...maybe.

http://www.conservatives.com/news/article.cfm?obj_id=72256

But the important thing is that they make a net profit:

The cause more deaths than they prevent!

 

From another forum:

Extract from the Herts. Advertiser Sept 11th, page 3

'Police accident investigator said . the car was being driven at about 50 mph when it hit a speed bump. The speed would have caused instability and..(17 year old driver) had steered too far to the left in a bid to correct. It left the road, hit a fence and overturned. Verdict accidental death. (blood alcohol level slightly over the legal drink-drive limit)



The cost of traffic calming.

Well,

I suppose it's one way to slow 'em down!

 

The council have very recently installed them for 500 yards on my road.

They have certainly cut down the speed of the young men in cossetted E Reg Novas, but increased the noise level, especially at night.

What was he doing hitting a speed bump at 50mph? I can't imagine the limit was any more than 30mph if their were bumps.

Sounds like the cost of driving like an idiot after drinking, not traffic calming, no matter how it's spun.

Spin?

Wot spin?!

You seem to think that speed humps are there to stop reckless, dangerous, speeding motorists.

And I agreed that it stopped him dead.

What's your problem with that?

 

The Times, 19/09/03

THE Government has ordered local authorities to consider removing thousands of road humps after an ambulance service leader complained that they were costing lives by delaying the response to emergencies.
The Department for Transport has written to every council in England and Wales telling them to consult emergency services before installing any more humps. And the DfT’s road safety division also tells councils to review existing humps identified by ambulance, fire and police services as causing a problem.

The letter is responding to a complaint from the London Ambulance Service “which suggests that many lives could be saved if their vehicles were not restricted by traffic-calming measures”.

It adds: “The Department acknowledges that full consideration should be given to the wider implications of introducing traffic-calming measures on our roads. This is particularly important with regard to response times for the emergency services.”

Sigurd Reinton, the service’s chairman, has suggested that London’s road humps, estimated at between 20,000 and 30,000, are to blame for up to 500 deaths from cardiac arrest a year.

Mr Reinton, a former director of management consultancy McKinsey who was appointed to tackle the service’s poor response time to 999 calls, said that every minute’s delay resulted in a 10 per cent drop in the survival rate from cardiac arrest.

“By installing more humps and slowing traffic we may be able to prevent more road deaths but it’s also possible we end up paying for that with many more lives lost,” he said.

A recent internal survey by a service paramedic found that many ambulance drivers answering emergency calls took detours to avoid humps. They also delayed treatment inside ambulances, such as inserting intravenous drips, because of the jolts caused by humps.

Road humps have delayed the introduction of a £4 million fleet of new ambulances in Yorkshire because the hydraulic lifts on the backs of the vehicles were hitting the tops of the humps. The ambulances are now being modified.

Liverpool City Council is lowering some of its 10cm-high humps because hearses were grounding on the way to funerals. Many councils have ignored DfT advice which said humps above 7.5cm were “not recommended”.

Barnet council in North London has already begun removing its 500 humps after claiming that there was no proven safety benefit.

Brian Coleman, a Barnet councillor and deputy-leader of the London Assembly Conservatives, said 60 humps had been removed in the past year as roads were resurfaced.

He said humps were not just disliked by motorists. “They are also desperately unpopular with residents and they are hated by the disabled and cyclists.”

Mr Coleman said that he had received a 1,000-signature petition against a plan to install road humps in Primrose Hill in North London. Famous residents who signed the petition included the broadcaster Joan Bakewell, the authoress Beryl Bainbridge and the director Jonathan Miller.

However, Mr Coleman said that the humps had been approved this week by Camden Council.

Several Tory-controlled councils, including Westminster, Enfield and Richmond, are understood to be changing their policies to make it harder for road humps to win approval. Tim Collins, the Shadow Transport Secretary, has promised to remove all “unnecessary road humps”.

A link is here:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-120-823085,00.html

 

I would agree to speed humps hindering the emergency services, I read a story about an ambulance carrying a patient with spinal injuries having to negotiate over 20 speed humps!
I travel along a congested stretch of road outside a school, those car width speed humps have been recently installed. It is rare that 20mph can be exceeded due to the congestion and parked cars. It is dangerous as you have to swerve to negotiate the poorly placed humps, endangering cyclists and make overtaking stopped buses difficult.

