20 MPH speed limit across london in three years

[detective-boy]

So I refute any proposal that allows police to determine what and when is safe. They are not the law.

You REALLY don't see that that is exactly what a blanket speed limit does, do you? You really WOULD rather some faceless, incompetent twat in TfL makes a decision for every situation rather than a police officer exercises some discretion at the scene in the precise circumstances of a particular case.

 

[detective-boy]

Ideas have to be feasible.

...

Totally agreed - or otherwise its not consistent across the board.

Consistency is not a strength, is it?

EVERY law has ALWAYS been enforced with discretion. Until the advent of robotic parking and speed enforcement. And look what happened ...

 

[detective-boy]

I'm not really interested in your mistakes if your negligence results in the death of my family. Sorry, but if you can't be trusted to drive safely then you can't be trusted full stop.

But we're not talking about potentially fatal negligence, are we. No-one is put at any significant additional risk by a car travelling at 46mph rather than 40mph on an empty, dry, lit dual carriageway at 3am on a clear night.

This comment has revealed exactly why you get the arse about my references to the "(Only) Speed Kills" brigade ... you're a member aren't you?

 

[detective-boy]

...raced through a traffic light.

(Only) Speed Kills.

If they weren't "racing" then the drink-driving and failing to comply with a red light wouldn't have had any effect, eh?

 

[BMR]

efits.

Option 2: Fit all cars with tag & beacon techonology.

Probably more expensive than the Option 1, and likely to have less public support.

.

What do you mean by tag and beacon? If you are meaning automatically slowing the car down when it passes through some sort of beam, I'd much prefer that to option 1.

Why? Because you have no longer got a flawless, unblinking eye of a camera watching over me, waiting to punish my slightest mistake.

 

[citydreams]

But we're not talking about potentially fatal negligence, are we. No-one is put at any significant additional risk by a car travelling at 46mph rather than 40mph on an empty, dry, lit dual carriageway at 3am on a clear night.

You really are the most pig-headed fuckwad of all shit-stirring space-wasters ever to have stumbled upon Urban.

Not only are you consistently rude, idiodtic and self-contradictory, but you don't even have the ability to debate with someone half as intelligent as you (rotflmao)

Leaving aside that you need to call someone stupid to get your point across, or that your head is so firmly placed up your own arse that it's probably easier to kick some sense into you than help you remove it, you are the most incompetent conversationalist I've had the misfortune to wipe off my shoe.

And you think you're clever?? Fucking tosspot. Grow up, or did they not teach you that at "how to treat the public 101" at pigschool.

 

[citydreams]

variable speed limits are the answer but are not practicable in terms of current technology.

says who? you? don't make me laugh. you know less about traffic enforcement than a community support officer.

you're a danger to the public.. thank fuck you're ex-dibble, though at least if you were I could enjoy myself by having you demoted to shit shoveller.

Seeing as drug prohibition is widely ignored and cannot effectively be enforced, do you argue that, say, banning alcohol as well will make observance of the law higher and enforcement easier?

Shut up you incompetent arse. You've totally lost the plot. Nurse, time for the nice policeman's medication.

 

[citydreams]

(Only) Speed Kills.

If they weren't "racing" then the drink-driving and failing to comply with a red light wouldn't have had any effect, eh?

You didn't even read the link did you.

They raced through a light thinking they could catch the inter-green phase - not as in your essex boy drag racing ex-police officer race.

But sure, the fact that they were already travelling at 30mph had nothing to do with the fact. (irony pointed out for the extremely hard of thought)

Shitstain.

 

[citydreams]

But we're not talking about potentially fatal negligence, are we. .

Actually, I was... But nevermind. Go back to pushing your pen, dibble.

 

[citydreams]

Originally Posted by citydreams:
I refute any proposal that allows police to determine what and when is safe. They are not the law.

You REALLY don't see that that is exactly what a blanket speed limit does, do you?

No cunstable, it's you that doesn't get it for the umpteenth time
1. it's not a blanket ban.
2. the balance of power shifts to the residents, via the councils to decide where is safe to drive above 20mph not, thank fuck, police sergeants who think they know it all.

You really WOULD rather some faceless, incompetent twat in TfL makes a decision for every situation rather than a police officer exercises some discretion at the scene in the precise circumstances of a particular case?

If it means people like you are off the streets, then abso-fucking-lutely.

 

[citydreams]

EVERY law has ALWAYS been enforced with discretion. Until the advent of robotic parking and speed enforcement. And look what happened ...

Jean Charles de Menezes (I shouldn't need to say any more than that, but.,. for the hard of thinking...)
Harry Stanley
Guildford 4
Brixton Riots
Stephen Lawrence
"Mad Dog" Hickson and "Chainsaw Woody" Woodruff
&c. &c. with a list of convictions as long as your arm..

 

[citydreams]

Is a Brother off the track?
Try the Square;
Try it well on every side.
Nothing draws a craftsman back
Like the Square when well applied.
Try the Square.

Is he crooked, is he frail?
Try the Square;
Try it early, try it late;
When all other efforts fail,
Try the Square to make him straight -
Try the Square.

Since the Metropolitan Police was founded in 1829 there have been two complete reorganizations of its detective department. Both were provoked by massive corruption scandals leading to criminal trials exactly one hundred years apart, in 1877 and 1977. In each scandal Freemasonry played a dominant role.

Scotland Yard's first 'Detective Force' was set up in 1842. It consisted of only two inspectors and six sergeants. By 1869, 180 detectives were dealing with minor crime in outlying divisions but serious investigations in London were left to only twenty-seven officers out of 9,000. In the 1870's most of this squad was itself a criminal conspiracy in which not only were the prime culprits Freemasons; Freemasonry was what brought them together.

http://freemasonrywatch.org/true_blue.html

 

[tarannau]

You see, I would, in principle, be in favour of police officers being given more discretion to enforce the laws. The reality is sadly very different - I don't trust the institutionally biased, look after its own, force that we have today further than we can throw it.

