Poll: UK Town Introduces Rolling Roadblock Citizen Pace Cars

[acemcmac]

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/09/915.asp">UK Town Introduces Rolling Roadblock Citizen Pace Cars
</a>

UK Introduces Rolling Roadblock Citizen Pace Cars
Doncaster, UK will use designated Pace Cars to block faster traffic flow.

Pace car stickerThe Doncaster, UK Road Safety Education Unit has developed a plan to recruit activists to become "mobile speed bumps" in a "Community Pace Car" program. Residents who who sign up receive a distinctive bumper sticker that identifies them as individuals who have agreed to adhere strictly to the posted speed limit and to block anyone who attempts to speed past. Other areas that have tried this method of "traffic calming" have also employed large municipal trucks in the traffic throttling effort.

Some safety experts are skeptical and suggest the program will prove more dangerous than helpful.

"Road safety works best when drivers co-operate together and adjust their speed to suit the hazard," said Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign. "This vital behaviour is being gradually, inexorably and dangerously replaced with a 'driving by numbers' approach. As a nation we are becoming obsessed with speed limits -- and that's a very bad thing."

I think I'd have a stroke if I got stuck behind one of these guys :|

 

[KarenMarie]

on the streets... fine.

on the motorways... no way. Road Rage galore.

i was just in doncaster a few months ago. the drivers are pretty tame there.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

I vote Nay.

I'm curious to see the resulting affects on traffic on some of the more congested roadways.

 

[cornbread]

no wonder its illegal to have a gun over there..

 

[Howard]

How do these officials get elected?

EDIT: *yea, not yay

 

[UncleWai]

If this happens in here, I would put spikes in my front bumper.

 

[yobarman]

Originally posted by: UncleWai
If this happens in here, I would put spikes in my front bumper.

If this happens here i can guarantee you i will be arrested on the first day of the law being passed for assault and vehicular manslaughter.

 

[mundane]

Residents who who sign up receive a distinctive bumper sticker that identifies them as individuals who have agreed to adhere strictly to the posted speed limit and to block anyone who attempts to speed past

Road rage, anyone?

 

[Koing]

Originally posted by: Howard
How do these officials get elected?

EDIT: *yea, not yay

F0ck knows.

We had the MP for Education HIRE a sex offender to be a teacher! wtf was that about?! CRAZY.

This is a really sh!tty idea.

Koing

 

[clickynext]

What a terrible idea. I wholeheartedly agree that people are becoming obsessed with speed limits, especially in the UK by the sounds of it. Granted, there are definitely a lot of people who drive at dangerous speeds, which is a seperate issue from the speed limit. However, I don't see this solving that problem at all.

 

[jammur21]

Road rage FTW?

 

[shoRunner]

HAHAHHAHA is this a joke???

 

[jjones]

Bad idea. I can just see some speed limit zealot start cutting people off and causing all kinds of dangerous situations thinking he's completely justified, and worse, being encouraged to do so by this program.

 

[Xyclone]

Originally posted by: jjones
Bad idea. I can just see some speed limit zealot start cutting people off and causing all kinds of dangerous situations thinking he's completely justified, and worse, being encouraged to do so by this program.

I concur.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Originally posted by: acemcmac
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/09/915.asp">UK Introduces Rolling Roadblock Citizen Pace Cars
</a>

UK Introduces Rolling Roadblock Citizen Pace Cars
Doncaster, UK will use designated Pace Cars to block faster traffic flow.

Pace car stickerThe Doncaster, UK Road Safety Education Unit has developed a plan to recruit activists to become "mobile speed bumps" in a "Community Pace Car" program. Residents who who sign up receive a distinctive bumper sticker that identifies them as individuals who have agreed to adhere strictly to the posted speed limit and to block anyone who attempts to speed past. Other areas that have tried this method of "traffic calming" have also employed large municipal trucks in the traffic throttling effort.

Some safety experts are skeptical and suggest the program will prove more dangerous than helpful.

"Road safety works best when drivers co-operate together and adjust their speed to suit the hazard," said Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign. "This vital behaviour is being gradually, inexorably and dangerously replaced with a 'driving by numbers' approach. As a nation we are becoming obsessed with speed limits -- and that's a very bad thing."

