Comments by "Roger Smith" (@rogersmith8339) on "“Crass Stupidity!” | Julia Hartley-Brewer And Howard Cox Slam 20mph Speed Limit Change" video.

  1. Surely it will affect the rich far more in their BMWs and Mercs that seem incapable of sticking to any speed limit or driving at a safe speed in bad conditions. And what about those with Lamborghinis or Ferraris that can do 200 mph? It must really hurt their egos to only be allowed to use 1st gear. The poor can't afford cars so they are unaffected.
    2
  2.  @stevejones2310  You have used too many clever words for the person who made the comment!
    2
  3.  @trevorferguson6222  Traveling by car is not a right and never has been, it is a privilege. When I was young, far fewer people owned cars and walking or using the bus was normal. In France, the buses (and trains) are cheap and reliable and therefore many more people use them which in turn means the roads are much quieter. Perhaps this is what we need in the UK?
    2
  4.  @ejoneswales  Your son's football team hardly counts as important (don't get me started on football! ). I could claim that it was essential for me to have a big 4x4 (like I do!) to carry things to my yacht and go beating and deer stalking etc but those are things I CHOOSE to do and in the grand scheme of things are just a privilege. Too many people get "right to" confused with "like to" these days and that is why the country is in such a mess.
    2
  5.  @GromDarkwater  The trains in France seem to be very well used along with the buses and that means the roads are much quieter. I recently did a couple of 30 or 40 mile bus trips that cost 2,50 euros each way.
    2
  6.  @GromDarkwater  That is called entitlement at it's most blatant. The only way to stop that is by laws.
    2
  7.  @outlaw6421  Again, no concept of average speeds!
    2
  8.  @GromDarkwater  Do you consider it a right to use your mobile then? People have become far too accustomed to thinking they have a "right" to do many things and that is causing problems. You have a right to jump off a tall building but you would not want to exercise that right but you don't have a right to do anything where there is an alternative course of action.
    2
  9.  @GromDarkwater  He did not mention anything to do with driving for pleasure for a start. When you hear about the number of people who "have to" drive their kids to school because they live over half a mile away you start to understand the difference between "want to " and "have to". I had no problems walking about 1 mile to school from the age of 5 and later nearer 3 miles to senior school. Anyone who says it is necessary to drive to the gym or some sports activity is exhibiting entitlement as they are things they choose to do.
    2
  10.  @GromDarkwater  You obviously don't mix with a broad spectrum of people. Many people in my city cycle everywhere in town because it is often quicker, and there is no hassle finding a parking space and the price of parking is silly. Others use the very frequent buses, particularly those with bus passes. We sometimes even go the two stops on the train (local station is a 5 minute walk) to the movies or for a meal as it is less hassle and no expensive parking.
    2
  11. There is a very simple answer to that, don't let them take your money by keeping to the limit. If absolutely no one got fined then if it was just a money making exercise it would fail miserably.
    2
  12.  @imbonkers3629  I hope you were being sarcastic there!
    1
  13. @@MarkAntonyMcDonald You really have no grasp of basic mathematics if you think a 20 limit instead of a 30 in urban areas will have that big an affect on average speeds and thus journey times. Next time you make a journey of between around 10 and 15 miles on mixed roads (including motorways as long as you are on one for less than 4 miles) work out your average speed and you will be very surprised.
    1
  14.  @imbonkers3629  You forgot the latest trainers, I-Phone and huge tv not to mention a three bed semi as a starter home! Oh, and meals delivered to their door several times a week.
    1
  15.  @williamrae9954  Not sure I get that?
    1
  16. With potentially less traffic on the roads and a negligible affect on average speeds purely due to the limit change, goods should get through quicker and using your argument be cheaper.
    1
  17. @@MarkAntonyMcDonald I guess my suggestion regarding working out your average speed was rather beyond your comprehension?
    1
  18. Do you really have no concept of average speeds and the effects on journey times?
    1
  19.  @trevorferguson6222  The elderly and infirm should not be driving and way too many people have become suckered into thinking they need to drive everywhere and that is just what the car makers and oil companies wanted. Even I confess to driving round to the supermarket around a mile away from home rather than walking to one 1/2 a mile away (which I often do as well) because I like many of the things that Lidl sell and the prices are good. My tiny city car costs very little to run so I still save money.
