Speed limits should be abolished (in an ideal world)
Would society be ready to self-regulate if speed limits were abolished from next year?
Many times when I'm behind the wheel or on my motorbike I imagine what it'd be like not to have speed limits on our roads at all. I imagine that if everyone was like me, there would be no need for them. You would always know what the right speed on a given road, in those circumstances, in that weather would be. Why wouldn't you, you're reasonable human being capable of doing amazing things (like putting two and two together), therefore, being considerate to your surroundings wouldn't be a problem.
If there was no speed limit I'd be driving 130-150 mph on motorways, 60-100mph on dual carriageways, 30 in built-up areas, 5-20 past a school. Well, to be frank, I'd happily drive at 60 mph in a built-up area at 3am when there's no-one around, no parked cars which could hide potential hazards, etc.
It all comes down to the driver, you see. A tired useless accident-prone driver who fiddles with the radio and manages to shave at the same time while moving will be a danger to the world - whatever his speed. A skilled and careful driver like me, pays attention every second of his journey and keeps himself and others safe.
Why should I crawl along at 70 mph on an empty motorway at 3am?
If there were no speed limits, people wouldn't need to speed anymore. They would just make up for the delay where and when it's safe - legitimately. Why should I crawl along at 70 mph on an empty motorway at 3am when my skills and modern technology (in the form of a fast, reliable and safe car) would allow me to get from London to Cornwall in 3 hours?
I know why: because we don't live in an ideal world. The question, therefore, is: is it 'non-ideal' because of a handful of anti-social individuals or is it more than just a handful? If the former is true, I suggest that we cage that handful of thugs and let the rest of us get on with our lives without having to observe rules which were made with 'them bad guys' in mind.
Classic story: a 3-lane dual carriageway, lunchtime, dry weather, 1 sleepy driver in the slow lane, 1 unhurried driver in the middle lane, 1 selfish b*****d hogging the fast lane and stuck behind him is Mr.X experiencing another instance of speed limit enforcement(50 mph) by a fellow motorist. Mr.X is late for a job interview but is in good form, having slept well, and his car is well-maintained. Exceeding the limit by 20 mph would help him. He's stuck for 5 miles, after which he comes of the main road and into a residential area. This is his opportunity to make up for lost time. He keeps his foot on the pedal and flies past a school at 40 mph when... a child steps out in front of him.
Mr.X should have left earlier. Mr.X should have been allowed to exceed the limit on the cariageway.
Speed limits save lives. But frustrated drivers take them.
By: Friday
Comments from visitors
A good example of harmonic resonance is the sound caused on the concrete sections of the M25, especially when driven along by vehicles with radial tyres, you hear that awful drumming scratch sound. Traffic noise can be amplified and exaggerated if it bounces,or echos off near by buildings. Different patterns of tyre tread can cause differing levels of harmonic resonance.
The continental expert - 15-Feb-11 18:03
Where are your other creations - have not seen any of them recently.
One despairs.
the crash expert - 2-Nov-10 23:49
The french have a much better and more graphic way of doing deterrence, they put up a black wooden or cardboard silhouette of a human figure, at the road side, with a red painted mark to look like blood, to show the relevant injury or death. They don't leave any worded signs with it either. They leave the requisite number of these human figures at the roadside signalling the number injured or ki11ed.
nick "petrolhead" fe - 28-Oct-10 17:36
In Suffolk in 1995 450 new 30mph limits were introduced on roads which had previously been at the National limit (60mph). Up until 1995 total casualties in accidents had been going down steadily every year. From 1996 they increased steadily at least until 2001 when they hit the same number as they had been in 1991. (ABD).
In any case, why not concentrate on the other 95% of accidents which are caused by inattention and poor judgement?
As to the signs saying "X people were ki11ed or injured on this road last year" or whatever; personally I think they are nonsense, but not for the reason you think! When they say "this road" how much of it do they mean? Put a sign like that on the A38, which is 292 miles long, and it could mean the whole of it! On the other hand do they mean a particular stretch of a road?
Without stating the length of road in question the sign is meaningless!
grumpyoldwoman - 28-Oct-10 15:26
There are times when it is perfectly safe to break speed limits; particularly as they are constantly being lowered due to reasons other than road safety, such as over zealous speed camera partnerships out to make some money. Speed limits have also been lowered after accidents even after it has been shown that those involved were not breaking the limit in the first place.
On the other hand, there are times when the speed limit is too fast; in icy or very wet conditions, when there is a group of children messing about on the pavement, animals around, etc..
The vast majority of accidents are actually caused by inattention to road conditions and other road users.
grumpyoldwoman - 28-Oct-10 07:16
You cannot judge safety in mph/or by an arbitrary number on a road sign. Driving and safety is all about time/place and conditions/and the weather. Use of mirrors and hazard perception.
the crash expert - 27-Oct-10 22:06
the crash expert - 27-Oct-10 21:34
grumpyoldwoman - 27-Oct-10 12:07





