🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Jan22.125313.6927@spider.co.uk> jmorris@spider.co.uk (John Morris) writes:
>In article <1993Jan18.153127.13273@praxis.co.uk> martin@praxis.co.uk (Martin Croxford) writes:
>>
>>"You should be nicked" for driving at an inappropriate speed. On
>>motorways this could be 100mph in most conditions, 70mph in heavy
>>rain/heavy traffic or 25mph in "normal" conditions. Outside a school
>>(assuming a 30mph limit) this could be 45mph at 3 in the morning, 35mph
>>in most other conditions or 20mph at 3.45pm when the kids are going home.
>>
>I think you are restricting the use of "inappropriate" to the safety aspects.
>I live in a house which fronts directly onto a main road, and the bedroom
>is at the front of the house. A car at 45mph is quite a lot louder than one
>at 30mph - and it really p***** me off when the gentle drift into sleep
>gets rudely aborted by some inconsiderate oaf who drives through fast 
>because "there is nobody about."
>
>John.
>
Yes I second this point. I think that the noise made by cars is a very
good reason for enforcing speed limits.

Can you imagine living by the North Circular? This is a three lane dual
carriageway with a 40mph speed limit. If you stick to 40mph you will
probably be the only person who does, mainly I think because everyone
knows it is "safe" to drive faster. (Certainly similar roads elsewhere
have higher limits.) However I'm sure that the noise, although still 
bad(!) would be a lot less if everyone did drive at 40mph rather than 
the 50-60mph which is the norm.

Noise apart another reason for sticking to the limit is the poor sod
who has to join from a side road. This is often hard enough if you
can assume that the traffic on the main road is not exceeding the 
limit. If you have to assume that most people are exceeding the limit
by 10-20mph then it becomes damn near impossible

Tim Morley (T.I.Morley)