    1
  20.  @snakeman9902  Greed (of the oil companies and motor manufacturers) got us hooked on cars. The control and slavery bit is total hogwash because we have become controlled by and slaves to the motor car without even realising it.
    1
  21.  @IhaveMy0pinion  Apparently at one time the then French president set out to make it so that everyone was no more than a 15 minute bike ride from a station and I believe he nearly succeeded. That would be much easier in the UK and if you substituted a good bus service where trains would be impractical, just think how quiet the roads would be for delivery drivers etc.
    1
  22.  @ejoneswales  You very clearly illustrate my whole point. I can claim that I need my large yacht to go on extended sailing holidays to France like I have just returned from, and of course I need a large vehicle to carry stuff to and from it. I also "need" a proper, big 4x4 for when I go pheasant shooting and deer stalking. Except those are all things I choose to do and am prepared to pay whatever it might cost (within reason money wise and accepting restrictions wise). I have to remind myself that a very large majority of people don't have the option of doing what I choose to do for one reason or another.
    1
  23.  @GromDarkwater  Ah, the let's get personal defence. Followed of course by the "China" reference. China might be much more restricted than many countries but much of what we hear from there is what MSM and our government want us to hear. I know from recent experience in France that the buses and trains are very widely used by all sorts of people. Yes, sometimes the pure convenience of using a car makes it an obvious choice, but with a 20 limit on urban roads unlikely to add more than a couple of minutes to a typical journey, if that in reality, what is the problem?
    1
  24.  @GromDarkwater  You sound so young and modern I guess you drive an EV?
    1
  25.  @GromDarkwater  With rights go responsibilities and I am not against anyone driving as such, as long as they do it in accordance with the law and with respect to others. The whole issue kicked off by this video is about a change to the law that in all honesty will have very little impact on most people on most of there daily journeys. Tell me how far your trip to work is each day and how long it takes. Then if you know how to, work out your average speed. Now look at the current speed limits you encounter. You will be shocked by what you discover. When I was working, my journey was about 10 miles and it was very rare that I could do it in under 25 minutes despite doing 70 all the way that was possible down 5 miles of motorway. Often it could take 40 minutes if I left home a tiny bit later than I liked to.
    1
  26.  @GromDarkwater  What, afraid of modern technology by the sound of things.
    1
  27. With that in mind, how do you view the post Hungerford and Dunblane changes to gun laws to which everyone who was affected by objected with very sound reasons.
    1
  28.  @firstlast5350  The changes were sold as making the country safer. I took part in what was up to that time, the largest demonstration in London against the changes. It didn't even get a mention on the news that night, probably because it was totally peaceful but also likely due to the topic being seen as "bad".
    1
  29.  @Dpo2203  I would say "with respect " but I loathe that expression. Both changes were done to supposedly make our country safer but while the gun laws have been proven to be completely ineffective in that respect, at least the 20 limit in urban/ built up areas may save the lives (or serious injury) of a few brats without costing the taxpayer many millions and putting numerous people out of business.
    1
  30. Maybe we need 70 mph limits in urban areas to cull the useless spawn the chavs who live in those places?
    1
  31. @@TOM-TOM-TOM The entitled generations! They have ruined the world as us grown ups knew it.
    1
  32. I find it hilarious that people claim that it is so hard to drive at twenty in a modern car, it just goes to show how many bad drivers there are as it isn't any harder than driving at 30 or 40. You are only talking about urban areas only for a start. As for adding to journey times across urban areas, just work out your average speed for a couple of journeys.
    1
  33. In the city where I live a lot of roads have a 20 limit because it really is not sensible to do any more because many of the roads were not made with mass car ownership in mind. Mind you, a lot of drivers still manage to drive recklessly and have unbelievable accidents!
    1
  34.  @PazLeBon  In which way do you mean that? Certainly through my city even 20 is pushing it a lot of the time.
    1
  35.  @PazLeBon  I have seen several crashes where cars have flipped over on roads with a 20 or 30 limit and even one where a woman drove straight on at a "T" junction and into the front of a house on the opposite side of the road! How on earth can you do that, driving at a sensible speed?
    1