Police clamp down on 20mph (From Banbury Cake)

Hmm, so when I do 20 and I get overtaken by a cyclist, and there's a police officer around, should the cyclist get stopped?

Answer: Yes.

Reality: No.

I was doing 20 along St Giles the other day and at elast one lycra clad cyclist went past me, i could run faster, 2nd gear, using heaps of fuel is not efficient.

EMBOX1 wrote:
Hmm, so when I do 20 and I get overtaken by a cyclist, and there's a police officer around, should the cyclist get stopped?

Answer: Yes.

Reality: No.

In reality, assuming you stick to the 20 mph limit how often are you overtaken by cyclists?

How often are you overtaken by other drivers?

A tiny minority of self appointed health and safety hysterics have succeeded in wasting the time of the police (who opposed this change) on enforcing a ludicrous speed limit which, as the story tells, has actually lead to an increase in deaths and serious injuries!

Road accidents have fallan and fallen and fallen for years and years, so why did these fanatics choose to demand a lowering of speed limits?

Because they get off on interfering in other people lives and bossing them about

Remember: 'It's 20 for no reason'

None at all

Shocking. We have the gold winning olympic heroes doing their best to ensure that people wear helmets when cycling - then we have a pic of the local cycling safety campaigner on a busy road without a helmet.

Excellent news. I agree re the picture of a woman with no front light, a wobble-inducing heavy bag and cycling in the outside of the outside lane when there is a cycle lane in St Giles.

If this report had said the statistic of 64 fatal crashes had gone down even by the slightest amount since the 20mph limit had been introduced, I would say that it had been a success. The fact the number has risen to 71 suggests that perhaps the money spent has not been a particularly great investment and could have been used elsewhere on Oxfordshire's roads. You could argue that with greater enforcement the figure may drop and I hope this is the case. I suspect it will just be a case of more wasted money policing these roads.

The comparable injuries and deaths since the 20mph limit was introduce compared to before indicate that speed is an issue but driving/cycling/walk
ing abilities far more if we want to reduce injury and death on our roads.

Spend the money on getting cyclists to learn and actually obey the rules of the road and you may see a drop in injuries.

Before anyone jumps on me for that statement, I agree that many drivers also need to learn to obey the rules of the road.

A 20mph speed limit is just some busybody's way of interfering and making it look as if they're trying to do something when they're not. They love the idea of thinking "I did that. That's all down to me" when in reality it's pathetic timewasting and money wasting. Now it's being actively enforced just beggars belief.

If we want to waste the police's time why can't they police the traffic mayhem every weekend around Bicester Village? That box junction painted on the road at the main roundabout is a joke.

Perhaps we could all have somebody with a red flag walking in front of our cars in the 20mph zones too.

Dilligaf2010 wrote:
Perhaps we could all have somebody with a red flag walking in front of our cars in the 20mph zones too.

Hehe yeah... or maybe we should just go back to horse and cart. It works for the Amish.

Andrew:Oxford wrote:
Shocking. We have the gold winning olympic heroes doing their best to ensure that people wear helmets when cycling - then we have a pic of the local cycling safety campaigner on a busy road without a helmet.

I hope that's a joke(!) shoulder to shoulder around a velodrome at 50mph is not the same activity as popping to the shops off St Giles. Kind of like telling me to wear a helmet in my car because Lewis Hamilton wears one in his.

Danny A wrote:

Andrew:Oxford wrote:
Shocking. We have the gold winning olympic heroes doing their best to ensure that people wear helmets when cycling - then we have a pic of the local cycling safety campaigner on a busy road without a helmet.

I hope that's a joke(!) shoulder to shoulder around a velodrome at 50mph is not the same activity as popping to the shops off St Giles. Kind of like telling me to wear a helmet in my car because Lewis Hamilton wears one in his.

Lewis does not have a roof, you do, Twit.

Touring cars? Rally cars? Star in reasonably priced Top gear car?

Just to get the facts across before this turns into another tit for tat motorists v cyclists argument which is normal for this forum.

Normal speed limits do not apply to cyclists. They apply to motor vehicles only (see Highway Code and Road Traffic Act). Cyclists can however be prosecuted for 'cycling furiously' or riding dangerously or carelessly.

