FAO North Cardiff Blue

[goats]

Re: FAO North Cardiff Blue

fair play , that made me laugh

Me too….i bet they were just dying to find a story like that to justify the madness of it….great in some places but not everywhere.

[North Cardiff Blue]

Re: FAO North Cardiff Blue

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/...c1Xn9sR6UPUt_g

Oh what a beautiful story, I'm so glad that the little girl was safe, I'll retire early in a year or two and drive around at five miles per hour to make sure no tortoise's get hurt crossing the roads xxx.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

Re: FAO North Cardiff Blue

it's just a straw man argument. if I were to say to you: "oh so you want to increase the speed to 30 in residential areas to save a bit of time when driving, well where will that stop, will you think that's still to slow and have people driving at 70 through housing estates to save a few seconds, no matter how many people die in the process?"
I don't think you'd be impressed with that line of logic would you?

ultimately why shouldn't we revise the speed limits based on the evidence from many countries that have done the same to save some lives for an absolute minimal level of inconvenience? it's far more sensible than just leaving them at the same level they were set 100 years ago when there was a tiny number of vehicles on the road because a bunch of people don't like change.

What a ridiculous reply that needs taking apart.

For a start, let's please get one thing clear. I don't know anyone who has any complaints about 20mph limits around schools or housing estates. If you find one, let us know. Please stop mistaking those who are against a blanket approach of a default of 20mph as those who want higher speed limits around those areas. If you genuinely think that, please stop. It is not true. Your thoughts about driving at 70mph through housing estates are total bollocks and utterly illogical.

My point, and will continue to be, arterial roads, particularly in quiet areas with no history of accidents or casualties from road accidents, now becoming 20mph roads where there is no real reason for it.

Here's 3 arterial roads not far away from me, all around a mile long. All have street lighting at the appropriate distance apart. All are relatively wide roads. Have a guess at the speed limits on each:

A - runs past a village, a small train station and industrial units and has several junctions on both sides at frequent intervals. Pedestrians cross regularly and a bus route runs along the road.

B - runs through a village with several bus stops and pelican crossings. Several bus routes use the road and school buses pick up and drop off children. There are several junctions. Road has seen a few accidents.

C - has no houses or buildings, just one pavement on one side. There are no houses for around a mile. Has no history of any accidents along this stretch.

Answers: A - 40mph, B - 30mph, C - 20mph.

I can't work out the logic in that, whatsoever, and neither can anyone else living around here.

The biggest problem I get whenever I try debating this with people like you is that you shove your fingers in your ears and just recite "saves lives" "evidence elsewhere" "minimal inconvenience". I firmly believe similar results in road safety could be achieved by having a full revision of speed limits, not just having a blanket approach. Evidence elsewhere might or might not be applicable to Wales, particularly in the valleys. Minimal inconvenience is a load of nonsense, though. Say you've got a road of 5 miles that is now 20mph and that's the only road you can use. That's 10 minutes extra per day and means a day extra over the course of a year. That's extra cost and wear and tear. It's not just that, either. People can be prosecuted and lose their license over this "minimal inconvenience", especially on roads that do not warrant 20mph speed limits, like C above.

It appears that, ultimately, the difference between us is that I believe there are some arterial roads that do not warrant a 20mph speed limit (please again don't suggest I advocate 30mph around schools, housing estates etc) and that there are roads where a reduction in speed limit is unnecessary and make no difference to accident figures. I believe each road should be looked at individually. In the meantime, you seem happy to drive everywhere at 20mph, even on roads where there'll never be a bad accident in a month of Sundays (bar anything caused by dangerous driving, which 20mph will not stop). All I want to see is some common sense with it all.

Lastly, I think that, as speed limits keep being reduced, it is a pertinent question to ask how far the Welsh Government is prepared to go. My 5mph comment was deliberately proposterous, but it makes a point of how far are they prepared to go to keep reducing accident figures. The real plan, of course, is to lower car usage.

[Rjk]

Re: FAO North Cardiff Blue

What a ridiculous reply that needs taking apart.