I think I'd have a stroke if I got stuck behind one of these guys :|

Seeing how people in CT drive like idiots and speed way beyond a reasonable limit (75 in 55 is common as is 80+ in 65), I am all for it! By god, give me my damned sticker!

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: IHateMyJob2004
Seeing how people in CT drive like idiots and speed way beyond a reasonable limit (75 in 55 is common as is 80+ in 65), I am all for it! By god, give me my damned sticker!

On a clear day, on a multi-lane, divided freeway, 80 mph is perfectly safe for the conditions. Just as 65-70 is perfectly safe on a rural route in clear, daylight conditions.

65 was the national speed limit on two-lane roads when a 1938 Plymouth was a "state-of-the-art" automobile. 70 was the speed limit on the interstates when the '57 Chevy was a hot, new item. If those cars were considered "safe" at those speeds on those roads I fail to see why modern cars are limited to 55 on two-lanes and 65 on freeways when by all accounts our current vehicles are several orders of magnitude safer.

The problem with this country's speed limit laws is that they are set by the wussiest and most over-cautious among us. They are not set at the design speeds for the roads. Hell, the ENTIRE interstate system was designed for safe travel at 80+ mph. Drivers in the 1950's were told in drivers' education that when the new, safer, "cars of tomorrow" were here, the speed limits on the interstates would be raised to their design speed. Instead, they were dropped to 55 because of the oil embargo. And then, once technology rendered the fuel economy argument moot, the safety zealots pitched a gigantic hissy-fit and prevented us from going to the speeds that the roadways were designed to handle.

ZV

 

[RKS]

Imagine the lawsuits...driving to hospital for a medical emergency and 3 or 4 do-gooders in their Hundais blocked the entire highway.

Sales of large SUVs with after-market, heavy-duty bumpers would sky rocket.

 

[Kelvrick]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: IHateMyJob2004
Seeing how people in CT drive like idiots and speed way beyond a reasonable limit (75 in 55 is common as is 80+ in 65), I am all for it! By god, give me my damned sticker!

On a clear day, on a multi-lane, divided freeway, 80 mph is perfectly safe for the conditions. Just as 65-70 is perfectly safe on a rural route in clear, daylight conditions.

65 was the national speed limit on two-lane roads when a 1938 Plymouth was a "state-of-the-art" automobile. 70 was the speed limit on the interstates when the '57 Chevy was a hot, new item. If those cars were considered "safe" at those speeds on those roads I fail to see why modern cars are limited to 55 on two-lanes and 65 on freeways when by all accounts our current vehicles are several orders of magnitude safer.

The problem with this country's speed limit laws is that they are set by the wussiest and most over-cautious among us. They are not set at the design speeds for the roads. Hell, the ENTIRE interstate system was designed for safe travel at 80+ mph. Drivers in the 1950's were told in drivers' education that when the new, safer, "cars of tomorrow" were here, the speed limits on the interstates would be raised to their design speed. Instead, they were dropped to 55 because of the oil embargo. And then, once technology rendered the fuel economy argument moot, the safety zealots pitched a gigantic hissy-fit and prevented us from going to the speeds that the roadways were designed to handle.

ZV

Vehicles are safer, not drivers.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Kelvrick

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: IHateMyJob2004
Seeing how people in CT drive like idiots and speed way beyond a reasonable limit (75 in 55 is common as is 80+ in 65), I am all for it! By god, give me my damned sticker!

On a clear day, on a multi-lane, divided freeway, 80 mph is perfectly safe for the conditions. Just as 65-70 is perfectly safe on a rural route in clear, daylight conditions.

65 was the national speed limit on two-lane roads when a 1938 Plymouth was a "state-of-the-art" automobile. 70 was the speed limit on the interstates when the '57 Chevy was a hot, new item. If those cars were considered "safe" at those speeds on those roads I fail to see why modern cars are limited to 55 on two-lanes and 65 on freeways when by all accounts our current vehicles are several orders of magnitude safer.

The problem with this country's speed limit laws is that they are set by the wussiest and most over-cautious among us. They are not set at the design speeds for the roads. Hell, the ENTIRE interstate system was designed for safe travel at 80+ mph. Drivers in the 1950's were told in drivers' education that when the new, safer, "cars of tomorrow" were here, the speed limits on the interstates would be raised to their design speed. Instead, they were dropped to 55 because of the oil embargo. And then, once technology rendered the fuel economy argument moot, the safety zealots pitched a gigantic hissy-fit and prevented us from going to the speeds that the roadways were designed to handle.

