MEPs push for 30kph (18.641mph) limit on residential roads throughout Europe

Let's face it, most cars do not travel at a constant speed in rush-hour congestion. It's stop-start,gear-stick shuffle stuff. The 20 mph limit's most important when the congestion isn't there.

it would encourage more cycling and that's good. More bikes=fewer cars.

Then we want to exclude I-C vehicles from town centres.

deleted

I am all for reducing speed limits in residential streets, and side roads, but I can't help feel that it will give people a false sense of security. Nowadays, all of the blame is on the driver, because they are in a big motor-driven metal box, yet the people that walk out in front of them are allowed to do so.

Reducing speed limits to 20mph, will make people think that it is safe for their children to play football in the road out the front, and that there is less danger. There may be less deaths, but there will still be injuries, and surely we should be trying to reduce that as much as we are deaths.

I just think that pedestrians will get the wrong idea by reducing speed limits, after all these are roads we are talking about, surely it should be the pedestrians responsibility to look around them and not walk accross a road if a car is coming, not the driver's responsabilty to drive so slowly that if a pedestrian does decide they want to walk out they can stop? We should be encouraging use of parks for children to play in, and zebra crossings for people to cross at.

On the note of efficiency, I know from closely monitoring my mpg needle, that my car is most fuel-efficient around the 40-50mpg range, and at 20mph you will be continuosly changing up and down between 1st, 2nd and 3rd gear, which isn't fuel-efficient at all. It's also worth noting that at 20mph, in say 3rd gear, most cars will be running at practically idle, and will be almost silent. While this is generally good, it will only add to the 'false sense of security'.

I am torn between the devil and the deep blue sea on this.
As a cyclist and a Grandad 20mph is good but as a motorist its not always so good. The problem is speed limits need to make sense to all users and even I can cycle faster than 20 with a fair wind; so does 20 apply to me too?
To a motorist 20 only makes sense in very limited areas like school zones; heaven help the BMW that runs over my Granddaughter. But elsewhere else its very slow progress and drivers need to be able to see why it applies in order to respect it.
Like most things safety is basically common sense but sense is so often spoiled by the do-good brigade; speed humps being a perfect example of good intentions giving bad outcomes for all users.

I suspect that most people who live in a residential area and have kids, want a 20mph limit outside their house. It is a massive act of selfishness to want a 30mph limit everywhere else.

I drive, in fact I've even been a white van man at times, I'll even admit to occasionally exceeding the speed limit, I dont have children and I cant see how a 20 mph speed limit in residential areas is an act of selfishness.

I think some roads should possibly be even lower than that, I grew up playing football on streets (and two weeks a year of street tennis when Wimbledon came around) and didnt have to worry about cars speeding down the road. If kids tried that now on the same street they would almost certainly be cleaned out, more than likely by someone cutting through to Tesco.