The London Telegraph is reporting today that the Department of Transport is proposing to impose a strict 20-mph speed limit on “residential roads and near schools.” Quoth a department spokesman: “We are trying to get the balance right between motorists and everyone else and this is a way of reminding local authorities that they have got these powers and they should use them.” I shouldn’t think that local authorities needed much reminding on that score. In Britain, as in the United States, “local authorities” like nothing better than sticking their collective noses into the everyday life of ordinary citizens, chivvying them with ever more intrusive rules and regulations, backed up by the coercive power of the state. In the case of the proposed new speed limits, enforcement will be aided by the nearly ubiquitous surveillance cameras deployed nearly everywhere in Britain these days. (On which subject let me recommend Ross Clark’s sobering book The Road to Big Brother: One Man’s Struggle Against the Surveillance Society, published later this month by Encounter Books.) Like many proposals formulated by the bureaucratic soft-totalitarians that rule over us these days, the 20-miles-an-hour law strikes one alternately as amusingly absurd and downright sinister. The sinister side, I hope, does not require elaboration. The amusing side may be slightly less obvious. It reveals itself in such observations as this:
“Research has found that pedestrians hit by a vehicle at 20mph have a greater chance of survival. Only one in 40 dies at 20mph, compared with one in five at 30mph.”
The cars Nancy Peloski and company want to force Detroit to build don’t go much faster than 15 mph, 20 tops, anyway, so its just a matter of time before Ginsberg tries to rule that today’s stupid idea from Britain serves as precedent for law here.
Every time we vote to re-elect these officials, we are complicit. You get what you tolerate. Protests are fine, but tossing incumbents out until the message is clear is the only answer.
Yes, you think your congress people are great, but so what? It’s your government and your servants should live in fear of incurring your wrath.
Hmm. Strange from a country that has the absurdly nannyish offence of “jaywalking”.
English cities are a lot more built up and congested than American ones, and our streets are generally narrower. When driving in a very built up area, or near a school, 20 mph or less is appropriate. However, this should not be a one size fits all policy.
Perhaps if we had more policemen and fewer speed cameras it would help. A policeman can exercise discretion as to whether a motorist’s speed is appropriate to the weather and traffic conditions. A camera simply records the speed, and sends the driver a bill – sorry – fine. (Notoriously speed cameras are used to raise money rather than improve safety.)
Personally, I’d love to see the reinstatement of the 55 mph speed limit since we’re all living in a period riddled with nostalgia for the glory of the Carter years.
Now all we have to do is start calculating the misery index and have some third world islamofascists overrun an embassy and take some hostages and have President Training Pants become a recluse in the White House (fat chance) and mount a futile, aborted rescue attempts and..and..and..
..someone pass the Kaopectate.
Войска ПВО. Now THAT brightened my day. Thanks.
Now that the urban leftists have attained absolute power, they assume it is their right to impose city-like restrictions on all, even rural folks who drive on empty roads in the middle of nowhere. Y’know, the more I see of these idiots the more I begin to itch for a little torch and pitchfork action….or a good old fashioned tar and feather party. Perhaps Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank should schedule a stump speaking tour of Tennessee, Arkansas and Oklahoma, with Rush Limbaugh providing media coverage. For added amusement they could pass out sacks of rotten tomatoes at the door.
What I’m saying is that I just don’t understand half the time whether our new government is serious or just funnin’ us. I mean some of the stuff they come up with make the Three Stooges look downright rational.
Sounds quite reasonable to me. We should have similar enforcement in the U.S. Anything which discourages driving and encourages walking and use of public transit, while providing a safety benefit at the same time, is a good policy in my book.
Methinks the draconian speed limit folks find the horse-drawn carriage to be cruel to the horses.
Just sayin…
Lower inner city speed limits to allow children back. Families move to suburbs to escape fast traffic
Oregon tried the 20 mph past all schools all the time and it got to be a burden. You are coming home at 11:45 pm past a high school for 4 block and you have to crawl at 20 mph. That one child might out. Very dumb idea.
Hey, this is a cool idea! It means I can drive my golf cart to the local mall instead of my Ford F-250. I always figured that it was a bit much to go shopping in my F-250.
