Click here to register on OneGuyFromBarlick|2|1
Go to Page
  First Page  Previous Page    41  42  43  [44]  45  46   Next Page  Last Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted -  14/11/2010  :  06:26
NEW VERSION TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR MEMBERS WITH SLOW CONNECTIONS TO CONNECT.

Follw this LINK for last version.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk
Replies
Author
Go to Page
  First Page  Previous Page    41  42  43  [44]  45  46   Next Page  Last Page
 
belle
VIP Member


6502 Posts
Posted - 28/01/2011 : 10:23
Heard yesterday, amidst mounting concern over Govts scrapping of our defences.."it's all part of a plan to become a European fighting force"...anyone else hear jackboots?

Edited by - belle on 28/01/2011 11:11:56 AM

Edited by - belle on 28/01/2011 11:12:57 AM


Life is what you make itGo to Top of Page
catgate
Senior Member


1764 Posts
Posted - 28/01/2011 : 10:46


quote:
Bruff wrote:


 
Also, I reckon one of the best things we could do to get folk to drive safely, is to insist car manufactures design in a 6" metal spike right in the centre of the steering wheel......This will of course never happen, but it illustrates clearly the notion of an individual's 'risk thermostat'.

 

I think that is an excellent, idea spoiled only by the fact that if the errant driver died there would be no one left who could support the dependants of the driver that he just killed.


Every silver lining has a cloud.


Go to Top of Page
Tizer
VIP Member


5150 Posts
Posted - 28/01/2011 : 11:30
I tend to agree with Frank that the 20mph limit does not work. I agree that statistically a car at 20 is likely to do less damage to a child than a car at 30, and that the driver of the car at 20 has slightly more time to avoid a child in the road. But I don't think we have evidence yet that imposing a 20 rather than 30mph limit will be a benefit to children/pedestrians in a British town *and* be viable in other ways such as allowing traffic to move and not come to a standstill. I would rather see the 30mph limit policed effectively and a 20mph limit outside schools at `school rush hour' twice a day.

We have a 20mph limit outside a school in the local town but it applies all the time and cars have to crawl along a main road at 20 at any time of day or night. The road has railings all the way along one side and there are no shops or anything else, it's a perimeter road to a housing estate. In contrast, our village school is at a junction on a main trunk road with a 30mph limit, no railings, no zebra crossing or lights, no street lights, alongside a pub, shop and post office with cars turning, parking and rushing by faster than 30. There is obviously a lack of joined up thinking in the council when it comes to sighting limits and crossings and this needs sorting first of all.

And the biggest issue of the lot is that we still need to get people to obey the present speed limits. Until we do that you can forget setting more limits or different limits. Most of the population are breaking the law every day on the roads and getting away with it. Much of the traffic passing through our village is going at 50mph, even articulated lorries, regardless of the 30mph limit and the school, shops etc at the centre.


Go to Top of Page
frankwilk
Senior Member


3975 Posts
Posted - 28/01/2011 : 19:36
Stanley you missed the point about Nimrods and you are showing your ignorance on what they are for.  In future border surveillance will be carried out by unmanned drones. Nimrods are Submarine Detectors the only way we get away with using them in Afghanistan or Iraq is because we had/have 100 % Air Security.

Stanley read my post I said in the most clear terms I could that the 20 mph is not policed. It can't be any more clear than that.
You show your ignorance of Small American towns. The vast majority of children go to school on the Yellow Bus !!! I lived for 4 years in Small American towns one of the reasons they bumble around is because the Highway Patrol tend to be parked up on Main Street, and because once again no one is going anywhere, hence no need for speed.
Now the Interstate is a different thing altogether.
Trident is the final defence it is not designed for combat, it is designed with the capability to offer the ultimate retaliation. I don't know about you But I like the feeling should anyone nuke us we can make sure they are going to die as well.

Edited by - frankwilk on 28/01/2011 7:38:37 PM



Frank Wilkinson       Once Navy Always Navy Go to Top of Page
frankwilk
Senior Member


3975 Posts
Posted - 28/01/2011 : 19:54
Let's hear it for a town the size of Barlick which has its own fire service, police, hospital and no booze problem on the streets at night. They must be doing something right!