The woman in the photograph doesn't need a front light as it is daylight. Maybe she is turning right ahead hence her road position (which is a bit too far right for my liking, she would be better off in primary position in the centre of the lane to avoid vehicles attempting a dangerous undertake).

I assume the comment above regarding Lewis Hamilton not having a roof is tongue in cheek as he has infinitely more safety equipment to protect him in the event of an accident than a normal car including wearing a helmet. You are more likely to suffer a head injury as a pedestrian or a passenger in a car then when cycling.

Let's all share the roads as responsible and courteous grown ups instead of this ridiculous and frankly scary hate for one type of road user over another. All users should abide by the rules of the road. Stopping at red lights, not using mobile phones whilst driving etc.

Mr Rose has proved to the people of this county that he is a clueless jobs worth who likes to waste our hard earned money. The 20mph limit is a pollution creating waste of time and money. Reducing speed limits does not reduce accidents, accidents happen, they can not be avoided, if they could they would not be accidents.
The idea of reducing our speed limits on major trunk roads to 50mph is a joke. All it has served to do is waste out money and give the metal thieves another source of income. No doubt he will quote the age old lie "speed kills", no it doesn't, James May drove the bugatti veyron at over 400kmph and he's still alive.

Even if the police don't enforce the 20mph speed limits, they are still valuable.

They mean I can drive at what I consider a safe and comfortable speed down narrow residential streets, without having cars behind me blowing their horns at me.

No one should be driving faster than 20mph in the residential areas, or in the shared central streets.

Excellent news and great post by jochta above. I hope that the police also start to deal with speeding National Express buses (the X5 seems especially guilty) and taxis in the 30mph bus lanes as well. They are a danger to the motorists which they undertake at excessive speed, as well as cyclists and pedestrians generally.

jochta wrote:
Just to get the facts across before this turns into another tit for tat motorists v cyclists argument which is normal for this forum.

Normal speed limits do not apply to cyclists. They apply to motor vehicles only (see Highway Code and Road Traffic Act). Cyclists can however be prosecuted for 'cycling furiously' or riding dangerously or carelessly.

The woman in the photograph doesn't need a front light as it is daylight. Maybe she is turning right ahead hence her road position (which is a bit too far right for my liking, she would be better off in primary position in the centre of the lane to avoid vehicles attempting a dangerous undertake).

I assume the comment above regarding Lewis Hamilton not having a roof is tongue in cheek as he has infinitely more safety equipment to protect him in the event of an accident than a normal car including wearing a helmet. You are more likely to suffer a head injury as a pedestrian or a passenger in a car then when cycling.

Let's all share the roads as responsible and courteous grown ups instead of this ridiculous and frankly scary hate for one type of road user over another. All users should abide by the rules of the road. Stopping at red lights, not using mobile phones whilst driving etc.

I suspect that she was being told where to ride by the photographer, so he could get the 20mph sign visible in the foreground.

"You are more likely to suffer a head injury as a pedestrian or a passenger in a car then when cycling."......
.........I'd be inclined to disagree with that statement.
If a pedestrian falls over, they've usually got the chance to prevent their head hitting the ground, a car passenger has a seat belt, and usually an SRS (Air Bag), whereas a cyclist has a limited chance to do anything to prevent injury, that's why cycle helmets were invented.

Ever tried driving 20MPH? other than slowing down for a school, it is VERy difficult, and means trundling along in fuel inefficient 2nd gear. Oxford has become the core of the police state that is England, with crime everywhere and little punishment for physical violence - as covered in yesterdays Mail, but money grabbing councillors going after innocent motorists.

Glad to have left the city, moved myself and business elsewhere.

Apart from one place of employment on the outskirts of Oxford I NEVER come into the city centre, i am unable to remember the last time i did, and this petty speed limit is another reason not to come in, Witney is my choice for shops, oh and Swindon. Oxford...NEVER

Floflo wrote:

EMBOX1 wrote:
Hmm, so when I do 20 and I get overtaken by a cyclist, and there's a police officer around, should the cyclist get stopped?