ZV

Vehicles are safer, not drivers.

That's not my problem. Damn fools think that driving is some kind of "right". It's not. And the licensing requirements need to be much, much more stringent. With required re-testing every 5-10 years. It should be administrated in a similar manner to competition racing licenses for clubs like the SCCA. I'd go so far as to say that at least 1/3 of the "drivers" on the road today in America have no bloody business behind the wheel of an auto.

There should also be a mandatory re-test after any accident for the at-fault driver.

ZV

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: diegoalcatraz

Residents who who sign up receive a distinctive bumper sticker that identifies them as individuals who have agreed to adhere strictly to the posted speed limit and to block anyone who attempts to speed past

Road rage, anyone?

Damn right.

Anyhow, I'm a sneaky ah heck with a quick car. I'll nip past these old git's in a pace-maker controlled heartbeat.

 

[Kelvrick]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Kelvrick

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: IHateMyJob2004
Seeing how people in CT drive like idiots and speed way beyond a reasonable limit (75 in 55 is common as is 80+ in 65), I am all for it! By god, give me my damned sticker!

On a clear day, on a multi-lane, divided freeway, 80 mph is perfectly safe for the conditions. Just as 65-70 is perfectly safe on a rural route in clear, daylight conditions.

65 was the national speed limit on two-lane roads when a 1938 Plymouth was a "state-of-the-art" automobile. 70 was the speed limit on the interstates when the '57 Chevy was a hot, new item. If those cars were considered "safe" at those speeds on those roads I fail to see why modern cars are limited to 55 on two-lanes and 65 on freeways when by all accounts our current vehicles are several orders of magnitude safer.

The problem with this country's speed limit laws is that they are set by the wussiest and most over-cautious among us. They are not set at the design speeds for the roads. Hell, the ENTIRE interstate system was designed for safe travel at 80+ mph. Drivers in the 1950's were told in drivers' education that when the new, safer, "cars of tomorrow" were here, the speed limits on the interstates would be raised to their design speed. Instead, they were dropped to 55 because of the oil embargo. And then, once technology rendered the fuel economy argument moot, the safety zealots pitched a gigantic hissy-fit and prevented us from going to the speeds that the roadways were designed to handle.

ZV

Vehicles are safer, not drivers.

That's not my problem. Damn fools think that driving is some kind of "right". It's not. And the licensing requirements need to be much, much more stringent. With required re-testing every 5-10 years. It should be administrated in a similar manner to competition racing licenses for clubs like the SCCA. I'd go so far as to say that at least 1/3 of the "drivers" on the road today in America have no bloody business behind the wheel of an auto.

ZV

Yea it is. Its a problem for everyone else on the road, sidewalks and parkinglots. The vehicles may be able to handle 80mph just as well with new braking and handling technology, but another 15mph might mean death for me when that motherfvcker t-bones me in the intersection or swerves into my lane.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Kelvrick

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Kelvrick

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: IHateMyJob2004
Seeing how people in CT drive like idiots and speed way beyond a reasonable limit (75 in 55 is common as is 80+ in 65), I am all for it! By god, give me my damned sticker!

On a clear day, on a multi-lane, divided freeway, 80 mph is perfectly safe for the conditions. Just as 65-70 is perfectly safe on a rural route in clear, daylight conditions.

65 was the national speed limit on two-lane roads when a 1938 Plymouth was a "state-of-the-art" automobile. 70 was the speed limit on the interstates when the '57 Chevy was a hot, new item. If those cars were considered "safe" at those speeds on those roads I fail to see why modern cars are limited to 55 on two-lanes and 65 on freeways when by all accounts our current vehicles are several orders of magnitude safer.

The problem with this country's speed limit laws is that they are set by the wussiest and most over-cautious among us. They are not set at the design speeds for the roads. Hell, the ENTIRE interstate system was designed for safe travel at 80+ mph. Drivers in the 1950's were told in drivers' education that when the new, safer, "cars of tomorrow" were here, the speed limits on the interstates would be raised to their design speed. Instead, they were dropped to 55 because of the oil embargo. And then, once technology rendered the fuel economy argument moot, the safety zealots pitched a gigantic hissy-fit and prevented us from going to the speeds that the roadways were designed to handle.

