14 Jul Is Twenty Plenty, Or Not Enough?
Where do you stand on the debate to reduce the speed limit from 30mph to 20mph?
Do you think it’s a bad thing to enforce a lower speed limit, or do you feel that the benefits of doing so will far outweigh the drop in speed and the slower journey?
All in favour
Those in favour of the speed reduction cite compelling reasons for doing so. The first, and perhaps most important, is that slower traffic means increased road safety.
Slower speeds mean more time to plan ahead and react while driving, and in the event of an accident, the lower the speed the less likely that serious injury will result from it.
Also, studies show that overall a vehicle travelling at 20mph has a less harmful effect on the environment than if it were travelling at 30mph.
A less aggressive road would also encourage more cyclists, with all the associated health benefits that come from travelling under your own steam.
There are also those who see no need for such a measure and feel that it’s just another interference by the nanny state. Perhaps put another way, ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’.
Opposers also feel that this reduction in speed would slow the pace of the road down a bit too much to the point where it becomes a long, drawn-out affair to get anywhere.
They also make the point that the argument is made somewhat irrelevant by the fact that speeding laws are the most universally broken laws anyway.
What’s the point in changing the law unless it’s backed up by traditional monitoring methods, such as police speed traps or fixed/mobile GATSO speed cameras; and you can’t have them everywhere.
How about you?
So how do you feel about it all?
Are you a ‘twenty plentier’, or do you feel that things are fine just as they are?
Whichever side you’re on, it’s a debate that will draw out strong emotions in us all.
Either way, let us know what you think!