Answer: Yes.

Reality: No.

In reality, assuming you stick to the 20 mph limit how often are you overtaken by cyclists?

How often are you overtaken by other drivers?

Daily. I'll video it if you want?

Danny A wrote:

Andrew:Oxford wrote:
Shocking. We have the gold winning olympic heroes doing their best to ensure that people wear helmets when cycling - then we have a pic of the local cycling safety campaigner on a busy road without a helmet.

I hope that's a joke(!) shoulder to shoulder around a velodrome at 50mph is not the same activity as popping to the shops off St Giles. Kind of like telling me to wear a helmet in my car because Lewis Hamilton wears one in his.

Twitbox! Speed isn't a factor ... it's there to protect your head when you fall off ... that's why children wear them at their snail's pace!! But then I guess you drive would without a seat belt if it wasn't illegal because you couldn't possibly hit the windscreen in a low speed impact could you?!

BigAlBiker wrote:
Apart from one place of employment on the outskirts of Oxford I NEVER come into the city centre, i am unable to remember the last time i did, and this petty speed limit is another reason not to come in, Witney is my choice for shops, oh and Swindon. Oxford...NEVER

Quite agree, I havn't been into Oxford for years thanks to cost of parking, rubbish shops, and now 20mph speed limits...........tha
nks council.

Buy online from home.

JK wrote:

Danny A wrote:

Andrew:Oxford wrote:
Shocking. We have the gold winning olympic heroes doing their best to ensure that people wear helmets when cycling - then we have a pic of the local cycling safety campaigner on a busy road without a helmet.

I hope that's a joke(!) shoulder to shoulder around a velodrome at 50mph is not the same activity as popping to the shops off St Giles. Kind of like telling me to wear a helmet in my car because Lewis Hamilton wears one in his.

Twitbox! Speed isn't a factor ... it's there to protect your head when you fall off ... that's why children wear them at their snail's pace!! But then I guess you drive would without a seat belt if it wasn't illegal because you couldn't possibly hit the windscreen in a low speed impact could you?!

It's about risk and where that risk comes from. By your logic, if speed isn't a factor then pedestrians should be made to wear them too(!) because despite what Diligaff thinks the DofT accident figures clearly show that pedestrians (and car occupants) suffer proportionately more head injuries than cyclists. Cyclists have just the same options as pedestrians in cushioning a fall. Unsurprisingly old people in particular have an very high chance of falling and getting a head injury - making them wear helmets would certainly reduce these injuries(!)

People need to look at the evidence we have not seen tens of thousands of people die from falling off bikes. Sadly we have seen tens of thousand of people die in cars when they crash off the road or into other things (this is why we wear seat belts). In Holland they have fewer deaths and injuries for cyclists, yet hardly any one wears a cycle helmet, in Australia they have higher deaths and injuries to cyclists, yet they all wear cycle helmets. Cycle helmets are the great red-herring of road safety.

I've been driving for 30 years...now with better cars I'm driving slower on roads I've travelled on in the past! Stop slamming the general motorist and deal with the idiots. Which I might add is not always the driver. How many parents do you see dragging kids out from between parked cars even when there is a crossing 20 yards away. Cyclists with no lights or reflective clothing. Cyclists going through red lights. People who step out into the road without looking on the basis that they can sue you for damages..... the list is endless! We pay through the nose for everything - do we have great roads.. no. The roads in the villages are so bad I had a puncture and didn't even notice until I got home!

A great OM comment thread!

So many interesting and provocative things.

A GOLD MEDAL for the commenters

Oflfie, 20mph in 3rd gear surely, innit?

The evidence suggests its bad driving/cycling/walk
ing that it the main cause of accidents not speed, and that to be hit at 20mph is far more survivable than higher speeds. Or is someone going to say being hit at 20mph is no different than 32mph?

EMBOX1 wrote:

Floflo wrote:

EMBOX1 wrote:
Hmm, so when I do 20 and I get overtaken by a cyclist, and there's a police officer around, should the cyclist get stopped?

Answer: Yes.

Reality: No.

In reality, assuming you stick to the 20 mph limit how often are you overtaken by cyclists?

