Even more speeding paranoia...

  Quickbeam 12:38 01 Jun 07

click here
or what?

  Bingalau 13:27 01 Jun 07

That should help the environment a lot. Everyone driving along in third gear using twice as much petrol as normal. My memories of Portsmouth is of thousands of "Dockyard Matey's" cycling to work and back every day.

  bremner 14:01 01 Jun 07

I welcome the move and can only hope that a man waving a red flag walking in front of every car is not too far off ;o)

  skeletal 14:17 01 Jun 07

Of course I blame broadband. It’s getting faster all the time; all those electrons going dangerously fast. Think of the children!!!


  Cymro. 14:54 01 Jun 07

I don`t like the idea very much but I suppose there is a case for it at certain places such as outside schools etc.

  Mr Mistoffelees 15:15 01 Jun 07

"but I suppose there is a case for it at certain places such as outside schools etc."

Exactly, but not the whole city.

  picklsey 16:08 01 Jun 07

do you not think it,s got more to do with the extra money they will make from speeding fines.

  Quickbeam 16:27 01 Jun 07

the day we accept the GPS speed limiting idea is getting closer... yes?

  ^wave^ 16:40 01 Jun 07

this looks like more speeding cameras and fines to me are they short of cash lets hit the motorist again.

  Input Overload 17:55 01 Jun 07

Having seen someone run over a few months ago I agree with the proposal totally.

  skeletal 20:50 01 Jun 07

Of course seeing someone run over, or indeed any accident that causes injury, is upsetting and any decent human being will feel for the person and family. That is not the issue; the issue is a blanket coverage of a very low, almost impossible to maintain, highly fuel inefficient (what’s happened to "global warming" then), congestion causing speed limit that will do very little to improve road safety overall.

In certain places, like outside schools at drop-off or pick-up times, one could make a case for even 15 MPH, but other, relatively wide and deserted roads with few parked cars, at 5AM is totally different. And that is the problem, which is why I’m always banging on about inappropriate speed. I, personally, would think the difference between the two situations is quite obvious, as would any traffic officer. A mechanical device (for which read speed camera) does not. To maintain 20MPH in the second case would require far too much attention to speed to the detriment of looking where you are going. I would far rather travel at, shock horror, 35 MPH and not have an accident at all, than 20 MPH and hit someone because I wasn’t concentrating on where I was going.

At such a low speed you can’t even rely on cruise control (which is far better at maintaining constant speed than a human) because a downhill section will have you go over the limit (I know I’ve tried it).

In heavily congested traffic, speeds will be low anyway, typically varying between 0 and 15-25.

And, what about bicycles? A decent cyclist can get over 20MPH, particularly on a slight descent.


This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Sniper Elite 4 review: Headshotting Nazis has never felt so good

1995-2015: How technology has changed the world in 20 years

The Best Design, Illustration, Animation and VFX Awards of 2017

WWDC 2017 dates: How to get WWDC 2017 tickets, when is WWDC 2017 and more details announced