Yep 2 of the 4 are paid for by Private Insurance, Hospitals /Fire. The Conservatives are offering Local Police Commissioners, so thats the Police taken care of.  Drink you must be 21 to obtain it, so that will cut down on problems, plus the fact Small American Towns don't have Night Clubs like in the UK. 
This was not an apples and apples comparison again.

Cat makes a valid point with regards to education of  School Children we have had two fatalities recently with teenagers getting off the bus and then running across the road in front of the bus,rather than waiting for the bus to move off.

Their is No Evidence to show that 20 MPH will reduce accidents, because no stats are available and won't be for at least another 20 years. It's just a Guess



Frank Wilkinson       Once Navy Always Navy Go to Top of Page
catgate
Senior Member


1764 Posts
Posted - 28/01/2011 : 19:57


quote:
Tizer wrote:

We have a 20mph limit outside a school in the local town but it applies all the time and cars have to crawl along a main road at 20 at any time of day or night.

You missed out the three months when the schools are closed, Tizer!

We have two similar ones up here, one in Elvington and the other in Sutton-on Derwent.

The one in Elvington is also augmentet by bloody great speed humps and so one needs to watch the speed bumps and the speedo and,  if one still has time to spare, keep a look out for children. This latter function is a made a liitle more difficult biecause the "mummies" park their Chelsea tractors, Mercs and BMWs along this stretch AT THE SCHOOL SIDE of the road.

Still it doesn't matter because we all know who will be at fault when some poor little sod stops one.

On the other side of the coin our little village (well we live in the parish thereof) does not even sport a 30mph sign. The parish council do not want one. So there are some sane people about.


Every silver lining has a cloud.


Go to Top of Page
catgate
Senior Member


1764 Posts
Posted - 28/01/2011 : 20:08


quote:
frankwilk wrote:
Their is No Evidence to show that 20 MPH will reduce accidents, because no stats are available and won't be for at least another 20 years. It's just a Guess

The 20 mph thing is just a gesture to concerned mummies and daddies and is in reality yet another means of intimidating, subjugating and softening up joe public, whilst at the same time raking in more money for all those essential things that are needed for good governance...like politicians' and councillor officers' salaries, pensions and expenses, and jobs for ACPO.


Every silver lining has a cloud.


Go to Top of Page
frankwilk
Senior Member


3975 Posts
Posted - 28/01/2011 : 20:42
borrowed this from another site but fitting I though to the discussion.

It is the same over here in Australia, the Government are obsessed with the road toll (as they call the number of deaths each year) and the media are always reporting the weekends road toll and comparing it to previous years. Always it is speed that gets the blame and always speed cameras that are the answer.

So many times we are told that speeding kills and therefore speed cameras save lives, and so many idiots believe it. You want the proof that speed cameras are for raising revenue and not to stop people speeding? seriously I have the evidence.

If you really wanted to stop speeding you could do it tomorrow, just change the penalties so that anyone ever caught, first offence, gets a £10,000 fine and loses their licence for 10 years.

Done. No more speeding.

But of course they don't, they give you a few points and a £60 fine. Because you get caught it means you are more likely to speed often and therefore it is better to have you on the road where you can donate more cash. What use are you on the bus?



Frank Wilkinson       Once Navy Always Navy Go to Top of Page
Bradders
Senior Member


1880 Posts
Posted - 28/01/2011 : 22:21
Cut the crap you idiots...ANYTHING  that stops one of my four Grandchildren from becoming a statistic , gets my vote .....

Think about it  !

(the edit was only to correct a spelling mistike !........ )

Edited by - Bradders on 28/01/2011 11:33:01 PM


BRADDERS BLUESINGER Go to Top of Page
catgate
Senior Member


1764 Posts
Posted - 28/01/2011 : 22:47


quote:
Bradders wrote:
Cut the crap you idiots...ANYTHING  that stops one of my four Granchildren from becoming a statistic , gets my vote .....

Think about it  !

Ok. How about only allowing stationary traffic on the road? That should be safe enough for anyone.


Every silver lining has a cloud.


