Letter: Blanket limits are not appropriate

OF COURSE the faster a child is hit by a car, the more likely the death and worse the injury. That is simple physics and is equally true for adults, cows, horses, and sweet furry bunny rabbits. To use this approach to argue for the imposition of more and lower blanket speed limits is unintelligent and even counterproductive to the cause of road safety ("Speed kills: it's that simple", 28 November).

Survey after survey shows that speed limits are not kept by a large proportion of motorists. I live in a small village on a B road near Basingstoke, and that road has a 30mph limit throughout. For at least half of the distance through the village 30mph is either too fast or too slow for the conditions. Equally, 70mph on an empty motorway or modern dual carriageway at 2am is boring, boring, boring, and there are many examples of speed limits being too fast as well as too slow. Overall at least 50 per cent of blanket limits are probably inappropriate. Is it any wonder therefore that the majority of sensible people driving cars get used to ignoring limits as being irrelevant?

The Independent on Sunday would better serve us by campaigning for the total abolition of blanket speed limits, coupled with every inch of the roads having a properly assessed speed limit ranging from 5-10mph to unlimited. The logic of the alternative as set out in the article is to pass a law requiring all vehicles to be preceded by a man waving a red flag. At a walking pace not even the sweet little furry bunny would get killed.

GODFREY THOMAS

Cliddesden, Hampshire