To think driving 10mph is too slow?

I had to do a course for exactly the same. But it was useful- he specifically explained the difference in stopping distance at impact at 24mph.
Still annoying and expensive though.

Oh give over, there are far too many cars on the road, that's the problem. Reduce car use, reduce speed limits, motor vehicles cause nearly all the accidents.

Bring back the man (or woman) with the red flag 🚩 to walk in front of vehicles, I say.

It would have the added advantage of reducing unemployment and boost the sales of red flags, which, by a bizarre twist of fate have been 'flagging' recently! 🤣

Typical motorist comment.. in fact your original & subsequent posts is one of entitlement.... "i don't want drive at X speed limit, as i'm the perfect driver, its always someone else's fault"

This time its cyclists, next week it'll be lorry drivers, mums with prams, horse riders... in fact any one who dares slow you down for even a nano second!

You seek out non stories and present them as fact....

My bike has a speedo.

That doesn’t mean all speed limits should be calibrated to the absolute minimum stopping distance.

Absurd. It should be higher. Modern cars are more than equipped to deal with going over 70mph

Whereas drivers of course are well known for never jumping red lights, never cutting corners, and never exceeding the speed limit!

So why didn't you start a thread about that? You just read the headline and got angry didn't you.

Just when you think you've seen every kind of stupid, up pops an article in the Telegraph.😂

The figures say differently, do children play outside like say 40 or 50 years ago? nope, too many cars.... can children walk to school safely in many areas? nope too many cars.....

Around 100 cyclists killed each year by vehicles, that will include a number of children.

Drivers kill approx 1800 per year, inc approx 300 children, imagine your child? or partner? friend?

Yes there are plenty of stupid cyclists but the bicycle rider will always come off worse when involved in a collision with a 1 ton plus vehicle.

I disagree.
The cyclists are king. They can go on any path, bridleway, pavement or pedestrianised shopping area they wish as well as roads and expect folk to jump out of the way.
Got to Birmingham city centre if you disagree. Also Birmingham tow paths - yes the tourist guide say about lovely canal side walks but imo they are only for people with excellent hearing and physical agility to hear and avoid the cyclists.
Also, pedestrian lights and zebra crossings don't apply to them - person knocked over and significantly injured near me recently - crossing when all the cars had stopped but knocked down by a cyclist.

I realise it is not all cyclists of course

I do not agree with 10mph, but I do think National Speed Limit should be reduced to 50mph for all vehicles. And 60mph on motorways.

Pedestrianised area in a town nr me BUT has an access to a car park and deliveries, vehicle speed limit is 10mph.... maybe those against low limits in these sorts of areas would think differently if they got hit at 30mph in a car park... might knock some sense in to them.. probably not!

We live in a culture where Car is King! nothing should be done to stop drivers doing as they will or the cry is "War on Motorists!"

That's what exactly what the report is suggesting:
"• 10mph where there is a particular prevalence of pedestrians and/or bicyclists and/or motorcyclists, or where there is a heightened vulnerability of pedestrians to impact and injury (e.g. around schools, around hospitals, and in the vicinity of major sports or social/cultural events)"

10mph only where there are lots of pedestrians - probably where there are too many for the pavement to hold & people are at risk of being pushed onto the road. This makes sense to me as it's what happens in practice if you drive near my local football stadium on match days - you have to drive very slowly as there are so many fans milling about.

The graphs were depressing reading.

Chances of fatality with various impact speeds and types of collision. Much higher than I thought, although improving with better car design but affected by heavier vehicles

@Ifailed That’s not jaywalking. If walkers use due care and attention they can be safely accommodated on roads with no footpaths. Jaywalking is really about not paying attention and actually causing the accident. Cyclists can often be very inattentive and speed around cars in an unsafe manner. Pedestrians often don’t pay attention to traffic and are unpredictable. At the moment irs never their fault.

Jaywalking therefore usually specifically means causing the accident if the cyclist or vehicle that runs into them is obeying the law. Eg it would cover running out between parked cars. If you are hit and the vehicle that hit you was doing 25mph legally, it’s your fault for not looking and “jaywalking”. Everyone should be better trained in terms of crossing roads!

I actually agree with you re a jaywalking law

At least in London - people are insane here and cross wherever they feel like

It'd be hard to enforce though 😄😄

I'm sick of it all @cakeorwine !!!

That said, i do love both cake and wine.

I wouldnt be able to leave my block! We only have crossing on the dual carriageway, thinking round my area in every direction.
Even with crossings, i couldn't get to the end of my own road as there's a farm on my road and no pavements through it.

What we actually need in the UK, which is normal in many other countries, is a Jaywalking law.

One of the few rights we have is the right to walk (cycle and ride) on public roads. Are you suggesting we ban people from walking on the 1000s of miles of minor roads without pavements?