Making overtaking buses difficult seems to be part of the overall strategy, Andy2.
Around here (North Cheshire), we are seeing bus stops 'built out' so that a stopped bus completely blocks the lane.
The other method of frustrating the motorist is to narrow the road (usually by adding lots of white paint or a cycle lane that never gets used) and then placing central reservations every 200 yds, thus trapping cars behind the slowest moving vehicle, usually a bus.

>I travel along a congested stretch of road outside a
>school, those car width speed humps have been recently
>installed. It is rare that 20mph can be exceeded due to
>the congestion and parked cars. It is dangerous as you
>have to swerve to negotiate the poorly placed humps,
>endangering cyclists and make overtaking stopped buses
>difficult.

umm surely you choose to swerve and endanger cyclists. Have you considered slowing down and overtaking when it is safe to do so? Almost all other drivers seem to grasp this point IME.

best wishes
james

He clearly said:

> "It is rare that 20mph can be exceeded"

And:

> "It is dangerous as you have to swerve to negotiate the poorly placed humps, comma, endangering cyclists"

[who are prone to under/overtake without looking/signalling/hidden in a blind spot, while you have slowed/stopped waiting for an appropriate time to negotiate the bumps, IME].

And:

> "make[s] overtaking stopped buses difficult."

NOT:

"It is dangerous as you have to swerve to endanger cyclists"

NOR:

" speed up as I approach cyclists"

And certainly not:

"I choose to swerve and endanger cyclists, speeding up and overtaking when it is not safe to do so."

You are clearly a typical cyclists as you demonstate the typical cyclists appalling to non-existent lack of observational skills.

IME

IMO

 

Hang on a sec, I've started on the 'golden nectar' but I havent had that much yet.
Let's have another look at this,
(or part of it)

The Times, 19/09/03

"THE Government has 'ordered' local authorities to consider removing thousands of road humps" after an ambulance service leader complained that they were costing lives by delaying the response to emergencies.
*******************
Then further down the post,

Barnet council in North London has already begun removing its 500 humps after claiming that there was no proven safety benefit.

Brian Coleman, a Barnet councillor and deputy-leader of the London Assembly Conservatives, said 60 humps had been removed in the past year as roads were resurfaced.

He said "Humps were not just disliked by motorists they are also desperately unpopular with residents and they are hated by the disabled and cyclists."

Mr Coleman said that he had received a 1,000-signature petition against a plan to install road humps in Primrose Hill in North London. Famous residents who signed the petition included the broadcaster Joan Bakewell, the authoress Beryl Bainbridge and the director Jonathan Miller.

However, Mr Coleman said that "The humps had been 'approved' this week by Camden Council"
====================================
So, 'Orders from the Govt'.
'A 1,000 signature petition'
'Humps removed after claims they "Have no proven safety benefit"
'Deputy leader of LAC. states "They are disliked by motorists, desperately unpopular with residents and they are hated by the disabled and cyclists"
***********************************
BUT.....Camden Council have 'Approved' the installation of even 'MORE'.??????

HUH??
======

Sorry, forgot to mention the 500 deaths caused by the humps, (cardiac arrest cases) and the £4 million fleet of ambulances affected by them.
Must'nt forget the patients with spinal injuries, or the hinderence to other emergency service vehicles.

If a speed bump kills a mindless yobo who's driving too fast, who cares?

Teach the next few a lesson. Then when the next one buys the farm (if he can outbid the grant-funded farmes), maybe a few more yobos will learn too.

Good on them. More speed bumps, I say!

TPG - FIGHTING FOR YOUR SAFE STREETS!

I'm sure the London ambulance service, which reckons the bumps are costing at least 500 lives a year, and the Yorkshire ambulance service, which has £40 Million of new ambulances laid up because they can't negotiate speed bumps, agree with you.

Keep on putting the anti-motorists' point of view forward:

We appreciate the support!

B.J.
It is my intention to continue ridiculing the ludicrous claims made by the anti car mob.

They are a bunch of poorly educated moronic leeches who have no idea what they are attempting to do as far as road safety issues are concerned.

I would prefer not to resort to 'name calling' but saddly these unfortunate creatures leave me little or no choice.

The small area in which my home is located has been inundated with these so called 'speed retarders'---every '25' YDS.

I firmly believe that a prominent influential member of our local council is closely related to the person who owns the company responsible for installing traffic calming measures......

And that he/she is ensuring that the MAXIMUM amount of humps are laid in return for a decent sized 'back hander'.