Go to Top of Page
belle
VIP Member


6502 Posts
Posted - 28/01/2011 : 23:32
I can't see the argument here..why would anyone want to drive faster than 20 miles an hour in built up traffic, cars parked both sides, the chance of any pedestrian suddenly stepping out...surely we shouldn't need to argue for the right to mow people down?


Life is what you make itGo to Top of Page
Bradders
Senior Member


1880 Posts
Posted - 28/01/2011 : 23:39
EXACTLY  Belle !....If it happened to one of theirs , they would be the first to call for the Death Penalty......

 


BRADDERS BLUESINGER Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 29/01/2011 : 07:13
Belle gets very close to my point about the 20mph limit. 30mph is too fast in modern urban streets which are far more congested. Legally you can do 30 in Town Square. But the main advantage I see is that it slows down the pace of life and the people I talk to invariably make the same comment 'Everyone is dashing round'. When you think of the average speed in major towns with heavy traffic you begin to realise that it isn't the bulk of traffic which needs slowing down but the rogue rat run drivers etc. That's why I think it should be a blanket restriction. The time lost by through traffic on urban roads would be negligible.

I read a report somewhere on this and the technology is in place to fit new vehicles with speed limiters that would respond to simple transponders mounted on lamp posts at town boundaries. All right the older cars would be too expensive to retro fit but they would be slowed down automatically by the new vehicles with limiters. Think of HGVs with 56mph limiters.

Frank, once again you are wrong and divert the thread into a course that proves your point. The services in Northfield MN are financed by income from a local sales tax, all of them. The health insurance system is a different matter altogther and operated at Federal level. As for booze, Northfield has only one source of alcohol outside a few main street bars (numbers of licences heavily controlled by the city) and it is an off licence run by the city, very well stocked, no price-cutting allowed and all profits go back into the town chest. Local supermarkets aren't allowed to sell acohol. I can't speak for other towns because I don't know what their local ordinances are but in Northfield that's how they choose to run the town and it seems to work.

As for AWACS the technology is advancing, of course I knew that, but that is no excuse for spending £6billion on a resource and then scrapping it. My original point stands, there is still a use for them and more important in my mind is what it does for workers who have spent most of their working lives producing something only to see it trashed. There's a message there about their skills and usefulness to society. Are AWACS still used by the US?

As for mutually assured destruction by the use of nuclear retaliation, some comfort that is! It's a policy of despair and if we can't think of a better reason for having Trident than that my case is proved. The argument is made that it will cost money to scrap it, same applies to all the other things they scrap. Bite the bullet, scrap them and take the load off our kids in the future.  Old-fashioned opinions these days I know but I lived under bombardment and if nuclear weapons had been in existence then I wouldn't be here now. As far as I am concerned it is that simple.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
frankwilk
Senior Member


3975 Posts
Posted - 29/01/2011 : 08:46
Cut the crap you idiots...ANYTHING  that stops one of my four Grandchildren from becoming a statistic

You Are The Person
to prevent one of your Grandchildren from becoming a statistic.
I refrain from using the I***t word, I try not to get personal, even though a lot is aimed at myself.

Edited by - frankwilk on 29/01/2011 09:19:24 AM



Frank Wilkinson       Once Navy Always Navy Go to Top of Page
frankwilk
Senior Member


3975 Posts
Posted - 29/01/2011 : 09:32
Yes Stanley AWACS are very good, but they have a different role to Nimrods !!!!
Stanley Stanley the Nimrod was Years behind Schedule and Technology has overtaken it. Should we continue building something that is pointless , and on Borrowed Money ??
Answer this 
How do you know that if we had, already a Nuclear Capability in 1914 or in 1939 that a Conventional War would have happened. Bet Hitler and the German people would have thought twice before going to war.



Frank Wilkinson       Once Navy Always Navy Go to Top of Page
Topic is 167 Pages Long:
Go to Page
  First Page  Previous Page    41  42  43  [44]  45  46   Next Page  Last Page
 


Set us as your default homepage Bookmark us Privacy   Copyright 2004-2011 www.oneguyfrombarlick.co.uk All Rights Reserved. Design by: Frost SkyPortal.net Go To Top Of Page

Page load time - 0.781