How often are you overtaken by other drivers?

Daily. I'll video it if you want?

You are probably better concentrating on your driving than filming others!

You want speeding cyclists prosecuted. Am I correct in assuming that you'd like any car breaking the 20 mph limit to get a ticket?

EMBOX1 wrote:

Floflo wrote:

EMBOX1 wrote:
Hmm, so when I do 20 and I get overtaken by a cyclist, and there's a police officer around, should the cyclist get stopped?

Answer: Yes.

Reality: No.

In reality, assuming you stick to the 20 mph limit how often are you overtaken by cyclists?

How often are you overtaken by other drivers?

Daily. I'll video it if you want?

I'll Film it I've got two roof mounted cameras for my car

To those long suffering oxford residents and workers who are fedup of all this repression, note that oxford is the heart of this sort of thing. Yes, High Street, Broad Street and the city parks are a delight, but the clamp down on hard working people and businesses makes the place more like a Soviet city, which is why the people living in the Eastern Bloc have short life expectency. No hope and constant stress that they may be doing something wrong simply by going about their daily lives.

I am fortunate to have lived in the 80s and 90s and travelled or lived in various cities, and believe me, this appalling state of affairs is unique and only massive protests and refusal to pay any penalty charges is going to undo it all.

Glad to be gone, although I am going to put time and resources aside to continue to fight for common sense law and order, where MONEY is no longer the incentive for the introduction of laws. Further, we also need to right the fact that if you do get penalised for going 30 in a 20 zone, and refuse to pay the blackmail fee of £99 to the AA (formerly a decent credible institution) for a 'road safety' course, you get 3 points on your license, which hits your car insurance! Meanwhile, genuinely dangerous motorists get away with it because there are no more patrol cars or cops keeping an eye out for bad driving.

And please don't let these silly jobsworths who are purely envious of successful hard working drug free people like you and I fool you. They are just bitter and full of hate for those who aspire to better things than repressing others.

Dastroll wrote:

EMBOX1 wrote:

Floflo wrote:

EMBOX1 wrote:
Hmm, so when I do 20 and I get overtaken by a cyclist, and there's a police officer around, should the cyclist get stopped?

Answer: Yes.

Reality: No.

In reality, assuming you stick to the 20 mph limit how often are you overtaken by cyclists?

How often are you overtaken by other drivers?

Daily. I'll video it if you want?

I'll Film it I've got two roof mounted cameras for my car

Yeah, I got a rear view mirror mounted cam for this - reduces my insurance premium. It records as soon as the engine is started, and for 2 mins after its switched off. Get them on eBay or at Maplins.

i dont have the most powerful car (2l twin turbo diesel) but to do 20mph I have to use 2nd. I'm then doing a pretty dangerous 3000rpm with a lot of torque. My fuel efficiency drops to about 12mpg, the wear on my engine is immense and i spend my time constantly monitoring my speedo and not the road as the slightest flick of the accellerator will see me hit 30 in a couple of seconds. Yet if i try to use 3rd, drop my revs to 1000-1500rpm and increase my mpg to a more respectable 35 i have so little power in the engine to react to cyclists/buses pulling out/other drivers that I consider it to be dangerous so i then have to look ahead at the road so much to avoid these situations that I'm paying zero attention to the speedo and usually end up creeping towards 30 anyway.

I see no point at all in the limit on roads like st giles/headington hill/london road/parts of iffley road/marston road etc as they're major highways and not side roads. it's as if it was rolled out to generate additional income!

EMBOX1 wrote:

Dastroll wrote:

EMBOX1 wrote:

Floflo wrote:

EMBOX1 wrote:
Hmm, so when I do 20 and I get overtaken by a cyclist, and there's a police officer around, should the cyclist get stopped?

Answer: Yes.

Reality: No.

In reality, assuming you stick to the 20 mph limit how often are you overtaken by cyclists?

How often are you overtaken by other drivers?

Daily. I'll video it if you want?

I'll Film it I've got two roof mounted cameras for my car

Yeah, I got a rear view mirror mounted cam for this - reduces my insurance premium. It records as soon as the engine is started, and for 2 mins after its switched off. Get them on eBay or at Maplins.

