I'm all for child safety having two of my own, but I do feel they are taking the michael at the moment. Warrington is becoming horrendous to drive through at any time of the day now. There just seems to be no planning at all and Warrington has some of the worst traffic lights I've ever seen. Long Lane is a prime example, driving from Hilden Road to say PC World would probably take 15 minutes once you've sat at those never changing lights for 5 minutes watching no cars go anywhere then crawled along Long Lane at sub 20 mph to join the queue to the lights onto Winwick Road which are horrific. When the Long Lane traffic finally goes to green the lights on the roundabout then go to red meaning 2 cars max can get through.

20mph on Long Lane is fine at school time and when kids are out vandalising cars and getting trollied, but when you drive down there at 2am and the plank in front of you is doing 19 mph it just becomes a tad annoying.

cruising long lane for orfords finest at 2am eh?

Technically speeding didn't kill the child, the child running out into the road killed him. Educate children better about road safety. Contraversial viewpoint, i understand, but i'm sick of the owness being put on the driver.

No it doesn't. I was doing 90mph on the motorway the other day, and nearly all my driving life have done so. Haven't killed a single person. Inappropriate speed kills. If i was doing 90mph down Long Lane, now that would be dangerous. This is the part that annoys me about the "speeding tax" that seems to be implied on drivers. I drive a little quicker than maybe i should. Who's more dangerous? Myself, or the 80yr old granny with the reaction times of an oil tanker? The way to stop poor driving is regular retests. If you can't pass regular standard checks, you can't drive. Driving is a privelidge, not a neccessity.

Or the driver losing control and driving onto the pavement?

Or if the car had been going 20mph then the child would not have been killed.

What is the difference in braking distance between 70 and 90 mph?

Depends what car you are driving surely? Doing it in an old car, it would be horrendous. Doing it in a modern car, with further uprated brakes, and its not going to be much different to a standard car. Again, the point is being missed. If everyone leaves enough space to the car in front, we could all do 140+mph safely. However, some idiots drive too close to be doing 40mph let alone 70mph. I appreciate the point you are making, and i'm not excusing poor driving, but to point the finger of blame at speed alone is simply ridiculous.



Again, if the driver is on the pavement, then its not speed killing is it? If you can't keep a car on the road at 30mph, then frankly, you shouldn't be driving. As with the 20mph thing, i have absolutley no problem whatsoever with limits like that being put in place outside schools and playgrounds, i'd drop them even further, but why they should be enforced outside of these hours is ridiculous.

You are just trying to create here.

I expect you are, because you seem to have the attitude that you are a great and safe driver, and can therefore drive safely at higher speeds than most other people.

The 80 year old granny probably knows she is a bad driver and therefore drives very slowly. Even if she does hit a pedestrian she is going so slowly they will probably not be killed.

I can't remember the exact stats but it's something like 80% chance of dying if hit at 40mph, 20% if hit at 20mph. Therefore the answer to your question is pretty obvious really, isn't it.

Once again, quoting convenient government stats at me that aren't relevant to my point. I don't class myself as a great driver. Can i control a car? Yes. Better than some drivers? Yes. Thats why i enjoy doing track days etc..they allow you to test yourself in demanding situations. Do i drive like i do on the track, on the road? No. Thats why i go to a track to do it. The point i am making is that speed alone DOES NOT KILL. If i'm driving down an empty road at 4am in the morning as i often do on my way to fishing, and i'm doing 50mph in 40mph zone, am i likely to kill anyone? No. If i stop at a red light, and there's nothing coming, i drive through. Oh no, i've jumped a red light. Did anyone die? No. Its sweeping generalisations that are just wrong, hence my statement about "inappropriate speeding kills". If i do 40mph outside a school during school ours, then thats just reckless, as it would be if i did it in a resedential area. Everyday i see so much much dangerous driving its unbelievable. Undertaking, tailgating, using mobile phones, smoking, dangerous speeding, and combinations of them all. Does a speed camera or a copper with a camera catch any of this? No, and i'll guarantee that those driving styles contribute to more accidents every year than out and out speed.

You can't have a set a rules that obey you when it suits though. That would be silly.

Timmy, from what you are saying, you are quite simply a reckless driver. Believe me, speed does kill. Try picking up the body of a 16 year old girl who's just been killed by a speeding driver. Going through a red light because you can't see anything coming is quite simply reckless. People with an attitude like yours should simply not be on the road.

Drinking and driving doesn't kill. I could drink 10 pints and drive at 80mph and I'd be fine. Its colliding with something that kills. And yet its drink driving thats the offence.....why not make it colliding thats the offence...?

You would be fine until you hit something. Then you wouldn't be watching the Wire for about 5-10 years.

Speed doesn't kill. Inappropriate speed does.