There was a remarkable statistic in the paper that showed that nearly all speeding offences committed by officers were waived by their seniors. Full details on http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/uk/speeding+police+officers+unpunished/535937

But essentially from 90,480 offences captured on film, just 354 officers received fines or points on their licenses (1 in 200) - compared to 80% of ordinary motorists, according to official figures. Which, even allowing for the occasional emergency siren or situation, is remarkably convenient

Discretion? You can't trust officers to police themselves honestly, let alone the general public. We've seen what police discretion has achieved in things like stop and search, disproportionately discriminating against ethnic minorities. Why give more discretion to officers in other situations - they need to earn the respect first.

 

[flash]

Okay just so I tidy up what I said on this one:

don't quite agree with this.. VMS's go up much quicker. And as I've found at TfL (apart from charging foreign diplomats) where there's a will, there's a way?

DTO Carp List Slots last for up to 14 months - it is the latest DTO policy (i.e. from Jnauary~ish 2007). They admit that the works may happen quicker, but they aren't promising anything (I agree it should happen quicker, but this whole stick an installation everywhere just because someone may do something stupid philosophy - I am somewhat hypocritical on this one as I am a fan of guardrail - plus the C.C.Zone and work it entailed for DTO means they are stretched - its why they leave the vacant slots off of office plans these days that go to consultants as it gives the wrong impression).

I'm not that kind of modeller (I use my own models) Though funnily enough, my first day on the job was to go out on the streets and check the phasing for Blackfriars Bridge. That's one mean set of lights to phase on your own. ?

Apologies for assuming that you were a straight number plugger - and yeah that's somewhat intimidating

Before you bow out, may I ask you what your view is of the Mayor's Transport Strategy?

I'd rather not say to much as I don't have a strong valid opinion of my own so it would be wrong to criticise. However a 3-5 year rolling funding programme is needed i.e. at the end of March accruals + lip bids for the following year (13 months time), takes you up to 2 months into the new year, leaving you with 10 months to 12 months work - that aint going to happen. I also have strong issues with certain things BPT related.

 

[flash]

Just to tidy up on this one as well:

Consistency is not a strength, is it?

EVERY law has ALWAYS been enforced with discretion. Until the advent of robotic parking and speed enforcement. And look what happened ...

I totally disagree with this statement. Laws are there for a reason. Discretion cannot be used or otherwise you give defendants a weapon when a case goes to court (i.e. they let him off why can't you let me off). I take the view that too many laws have been made (since 1997 perhaps).

The amount of accident statistics that I have been through where the cause was put down as excessive speed is untrue. Hence speed limits are there for a reason. I put you down as an ex-traffic department police person (maybe I'm wrong). I'm not saying that you couldn't have Autobhan style sections of motorway - but we all know the reason why we got speed limits on the motorway don't we - a firm went testing with their cars on the M1 at 160+ prior to Le Mans back in the 60's. You give someone an inch and they take a mile. Until we can live in a sensible and respectful society - you need strong laws and harsh punishments - regardless of civil liberties (i.e. if a sign is put up saying "no parking"/double red lines etc. - no you can't park there just because you couldn't find a space/wanted to go to Carnival, yes your car has been towed, yes you will have to pay a fine if you want to see it again). Once people start to respect the law, maybe some of these problems will start to go away.

 

[slainte]

Agh I really didn't want to get involved with this but Ive watched this get very very silly.
Yes it should be noted that it is not speed that kills but un-necessary speed in a given situation. If the reason for speed cameras is to keep traffic flowing then in some instances the slowing of traffic down when heavily congested so that it keeps flowing is an option although an irritable one for many.
Variable cameras such as on the M25 are the answer the only answer because if you lower the limit to 20mph and say its Sunday evening at 2am and the roads are empty its frankly ridiculous to get flashed if you doing 28 mph.

If the problem is to improve road safety then the options are to regularly have people re-test every 10 years at least so that you can raise the standards required and remove the fuckwits on the roads which barely passed a test years ago. And no experience doesn't necessarily make you a better driver if you have been practising shite driving or riding habits for years. But nobody or particularily any political group wants to suggest this which is frankly insulting cause riding or driving is a privilege and not a right and you can kill someone. If you not up to the grade as the road landscape evolves then sorry youre out. This is the situation for RoSPA licence holders,they have to take their test every 3 years to keep their advanced licence and if they don't make the grade ie keep the skills up they loose it.
Im not a policeman but when I did my advanced riding IAM training I really was amazed at the standards the police class one holders have.The skill level involved has to be seen before statements of derision should be directed at them,which frankly I think many here haven't witnessed first hand. The observation is amazing as is the application of what is termed "the system" of roadcaft for smooth fast progression.
I cringe at how I rode a motorbike before and compare it to now and its made me a better safer more observant rider.Smoother, ironically faster and within the speed limit.
Problem is from a safety perspective, people want to have something like a camera to slow them down as its "the speed"rather than be told they are a safe but shite driver/rider..an ego thing and the way people react to the idea of having to re-test regularly is disgusting but said same individuals will harp on new drivers/riders/ motorcyclists/ cyclist etc. everyone but themselves ie I could be better but that would mean that i might have to eat humble pie so that I can improve.
Im not convinced myself the 20 mph cameras are an answer to the congestion in london its too complicated for that and requires multiple angles such as lower cost public transport and cost and a shed more of it.
This in combination with either less traffic density or raising the standards on the road is the way forward.
Sorry if I have ticked anyone off.