Snaipyr Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 I'd make it single lane heading south - with barriers if need be, and a run off lane and gap in the barriers to the Horses Home and the house at the top. I take it you do know the rules of road , i remember somewhere in the Highway Code it states that it is Illegal to cross a SOLID white line, anyone caught doing this on Richmond Hill needs to be dealt with sooner the better, i had some fuckwit in a grey Bmw overtake me on richmond hill, i admit to doing 55mph he steamed past me, got to the top corner and turned right over the solid white lines in front of an oncoming vehicle which looked to have to had brake quite hard, me speeding by 5 mph doesn't make me a bad driver as for sure the speed will be scrubed off by the top of the hill, his display of driving left me horrified. OK - Plan 2. Move the Horses Home to somewhere that doesn't involved getting into the fast lane, indicating right, slowing down and hoping that someone doesn't steam into the back of your car. Plan 3 - Build housing estates both sides of the hill and slap a 30 mph speed limit on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 I have a question. Why is it, that people who oppose the speed limit and cite an inability to have it enforced are very often the exact same people who are vocal about their opposition to the introduction of speed cameras. And if the speed limit wont actually make any difference as some claim, then let's just introduce it already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 To summarise: - People ignore speed limits, so they need to be enforced better - Speed limits do not reduce accidents, but do reduce accident severity So, the answer is speed limits with improved enforcement, right? What kind of logic is that? Why should generally law-abiding-citizens and good drivers be affected by the actions of a few stupid people? Richmond Hill is a far more complex question than that, and speed limits do not stop stupid drivers or accidents most of which happen up there because of people entering other lanes on what is a dangerous, steep, narrow-laned and often busy bend (where even a 40mph limit would still give a combined impact of 80mph). Even so called 'good drivers' can get into situations up there because of road conditions, especially in winter. Speed limits don't teach people how to to use their gears properly either, and don't stop being people being distracted (in fact they cause more distraction whilst people monitor their speedometer and not the road - imagine what that could cause up there). Your level of argument here clearly demonstrates the dangers of legislating for the lowest common denominators in society - which you are suggesting - whilst ignoring the alternatives and not dealing with the issues surrounding a particular blackspot (hint: the title of the thread) by generalising your argument across the islands roads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 I always enjoy this argument that in effect if we all drove within our capabilities there would be no accidents. I drive in a way I beleive is sensible and believe I am capable off but I might be wrong. No body has ever told or tested me on my driving capabilities apart from my test many years ago to see if I was competent to have a licence. Do you really believe that people who exceed their capabilites and have an accident go out to "drive beyond their capabilities" or when they are driving in a way that many of us might think is foolish and reckless they thibnk I am driving beyond my capabilites lets carry on. To me it is a rubbish argument as at the time I am sure everybody is driving within what they would deam their capabilities, they may well have over estimated them but it still does not alter the fact that they will me driving in a way they believe they are capable of. To say that people driving within you capabilities is a bland meaningless phrase. It might be self evidently correct but unless there is a means to tell every body what their capabilities are it is meaningless. Do you know the spread of your drving capabilities cos I certainly do not know mine and I have no idea if I am capable of driving faster or what ever. I believe I drive within my capabilities but maybe on the way to work this morning I will spin off and discover that they are way below the level i believe them to be. If an accident has been caused by speeding, regardless of whether a speed limit existed or not, the driver was most likely driving beyond their capabilities and so has been reckless. That is the best limiter: drive within your capabilites and within the conditions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Just a suggestion; perhaps all those who are opposed to a speed limit should prove their worth by taking this course - I believe it costs £85 nowadays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ai_Droid Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 What kind of logic is that? Why should generally law-abiding-citizens and good drivers be affected by the actions of a few stupid people? It's perfectly logical, if limits are proven to reduce the severity, then where's the arguments against them? Richmond Hill is a far more complex question than that, and speed limits do not stop stupid drivers or accidents most of which happen up there because of people entering other lanes on what is a dangerous, steep, narrow-laned and often busy bend (where even a 40mph limit would still give a combined impact of 80mph). Your level of argument here clearly demonstrates the dangers of legislating for the lowest common denominators in society - which you are suggesting - whilst ignoring the alternatives and not dealing with the issues surrounding a particular blackspot (hint: the title of the thread) by generalising your argument across the islands roads. I didn't suggest other safety mesures be ignored, Dickbert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 What kind of logic is that? Why should generally law-abiding-citizens and good drivers be affected by the actions of a few stupid people? It's perfectly logical, if limits are proven to reduce the severity, then where's the arguments against them? Richmond Hill is a far more complex question than that, and speed limits do not stop stupid drivers or accidents most of which happen up there because of people entering other lanes on what is a dangerous, steep, narrow-laned and often busy bend (where even a 40mph limit would still give a combined impact of 80mph). Your level of argument here clearly demonstrates the dangers of legislating for the lowest common denominators in society - which you are suggesting - whilst ignoring the alternatives and not dealing with the issues surrounding a particular blackspot (hint: the title of the thread) by generalising your argument across the islands roads. I didn't suggest other safety mesures be ignored, Dickbert. Well - Hemorrdroid - why don't you go ahead and suggest some for Richmond Hill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ai_Droid Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Well - Hemorrdroid - why don't you go ahead and suggest some for Richmond Hill. As well as adding a limit and a speed camera, I'd think about either straightening the corner, or adding a new one half way down each of the fast bits to slow the traffic. I'd probably nuke the dual carriageway too, manx drivers seem to get over excited at both of those on the same road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keyboarder Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Maybe for you in your brown Austin Montego worrying whether your trilby will blow off if you reach 55mph, but for most people 50 mph is not too fast up an open stretch of dual carriageway with good visibility. I'd probably nuke the dual carriageway Without wanting to be pedantic, Richmond Hill is not a dual carriageway. oldmanxfella, perhaps you should slow down and take a refresher course, lol......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ai_Droid Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Without wanting to be pedantic, Richmond Hill is not a dual carriageway. oldmanxfella, perhaps you should slow down and take a refresher course, bumsex......... Ah your right yes, I mean remove two lanes. Probably less important than slowing people coming down the hill though, which seems to be where most of the bother is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tucker Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Without wanting to be pedantic, Richmond Hill is not a dual carriageway. oldmanxfella, perhaps you should slow down and take a refresher course, bumsex......... Ah your right yes, I mean remove two lanes. Probably less important than slowing people coming down the hill though, which seems to be where most of the bother is? So is that one way going up or down ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tucker Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 When are you muppets going to learn ! Speed does NOT kill ,SHIT driving kills ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 When are you muppets going to learn ! Speed does NOT kill ,SHIT driving kills ! So how come nobody dies when they're reverse parking? That's when most shit driving goes on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frances Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 When are you muppets going to learn ! Speed does NOT kill ,SHIT driving kills ! So how come nobody dies when they're reverse parking? That's when most shit driving goes on. wish it were so - many children killed each year by reversing vehicles (why do you think so many goods vehicles have an automatic broadcast warning when in reverse) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 That's not shit driving, that's shit pedestian-ing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.