ZV

Vehicles are safer, not drivers.

That's not my problem. Damn fools think that driving is some kind of "right". It's not. And the licensing requirements need to be much, much more stringent. With required re-testing every 5-10 years. It should be administrated in a similar manner to competition racing licenses for clubs like the SCCA. I'd go so far as to say that at least 1/3 of the "drivers" on the road today in America have no bloody business behind the wheel of an auto.

ZV

Yea it is. Its a problem for everyone else on the road, sidewalks and parkinglots. The vehicles may be able to handle 80mph just as well with new braking and handling technology, but another 15mph might mean death for me when that motherfvcker t-bones me in the intersection or swerves into my lane.

No, it's not. We need those dumbfvcks off the bloody roads. Instead of making concessions to allow incompetants access to our roadways, we need testing that will weed them out. It's dead-simple. Revoke the licenses of the worst 1/3 of drivers and raise the limits to the speeds for which the roads were designed.

There will be less pollution, less traffic, and fewer accidents.

ZV

 

[DivideBYZero]

After some research and hopign it wasn't true...I found the official link. Sad...

I highly doubt people will be encouraged to block other drivers passing.

If you are in a 30Mph zone doing 25, I'll pass you. I may reach 35Mph during the overtake, but that will be to reduce my time exposed to danger, and I will return to the limit after the overtake.

Local goverment officials are ****ing idiots most of the time.

 

[m2kewl]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Kelvrick

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Kelvrick

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: IHateMyJob2004
Seeing how people in CT drive like idiots and speed way beyond a reasonable limit (75 in 55 is common as is 80+ in 65), I am all for it! By god, give me my damned sticker!

On a clear day, on a multi-lane, divided freeway, 80 mph is perfectly safe for the conditions. Just as 65-70 is perfectly safe on a rural route in clear, daylight conditions.

65 was the national speed limit on two-lane roads when a 1938 Plymouth was a "state-of-the-art" automobile. 70 was the speed limit on the interstates when the '57 Chevy was a hot, new item. If those cars were considered "safe" at those speeds on those roads I fail to see why modern cars are limited to 55 on two-lanes and 65 on freeways when by all accounts our current vehicles are several orders of magnitude safer.

The problem with this country's speed limit laws is that they are set by the wussiest and most over-cautious among us. They are not set at the design speeds for the roads. Hell, the ENTIRE interstate system was designed for safe travel at 80+ mph. Drivers in the 1950's were told in drivers' education that when the new, safer, "cars of tomorrow" were here, the speed limits on the interstates would be raised to their design speed. Instead, they were dropped to 55 because of the oil embargo. And then, once technology rendered the fuel economy argument moot, the safety zealots pitched a gigantic hissy-fit and prevented us from going to the speeds that the roadways were designed to handle.

ZV

Vehicles are safer, not drivers.

That's not my problem. Damn fools think that driving is some kind of "right". It's not. And the licensing requirements need to be much, much more stringent. With required re-testing every 5-10 years. It should be administrated in a similar manner to competition racing licenses for clubs like the SCCA. I'd go so far as to say that at least 1/3 of the "drivers" on the road today in America have no bloody business behind the wheel of an auto.

ZV

Yea it is. Its a problem for everyone else on the road, sidewalks and parkinglots. The vehicles may be able to handle 80mph just as well with new braking and handling technology, but another 15mph might mean death for me when that motherfvcker t-bones me in the intersection or swerves into my lane.

No, it's not. We need those dumbfvcks off the bloody roads. Instead of making concessions to allow incompetants access to our roadways, we need testing that will weed them out. It's dead-simple. Revoke the licenses of the worst 1/3 of drivers and raise the limits to the speeds for which the roads were designed.

There will be less pollution, less traffic, and fewer accidents.

ZV

werd man. interstate speed limits should be 75mph or so...and all the drivers who don't know how to use the left lanes should be OFF it!! stop lobbying for the pussification of america's roadways!

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: IHateMyJob2004

Seeing how people in CT drive like idiots and speed way beyond a reasonable limit (75 in 55 is common as is 80+ in 65), I am all for it! By god, give me my damned sticker!

When I witness another enraged driver take your head off with a shotgun for being a complete moron intentionally disrupting traffic, I'll claim that I didn't see anything at all. Many others would do the same.