Should be fun going around filming in Oxford with the amount of times I'm passed by cars and cyclist whilst I'm travelling at the speed limit. Just about everyday i'm undertaken by a car on St Giles just before the Banbury Road. Since I put cameras on my car I've found other road users don't try stupid things like trying to force their way though a gap that doesn't exist, or cutting me up.

20 mph what a joke

20mph is ok at certain times of the day, in certain areas, but at 4am in headington, it is pointless. maybe these limits could be policed at the most appropriate times, but i can say fairly certainly it will be done at 7am on sunday mornings!! also, to save fuel, why not have the traffic lights at flashing amber during the night, say 11pm to 5am, and allow traffic to police itself, as they do in america. it works, and avoids people sitting at lights un-necessarily.

Bridget Driscoll (died 17 August 1896, aged 44 years) was the first pedestrian victim of an automobile accident in the United Kingdom. As she and her teenage daughter May (and possibly one other person) crossed the grounds of the Crystal Palace in London, she was struck by an automobile belonging to the Anglo-French Motor Carriage Company that was being used to give demonstration rides. One witness described the car as travelling at "a reckless pace, in fact, like a fire engine".

Although the car's maximum speed was 8 miles per hour (13 km/h) it had been limited deliberately to 4 miles per hour (6.4 km/h), the speed at which the driver, Arthur James Edsall of Upper Norwood, claimed to have been travelling. His passenger, Alice Standing of Forest Hill, alleged he modified the engine to allow the car to go faster, but another taxicab driver examined the car and said it was incapable of exceeding 4.5 miles per hour (7.2 km/h) because of a low-speed engine belt. The accident happened just a few weeks after a new Act of Parliament had increased the speed limit for cars to 14 miles per hour (23 km/h), from 2 miles per hour in towns and 4 miles per hour in the countryside.

So since the 20mph speed limit has been introduced, the rate of serious injuries and deaths has gone up over 10%, and yet they want to spend money enforcing the limit?!

Seems to me like it hasn't worked, and they should put it back to 30mph.

Surely it should be down to 15mph, mi'lady.

Someone, remind me how many 20mph signs Oxford has?

A really Gold Medal thread of comments - not had so much fun reading them since the sledging coppers went down that hill on their shields!

The council should start off by putting 30 limits signs up, and the police enforcing them before worrying about the 20 limit. after all "It's 30 for a reason".

Danny A wrote:
Touring cars? Rally cars? Star in reasonably priced Top gear car?

if you're going to make reference to Lewis Hamilton get the formula right, they aren't all the same.
But surely a cycle campaigner should be wearing a helmet.

So while speed cameras were turned off, and 20 mph limits are not being enforced serious injuries showed a slight increase.

There's really not enough data to be able to draw any conclusions from this data.

sablond oxford wrote:

Danny A wrote:
Touring cars? Rally cars? Star in reasonably priced Top gear car?

if you're going to make reference to Lewis Hamilton get the formula right, they aren't all the same.
But surely a cycle campaigner should be wearing a helmet.

Apply your principles to members of the The Oxford Pedestrian Society and they should be wearing walking helmets.

Statistics from the DFT support this. Pedestrians are as likely to suffer head injuries as cyclists.

By the same logic a driver or passenger in any car should wear a head brace. Whiplash is far more prevalent in drivers than head injuries are in cyclists.

Floflo wrote:

sablond oxford wrote:

Danny A wrote:
Touring cars? Rally cars? Star in reasonably priced Top gear car?

if you're going to make reference to Lewis Hamilton get the formula right, they aren't all the same.
But surely a cycle campaigner should be wearing a helmet.

Apply your principles to members of the The Oxford Pedestrian Society and they should be wearing walking helmets.

Statistics from the DFT support this. Pedestrians are as likely to suffer head injuries as cyclists.

