Oops, that could have been expensive.

Not every accident is featured in the papers...

What you would need is the road safety statistics that helped form part of the decision making progress employed by your local council. They would either tell you "none", "one and a half" or "a metric shitload".

Ergo, the number would be different, but the request - "how many accidents?" would be the same.

But I'm reasonably sure neither of us care enough to be bothered :)

I like the idea of one and a half accidents, is that a motorbike? ;)

windmill lane, was nsl, dropped to 30 mph for no reason uxbridge road, was 40 dual carriage way with 2 and 3 lanes on it, dropped to

windmill lane now has speed camera signs dotted along it as well as a bump exactly where the fastest point it uxbridge road now has 2 speed camera'son it (but that's fair enough as there have been a fair few accidents out in front of the hospital but that's more to do with the fact that people cross the road rather than waiting for the lights to have the little green man showing) Greenford road now has plod sitting at random intervals (hiding in the side roads) and clocking people who are doing 40 mph (they haven't put up 30 mph signs, they've just removed the 40 mph ones)

there was no reason given for the blanket 30 mph limits imposed on all of the local roads

Bingo.

Just because the accidents weren't serious, doesn't mean they won't result in a lower speedlimit.

As Lordy says, it's VERY likely that you'll be unaware of smaller accidents. They probably have occurred on that road, hence the new lower limit. Regular accidents are pretty much the only reason to lower a speed-limit.

Don't be an ass.

Yes of course we all know that's the main reason for lower speed limits. ROFL

But, it is ?

You know all those long 50mph A-Roads around the country ? Well they're

An accident will be documented somewhere, a -accident won't be.

Only if including a Sidecar.

No, you fail to understand. It's not just virtually impossible, it's impossible to prove a negative, because no matter how hard you look, there's always a finite and definite probability that the event (accident) occured but did not get recorded or reported or you just looked int he wrong place. However proving that an accident happened is easy, if you find a reference to it, it happened.

It's logic, a branch of mathematics, so I don't expect you to understand. However be assured that you can't prove a negative, ever.

Jesus H Christ.

"Dear Mr Safety Conscious Council Member, how many accidents were involved in your decision to lower the speed limit ?"

You don't need to prove that there have *never* been any accidents, and yes to all intents and purposes it would be impossible. The issue is how many accidents were involved in the decision making progress.