For a start, let's please get one thing clear. I don't know anyone who has any complaints about 20mph limits around schools or housing estates. If you find one, let us know. Please stop mistaking those who are against a blanket approach of a default of 20mph as those who want higher speed limits around those areas. If you genuinely think that, please stop. It is not true. Your thoughts about driving at 70mph through housing estates are total bollocks and utterly illogical.

My point, and will continue to be, arterial roads, particularly in quiet areas with no history of accidents or casualties from road accidents, now becoming 20mph roads where there is no real reason for it.

Here's 3 arterial roads not far away from me, all around a mile long. All have street lighting at the appropriate distance apart. All are relatively wide roads. Have a guess at the speed limits on each:

A - runs past a village, a small train station and industrial units and has several junctions on both sides at frequent intervals. Pedestrians cross regularly and a bus route runs along the road.

B - runs through a village with several bus stops and pelican crossings. Several bus routes use the road and school buses pick up and drop off children. There are several junctions. Road has seen a few accidents.

C - has no houses or buildings, just one pavement on one side. There are no houses for around a mile. Has no history of any accidents along this stretch.

Answers: A - 40mph, B - 30mph, C - 20mph.

I can't work out the logic in that, whatsoever, and neither can anyone else living around here.

The biggest problem I get whenever I try debating this with people like you is that you shove your fingers in your ears and just recite "saves lives" "evidence elsewhere" "minimal inconvenience". I firmly believe similar results in road safety could be achieved by having a full revision of speed limits, not just having a blanket approach. Evidence elsewhere might or might not be applicable to Wales, particularly in the valleys. Minimal inconvenience is a load of nonsense, though. Say you've got a road of 5 miles that is now 20mph and that's the only road you can use. That's 10 minutes extra per day and means a day extra over the course of a year. That's extra cost and wear and tear. It's not just that, either. People can be prosecuted and lose their license over this "minimal inconvenience", especially on roads that do not warrant 20mph speed limits, like C above.

It appears that, ultimately, the difference between us is that I believe there are some arterial roads that do not warrant a 20mph speed limit (please again don't suggest I advocate 30mph around schools, housing estates etc) and that there are roads where a reduction in speed limit is unnecessary and make no difference to accident figures. I believe each road should be looked at individually. In the meantime, you seem happy to drive everywhere at 20mph, even on roads where there'll never be a bad accident in a month of Sundays (bar anything caused by dangerous driving, which 20mph will not stop). All I want to see is some common sense with it all.

Lastly, I think that, as speed limits keep being reduced, it is a pertinent question to ask how far the Welsh Government is prepared to go. My 5mph comment was deliberately proposterous, but it makes a point of how far are they prepared to go to keep reducing accident figures. The real plan, of course, is to lower car usage.

Yes my "thoughts" about driving at 70 mph through a housing estate are total bollocks, I'm glad you were able to recognise that. That was to highlight that your oft repeated argument about how far will they reduce speeds in order to save lives is also bollocks.

For any given road there is clearly a balance between safety and practicality - there's nothing wring with suggesting there are roads that could perhaps be reviewed, but that isn't the point you were making when you said "Where does it stop? Will the Welsh Government end up thinking that casualty figures are still too high and reduce speed limits further?" which is what I was replying to.

[North Cardiff Blue]

Re: FAO North Cardiff Blue

What a ridiculous reply that needs taking apart.

For a start, let's please get one thing clear. I don't know anyone who has any complaints about 20mph limits around schools or housing estates. If you find one, let us know. Please stop mistaking those who are against a blanket approach of a default of 20mph as those who want higher speed limits around those areas. If you genuinely think that, please stop. It is not true. Your thoughts about driving at 70mph through housing estates are total bollocks and utterly illogical.

My point, and will continue to be, arterial roads, particularly in quiet areas with no history of accidents or casualties from road accidents, now becoming 20mph roads where there is no real reason for it.

Here's 3 arterial roads not far away from me, all around a mile long. All have street lighting at the appropriate distance apart. All are relatively wide roads. Have a guess at the speed limits on each:

A - runs past a village, a small train station and industrial units and has several junctions on both sides at frequent intervals. Pedestrians cross regularly and a bus route runs along the road.