The problem with speed limits is there exists a mindset which thinks “Speed limit say thirty therefore I have a right to travel at thirty mph. And they are doing thirty when road conditions dictate ten mph would be a responsiuble speed.
I am reminded of the wag who, during a debate on reducing the drinking age to 18 years, remarked that the answer was simple: increase the drinking age to 55 and lower the speed limit to 18 mph. Voila, fewer and less serious auto accidents and no more drunk drivers.
I think I see what’s in the cards: the reduced speed limit means city cars won’t need airbags or even seat belts or big bumpers. Then the mfrs can sell real small, real cheap cars. This is good news for anyone with teen-age drivers.
gyges:
What planet do you live on?? I do not live in the suburbs to escape “fast traffic”. The freeway on-ramp is less than two minutes from my house.
I live in a suburb of a major metropolitan area because
1) The schools are better – MUCH better
2) Police response time to a 911 call is less than 2 minutes (personal experience)
3)MUCH lower crime rate
4) Access to all the perks of a big city without the hassles. I never have to sit in traffic as both of us work in our cozy little suburb.
5) People are…neighborly. We know most of our neighbors, something that can be uncommon in the “big city”.
5) Relative safety means the kids can go out and about without me having to worry about drive-by shootings or drug pushers
There are tons of reasons to NOT live in the major city, but rather one of the outlying suburbs. Fast traffic has nothing to do with our decision, or the decision of anyone else I know.
I have another stupid idea,inspired by the Greens and the idiot Ruben Navarete,Bush, and the other slave labor/welfare dependent/democrat voter importer advocates.Reconfigure GM to manufacture only pedicabs,and rickshaws and issue the 12 million illegals with a new transportation worker visa,so they can legally pull and pedal the devices.. Presto! Solve the immigration and global warming crises simultaneously.
@8. MF: Not everyone lives in a city. My daily commute is a 30-40 minute drive each way. To commute via public transport would require a half-mile walk at each end, two transfers between different modes of transportation (bussubwaycommuter rail), and two hours if I’m LUCKY. What reasonable person would choose that over driving?
I will agree only if Nancy Pelosi’s private jet only fly 20 miles an hour as well.
Wow, we should raise the speed limit to 60 MPH in residential areas so almost all pedestrian accidents will be fatal, Anything short of that is pussy footing Ludditism. Bicyclists and pedestrians are just Commies or losers anyways, who needs them?
Saltherring
got any more conspiracy you uncovered in your back 40 that you want to share with your fellow patients?
MF:
“Sounds quite reasonable to me. We should have similar enforcement in the U.S. Anything which discourages driving and encourages walking and use of public transit, while providing a safety benefit at the same time, is a good policy in my book.”
The funny thing is, MF, you probably haven’t the slightest idea that you’re a fascist!
Think about it.
#21 NAMBY PAMBY: We should get rid of all speed limits on interstates ,and restrict green hysterics like you to sedan chairs,(carried by illegal aliens and homelesspeople).That way,you can fulfill your libtard fantasies,of being green and compassionate simultaneously.
We should get rid of all cars and trucks. We need to walk. We are all too fat from cars taking us every place anyhow. We need to get rid of the streets, highways and roads and turn them into sidewalks and bike lanes. No more lazy transportation will save the world from fumes and obesity.
5. Войска ПВО: You forgot about wearing a cardigan.
In Britain, the hard stuff, like getting the drug suppliers and dealers is left on the shelf; but show a golliwog doll in a window, and you get dropped on with a real heavy weight because you are a RACIST!
If you call for a cop to report a burglary IN PROGRESS, you’ll probably get a call some two days later to offer a case number for the insurance, but if there is the slightest rumour that an ordinary person has got hold of a GUN, the armed response unit comes out, it’s ‘hands behind your head time, and down on the ground!’
Try expecting that sort of reaction when there’s the possibility of a criminal with a firearm, and they’ll wait for four hours because of ‘Health & Safety’ issues!
Sedanchairs + illegalalien carriers =Energy independence.
The greatest offenders of caution at school crossings are the parents picking up their children. It’s the “me firsters” who cause so much chaos and they break the speed limit to get out before everyone else, run down crossing guards, turn right on red with ten or fifteen kids in the crosswalks, refuse to go along with safety implemented by the schools. Parents are the worst!!!