Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'm sorry Steady Eddy, but your two documents didn't support your case.


The Association of British Drivers was unsupported conjecture - a political polemic not a study.


The Police Review contradicted the ABD by explaining that speed humps slowed traffic that in turn limited accidents, and that there was no evidence of undue speeding between humps.


The police also recommended that humps were introduced according to traffic studies rather than politics (something our local council has manifestly done).


The police observed hypothetically that damage could be done to vehicles, but admitted they had no evidence.


The police observed that there were other traffic calming systems but made no statement about comparative effectiveness.


In fact the only complaint was that they always seemed to be late in the consulting process, but at no time suggested they were not consulted nor that their complaints weren't heard or acted upon.


Why would you present these two documents as evidence of your case? You've willfully misinterpreted them.


Is the real case that you don't want any regulation because you believe that your freedom to drive with abandon is more important than the rest of us poor citizens?

The police also recommended that humps were introduced according to traffic studies rather than politics (something our local council has manifestly done).


Hmmm. Maybe, maybe not. They've shown that there is, arguably, a problem. They've proposed speed humps as a solution. I don't believe they've shown that speed humps are necessarily the correct solution. Melbourne Grove a classic case in point.


We have a problem - something must be done - this is something - it must be done. Sadly, that's the way of the world these days...

Sorry but I can't be biffed to lok back over the thread.

Has anyone yet made a humorous remark concerning there not being much of a view from the top of a speed bump?

If they haven't, consider it made.

If they have, I'll take my leave.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Trump changes his mind as often as the clock ticks. The man is an egotistical buffoon, similar in ways to Starmer, another egotistical, do as I say, not as I do, wedged to the hilt hypocrite who still thinks he's Head of the DPP not the first minister.   Certainly don't want beef from the US, it'll hurt our own beef production farmers, revered around the world as the very best with the quality of British and especially prime Angus Scotch Beef.  Just don't export to the US and only import from there what is essentially necessary. 
    • The deal with America is currently being announced Is it a good one for us or have we been sold a pigs ear as a silk purse ?  Personally  as it involves Beef bring imported to the UK, I don't believe its in the public interest. Interested to see others reaction 
    • Ground nesting bees are different. They don't swarm in the same way. https://beehunterma.com/how-to-safely-get-rid-of-ground-nesting-bees/#:~:text=Using a hose%2C gently soak,labeled for ground-nesting bees. Sorry I think that might be American bees. But so far as I can see the method for UK bees with water would be the same. It seems the most humane way, as it just encourages them to relocate. I had a nest of white tailed bumble bees in my garden last year. It was fascinating watching them go in and out of the ground.   But then I didn't need to put a shed over them!
    • If it's a bumble bee nest they won't be interested. But they are an important part of the local ecology. I don't know whether bumbe bee nest can be transferred readily. But they shouldn't be destroyed. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...