B - runs through a village with several bus stops and pelican crossings. Several bus routes use the road and school buses pick up and drop off children. There are several junctions. Road has seen a few accidents.

C - has no houses or buildings, just one pavement on one side. There are no houses for around a mile. Has no history of any accidents along this stretch.

Answers: A - 40mph, B - 30mph, C - 20mph.

I can't work out the logic in that, whatsoever, and neither can anyone else living around here.

The biggest problem I get whenever I try debating this with people like you is that you shove your fingers in your ears and just recite "saves lives" "evidence elsewhere" "minimal inconvenience". I firmly believe similar results in road safety could be achieved by having a full revision of speed limits, not just having a blanket approach. Evidence elsewhere might or might not be applicable to Wales, particularly in the valleys. Minimal inconvenience is a load of nonsense, though. Say you've got a road of 5 miles that is now 20mph and that's the only road you can use. That's 10 minutes extra per day and means a day extra over the course of a year. That's extra cost and wear and tear. It's not just that, either. People can be prosecuted and lose their license over this "minimal inconvenience", especially on roads that do not warrant 20mph speed limits, like C above.

It appears that, ultimately, the difference between us is that I believe there are some arterial roads that do not warrant a 20mph speed limit (please again don't suggest I advocate 30mph around schools, housing estates etc) and that there are roads where a reduction in speed limit is unnecessary and make no difference to accident figures. I believe each road should be looked at individually. In the meantime, you seem happy to drive everywhere at 20mph, even on roads where there'll never be a bad accident in a month of Sundays (bar anything caused by dangerous driving, which 20mph will not stop). All I want to see is some common sense with it all.

Lastly, I think that, as speed limits keep being reduced, it is a pertinent question to ask how far the Welsh Government is prepared to go. My 5mph comment was deliberately proposterous, but it makes a point of how far are they prepared to go to keep reducing accident figures. The real plan, of course, is to lower car usage.

Well done Eric, let him have it, I can see my training is finally paying off

[North Cardiff Blue]

Re: FAO North Cardiff Blue

Yes my "thoughts" about driving at 70 mph through a housing estate are total bollocks, I'm glad you were able to recognise that. That was to highlight that your oft repeated argument about how far will they reduce speeds in order to save lives is also bollocks.

For any given road there is clearly a balance between safety and practicality - there's nothing wring with suggesting there are roads that could perhaps be reviewed, but that isn't the point you were making when you said "Where does it stop? Will the Welsh Government end up thinking that casualty figures are still too high and reduce speed limits further?" which is what I was replying to.

You bought a house on a busy road didn't you, and now you don't want riff-raff driving fast down you street.

Change the law of a million years, NIMBY's don't want cars driving at 30 in their streets!

[North Cardiff Blue]

Re: FAO North Cardiff Blue

FFS he's stopped spamming the football board and you post this.

FFS agreed, I tried to ignore it

[North Cardiff Blue]

Re: FAO North Cardiff Blue

Yes my "thoughts" about driving at 70 mph through a housing estate are total bollocks, I'm glad you were able to recognise that. That was to highlight that your oft repeated argument about how far will they reduce speeds in order to save lives is also bollocks.

For any given road there is clearly a balance between safety and practicality - there's nothing wring with suggesting there are roads that could perhaps be reviewed, but that isn't the point you were making when you said "Where does it stop? Will the Welsh Government end up thinking that casualty figures are still too high and reduce speed limits further?" which is what I was replying to.

Eric the only people for it if they are honest, are people that live on the busy roads themselves, so ignore any defenders, that's the only real reason, the safety is just a front.

[Rjk]

Re: FAO North Cardiff Blue

You bought a house on a busy road didn't you, and now you don't want riff-raff driving fast down you street.

Change the law of a million years, NIMBY's don't want cars driving at 30 in their streets!

I live in a cul-de-sac, you'd be a maniac if you tried to drive over 10 mph in my street.

30 metres away though is a main arterial road, which you can drive at 30 mph on because it isn't a residential road.

