr. Sausages]

But we're having it in English, and ironically the English (along with almost the entire of the rest world) have long since recognised the importance of a national speed limit, and are in fact reducing their speed limit on country roads, such as the ones that are unrestricted here.