By the same logic a driver or passenger in any car should wear a head brace. Whiplash is far more prevalent in drivers than head injuries are in cyclists.

every one should wear protection that is suitable for what they are doing.
When i cycle i wear a helmet and use lights as i want to protect myself and be visiable. I wear a sealt belt when i'm in a car.
If people stuck to rules then we would all be better off.
And how many pedestrians gain the head injuries by cyclist or cars not sticking to rules, especially cyclist going through read light. if we all acted as we should there would be a lot less injuries full stop!

davyboy wrote:
20mph is ok at certain times of the day, in certain areas, but at 4am in headington, it is pointless. maybe these limits could be policed at the most appropriate times, but i can say fairly certainly it will be done at 7am on sunday mornings!! also, to save fuel, why not have the traffic lights at flashing amber during the night, say 11pm to 5am, and allow traffic to police itself, as they do in america. it works, and avoids people sitting at lights un-necessarily.

Good comment davyboy, but I'm seriously hoping the police will have better (or even worse) things to do than "lying in wait" for motorists doing 30 mph in Headington, St Giles etc at 7am on a sunday morning!!.....or is this just a money making exercise??

Floflo wrote:

sablond oxford wrote:

Danny A wrote:
Touring cars? Rally cars? Star in reasonably priced Top gear car?

if you're going to make reference to Lewis Hamilton get the formula right, they aren't all the same.
But surely a cycle campaigner should be wearing a helmet.

Apply your principles to members of the The Oxford Pedestrian Society and they should be wearing walking helmets.

Statistics from the DFT support this. Pedestrians are as likely to suffer head injuries as cyclists.

By the same logic a driver or passenger in any car should wear a head brace. Whiplash is far more prevalent in drivers than head injuries are in cyclists.

Don't you mean "Claims" for whiplash are far more prevalent in drivers.

How about everyone just stops being so irate and go at the speed limit! At the very most it will add mere seconds to your journey along St Giles or even in Headington. And they are both busy places full of cars going all different directions, pedestrians/tourists and cyclists.

Here's a jolly page about cyclists http://thefriendlycy
clist.co.nz/ videos narrated by our own Stephen Fry ;-)

Well said Ninja Hobnobs. I have far more issues with drivers going no where near the speed limit on clear roads: vehicles doing 55 on the M40 and 60 on the Northern Bypass, when their are both 70, innit.

bart-on simpson wrote:
Well said Ninja Hobnobs. I have far more issues with drivers going no where near the speed limit on clear roads: vehicles doing 55 on the M40 and 60 on the Northern Bypass, when their are both 70, innit.

Speed limits are limits (funnily enough), they are not aspirations. Motorists should travel at a speed appropriate to the road, location and conditions, this speed may be considerably lower than the speed limit for that road.

I see taxis are exempt from this 20mph speed restriction. As I don't get to many F1 races, it's the next best thing to see one of our fare-charging bastions of the road, dangerously undertake you on St Giles Street.
A special big-up to the City Cars driver who burst out of their batcave entrance in St Aldates, right in front of a deeply unimpressed police officer. Many one day, if all the planets are in alignment, one of these numpties will actually receive a ticket for this idiotic manoeuvre.

This is great news. It means I will be able to concentrate on my speedo whilst being udertaken by cyclists on my way out of Oxford...

John Lamb wrote:
I see taxis are exempt from this 20mph speed restriction. As I don't get to many F1 races, it's the next best thing to see one of our fare-charging bastions of the road, dangerously undertake you on St Giles Street.
A special big-up to the City Cars driver who burst out of their batcave entrance in St Aldates, right in front of a deeply unimpressed police officer. Many one day, if all the planets are in alignment, one of these numpties will actually receive a ticket for this idiotic manoeuvre.

Firstly it is 001 cowboys that have an office in St Aldates, and secondly I was in a cab that got pulled on morrell Ave for speeding last week, (and no I did not tell him to hurry with my burger delivery) so both of your weak attacks repelled by my force shield.

Sorry 001 cars. You say ONE taxi driver (dozens more to go) received a speeding ticket while you were sat in it? Did you not think to remonstrate with this driver for endangering your life whilst paying for the privilege?
Are you a man or a mouse?
Force shield blasted with double photon torpedoes (does this not seem silly to you?)
Good luck selling your eyelid and udder burgers; I for one will not be consuming any of your simply offal heart attacks in a bun.
Unless you're offering me one free.....