[North Cardiff Blue]

Re: FAO North Cardiff Blue

I live in a cul-de-sac, you'd be a maniac if you tried to drive over 10 mph in my street.

30 metres away though is a main arterial road, which you can drive at 30 mph on because it isn't a residential road.

Your Mum or someone then no one in their right mind likes 20.

[Rjk]

Re: FAO North Cardiff Blue

Your Mum or someone then no one in their right mind likes 20.

no, this may be hard to understand for a raging tory, but not everyone is entirely motivated by their own personal gain.

[North Cardiff Blue]

Re: FAO North Cardiff Blue

no, this may be hard to understand for a raging tory, but not everyone is entirely motivated by their own personal gain.

Not a tory, and how would anyone gain from going 10mph faster you raving NIMBY lunatic

[jeepster]

Re: FAO North Cardiff Blue

What a ridiculous reply that needs taking apart.

For a start, let's please get one thing clear. I don't know anyone who has any complaints about 20mph limits around schools or housing estates. If you find one, let us know. Please stop mistaking those who are against a blanket approach of a default of 20mph as those who want higher speed limits around those areas. If you genuinely think that, please stop. It is not true. Your thoughts about driving at 70mph through housing estates are total bollocks and utterly illogical.

My point, and will continue to be, arterial roads, particularly in quiet areas with no history of accidents or casualties from road accidents, now becoming 20mph roads where there is no real reason for it.

Here's 3 arterial roads not far away from me, all around a mile long. All have street lighting at the appropriate distance apart. All are relatively wide roads. Have a guess at the speed limits on each:

A - runs past a village, a small train station and industrial units and has several junctions on both sides at frequent intervals. Pedestrians cross regularly and a bus route runs along the road.

B - runs through a village with several bus stops and pelican crossings. Several bus routes use the road and school buses pick up and drop off children. There are several junctions. Road has seen a few accidents.

C - has no houses or buildings, just one pavement on one side. There are no houses for around a mile. Has no history of any accidents along this stretch.

Answers: A - 40mph, B - 30mph, C - 20mph.

I can't work out the logic in that, whatsoever, and neither can anyone else living around here.

The biggest problem I get whenever I try debating this with people like you is that you shove your fingers in your ears and just recite "saves lives" "evidence elsewhere" "minimal inconvenience". I firmly believe similar results in road safety could be achieved by having a full revision of speed limits, not just having a blanket approach. Evidence elsewhere might or might not be applicable to Wales, particularly in the valleys. Minimal inconvenience is a load of nonsense, though. Say you've got a road of 5 miles that is now 20mph and that's the only road you can use. That's 10 minutes extra per day and means a day extra over the course of a year. That's extra cost and wear and tear. It's not just that, either. People can be prosecuted and lose their license over this "minimal inconvenience", especially on roads that do not warrant 20mph speed limits, like C above.

It appears that, ultimately, the difference between us is that I believe there are some arterial roads that do not warrant a 20mph speed limit (please again don't suggest I advocate 30mph around schools, housing estates etc) and that there are roads where a reduction in speed limit is unnecessary and make no difference to accident figures. I believe each road should be looked at individually. In the meantime, you seem happy to drive everywhere at 20mph, even on roads where there'll never be a bad accident in a month of Sundays (bar anything caused by dangerous driving, which 20mph will not stop). All I want to see is some common sense with it all.

Lastly, I think that, as speed limits keep being reduced, it is a pertinent question to ask how far the Welsh Government is prepared to go. My 5mph comment was deliberately proposterous, but it makes a point of how far are they prepared to go to keep reducing accident figures. The real plan, of course, is to lower car usage.

There is not a blanket limit.

[North Cardiff Blue]

Re: FAO North Cardiff Blue

She should be investigated by social services for child neglect.

It's made a up political story anyway, how would she know what speed the car was doing?

Everyone ignores it except at speed cameras.

[Tuerto]

Re: FAO North Cardiff Blue

I'm sure that we can all agree that it's really good news that the child in question didn't sustain more serious injuries 👍