And yes someone being knocked over can quite easily be to blame (speed in this case can be irrelevant). You could be doing 10mph in a 30 zone and hit some one who wanders into the road (for whatever reason) and run them over; they may die. It doesn't stop them being at fault though.

Speed kills… simple as that. So, I agree with 20mph zones near schools and parks, plus other built-up residential areas, etc.

Fortunately, most good drivers drive to the conditions of the road. However, a driver needs to realise that every time they climb into their car they are then in control of a deadly weapon if used inappropriately. It is easy to make a car go, but takes a lot more effort to make it stop!!

A driver has a protective shell to help cater for the unexpected; pedestrians, cyclists and bikers generally do not!!

The other issue with speed limits is that they have to go to the lowest common denominator – the idiot!!

There are too many of them around with no regard to other road users or pedestrians. Indeed, the complete lack of etiquette on our roads is all too evident with the pace of life being for us to get from A to B as quickly as possible.

However, the issue here is about enforcement.

In simple terms, if you break any trafficking laws you only have yourself to blame if you get caught.

But here’s the rub…

Some roads are arguably suitable for driving at a higher speed. For example, I live near a golf course where there is a church opposite with a lay-by. The road is wide enough to take 3 cars side-by-side with all round clear views. However, this is designated as a 30mph zone whereas, in my opinion, it would not be inappropriate for this to be a 40mph as there are no schools or other residencies nearby.

However, PC Plink sits in the lay-by with his speed camera catching countless motorists. Now, while I deplore this action, I would applaud it if his location was near a school or playground etc.

That said – whether we think the determined speed limit is right or wrong – it is up to the driver to abide by it as set by the relevant council. It is usually there for a good reason. Even on a motorway doing 80, 70 could make all the difference to help prepare for the unexpected – be it a blow out, or any other unforeseeable event.

In short, for the speed limit set – abide by it.

Sorry for the length of this post, but if just one death is saved from a lower speed limit then it has to be worth it.

And statistcally the overwhelming ammount of accidents involve sober drivers! Seemingly they pose more of a threat than drunk drivers.

I agree that speed kills but so does idiosy. Can we please ban idiosy too.

No offence like, but the above makes you sound like a complete ****.

You sound like the type of person that revs your engine at set of red lights? (well, ones that you actually stop for!). You sound like the kind of person that will career across 3 lanes of motorway traffic in a single manouver. You sound like the kind of person that will cut someone up without hesitation, whether it be on a three lane junction with one turning left and the others going straight on, or even at a roundabout.

It's morons like you that make decent people like me hesitant about wanting to drive on our roads. And you know what's worse; you openly admit that you drive like that. "Oh, look at me, I drive at 90mph on the motorway. I'm breaking the law, but it doesn't matter as I've not killed anyone..........yet. I drive through red lights at 4am, even if nothing is coming in the other direction. I'm breaking the law, wow, I'm dead hard I am. Whoooooooo!".

Well, next time you're doing the above and you end up being horribly mangled in a car accident because someone IS coming the other way, or someone breaks and you don't have time to and you go in the back of them, don't come on here looking for sympathy because I doubt you'll get any.

And yes, I do feel strongly about stuff like that because people like you get right on my tits. But hey, I'm sure you're a sound guy when you're away from your car.

And bad spelling.

i thought that but on my predictive text it didn't correct me, W71 will have a field day now

I'm sorry thats how you feel i've come across mate, its not what i intended obviously. The point i was making was that its the inappropriate speeding/dangerous driving that are the real crimes, not the incidents i pointed out. The redlight thing should have been more specific, i was talking about somewhere like Crosfields roundabout, where you can see every exit, and at a time when there is really no one on the roads, if i am not 110% certain, then i would never take a risk. Anyone who knows me, would know thats not how i come across. If i'm guilty of anything, its some enthusiastic driving out in Wales or other remote B-roads, or track days, but thats because i am a considerate driver, with a performance car who enjoys driving, so i do it away from the public. The 90mph motorway point i was making, was to indicate that when conditions allow, it is perfectly safe to move at 90mph with the traffic, as long as everyone is leaving the required stopping distances etc. I'm not a tailgaiter and i will never cut anybody up. Looking back, i see how it could have been seen as bragging, but it wasn't, i was merely trying to get people to think about this mantra that speed kills. It does, but only when it is dangerous and inappropriate to do so.

Any chance we can discuss this without the blatant insults folks?

Apologies mate, just annoyed me.

THat's fine mate, no worries at all. I just put the above as it's those types of drivers that have caused me to have my accident last May and also a series of near misses that have made me very weary, not to mention nervous, about driving.



It did sound like bragging, hence the way I worded my post, but you've explained in more details what you meant so I understand what you should have put. I did go off on one, so I appreciate your calm and collected reply.