The speed limits are maximum speeds not minimum, nor are they advisory speeds. Too slow might get you pulled in for causing an obstruction, but there is no excuse for overtakers to drive dangerously. Wait behind until it is safe to overtake.
Slow drivers are NOT responsible for accidents that happen ahead of them. They are driving at a speed at which they can stop before they plough into the back of any hazards. Sensibly!
I agree with you that the speed limits are there as a maximum speed. I also agree that there is no excuse to overtake when dangerous.
However on those points. The Speed limits were set when vehicles didn't have as many safety features on them. So perhaps this needs a rethink. But certainly not by slowing things down more. On motorways for example I'm all in favour of derestrictions. For a modern car and a sensible driver (I use the term for a driver who has complete and proper control, observation etc.) 70 on a motorway is just too damn slow. German Autobahns are a much better example of how to run a road. (and yes they do all behave better on the roads than brits)
As for SLOW drivers not being responsible... I've stated why I think they share responsibility and I think we will have to agree to disagree.
The one point I'd make is that if they have to drive slowly to be able to avoid hazards then perhaps their reaction time is not good enough for them to drive and they should get a bus.
Robert Naylor said:
No the speed limit is 30mph, so stick to it. Especially if its a residential road (ie no markings). Its a maximum speed not a target.
By the same logic as forcing pedestrians to use crossing, drives should stick to the main roads and not bomb along residentials at 35.
FYI: I do disagree on the dropping of the national speed limit.
Robert only quoting this as you mention a point that keeps coming up. (Agree with your points pretty much on residential stuff)
This idea of a target.
Don't know exactly when this came up but have been hearing it more and more. The limit isn't a target etc.
It certainly was a target when I learned to drive. When I sat my PCV it was even more of a target.
The exact phrase being "What is the speed limit on this road? Why are you not doing it?" (And no I wasn't speeding)
If I had not stuck to speed limits I would have failed my PCV. So for me to become a professional driver I had to know how to stick to the speed limit.
So I can't agree that you should go slower than the speed limit unless there are factors that make it necessary to do so. Residential areas are the prime examples as speed does need adjusted.
So if "WE" are saying that doing 70 in a car on a bypass (dual-carriageway) is wrong and that I should go slower then I think "THEY" are insane. Furthermore I think that anyone doing 50 on a dual carriageway (unless they are in a LGV or equivalent) should have their license removed. Same goes for slow gits on A roads.
On the point of pedestrians...
When I was young I was taught how to walk on country roads and at the time there was the big push on the green cross code. So for my part I think that pedestrians should know how to cross a road or to walk safely near roadsides.
This seems to have lessened as time has gone on. For example the local primary school teaches children how to cross the road. This is ridiculous as they should know how to cross roads before they go to school. A bit off the point but what it seems to have brought about is that if nobody is teaching the kids then make the drivers suffer.
The 20 limits near schools and the 20 limits in schemes which are not needed.
(And I do have a young child who will be taught how to navigate roads as soon as he is able to walk near them)
This seems to be turning into a rant so apologies.
It just seems to get more and more of a nanny state and the sooner we get back to having decent values and common sense the better.