Thursday, 3 January 2013
Independent Suspension (of Belief)
After my recent rants about Telegraph & Mail readers, I think I've found another group who are worse - Independent readers. Now the Independent isn't a right-wing rag - it's relatively neutral with Liberal overtones so you'd expect its readers to be calmer and more rational.
No such luck!
Maybe its middle-of-the-roadness means that supporters of both ends of the political spectrum will read it - and then end up arguing with each other.
This week's topic for discussion is 20mph zones. They started with this story backed up by a survey commissioned by The Independent about how people agree with these zones. Unfortunately, any survey that has been commissioned by an organisation will generally ask questions in a way to back up whatever results that organisation wants to hear so I suspect The Independent want more of these 20mph zones.
Anyway, whatever the case, the readers arguments soon break down to nothing constructive with anti-zoners coming up with "Perhaps we should bring back the original 4mph limit? Complete with the man holding a flag, walking ahead of the car?" followed by pro-zoners coming up with "Or maybe we should all drive flat-out with no limits whatsoever?" Look, if you can't add anything constructive to an argument, don't add anything at all - I wonder if that's why nobody ever comments on my postings? :)
That was Monday, and also on Monday we were given a bit more evidence of The Independent's view when this appeared. It is a very short "comment" article by someone who I presume is an Independent writer called Jonathan Brown. It has the title "The 20mph limit makes streets safer, so why not enforce it?" which may be debatable (ask the ABD - I'm coming to them shortly) followed by the subtitle "As a cyclist and father of two young children I am all in favour of putting people above cars" which implies that anyone not in favour of these zones puts cars above people - a ludicrous statement that makes me not want to bother with the rest of his article - and I speak as a cyclist and father of two youngish children - aren't all children "young" anyway? - that's the definition of being a child?
Well I did read it - it didn't take long and what I learned was that he'd been driving past "signs every few hundred yards" while "driving through the area at least three or four times a week" without being aware of them! No wonder he's in favour of slowing down, what chance to pedestrians have when he's behind the wheel?
The article also told me that "compliance is entirely optional" - I was always taught that a red circle sign was compulsorially to be obeyed - this is good news that I don't need to worry about these pesky 20 zones - makes you wonder why they're there really, doesn't it?
Tuesday saw another article, this time giving the other side of the story. It was entitled "Drivers predicted to lash out at 20mph slowdown zones" It leads with the statement "Motoring organisations hit back at the spread of 20mph speed zones which they claim could make exasperated motorists drive badly." Note the use of the plural there - motoring organisations. So which motoring organisations are we talking about here? - The AA and RAC are the obvious ones - or the IAM?
No, the ABD.
Who?
The ABD - I told you I'd get to them. Keith Peat, spokesman for Alliance of British Drivers and former traffic policeman said: “20mph zones will be counterproductive and create more accidents. What you’ll get is drivers driving to the speedometer. It’s safer that drivers drive to what they’re seeing outside the car and not to what their speed needle is saying.”
Sounds fair enough - and he is a former traffic policeman so he ought to know what he's on about?
Until you actually think about it - we've already been told that these zones are not being enforced - and it's not that difficult to knock it down a gear or two and drive slower while still judging your speed reasonably accurately.
Then look further at the ABD. If you look at the IAM's news page, you get a series of sensible, campaigning, safety-related articles. If you look at the ABD's news page, you get a list of Twitter links to articles where people are angry about parking abuses or that the Russians can clear a road quicker than us or just gloating that the Scottish Police didn't sell any seized cars. This seems to be a bad link on their site, they need to re-point their news index - but it does indicate that the ABD are the Daily Mail readers of the car world. Their Press Releases section is a mixture of the sensible and the scaremongering.
So where does that leave us in the 20mph Zone debate?
Where I live was designated a 20mph Zone a couple of years back. There were signs put up but they were not the red circle type and they were put up too high to be easily noticeable to your average motorist travelling at 30. There was also no publicity that I saw in the local press. I went out to take a photo of one of these signs today and it was gone - as were all of the others in the vicinity. They must have been removed as quietly as they were put up - and nobody seems to have noticed.
20mph Zones do not seem to be the answer to anything but the debate does need to happen - between sensible and informed people - and not in The Independent.
Labels:
20mph Zones,
ABD,
IAM,
RAC,
speed limits,
The AA,
The Daily Mail,
The Independent
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment