The idea proposed by the police of enforcing the speed limit without any leeway is absurd and, I ask, is this another way of making money from the already beleaguered motorist?
Speeding is a problem. However, a zero-tolerance attitude will create chaos as regards paperwork, create animosity towards the police and will not help the problem one bit.
The vast majority of us do try to abide by the speed limit, but a zero-tolerance approach will mean most of us will have our eyes glued to the speedometer and not on the road, probably resulting in more accidents.
The other issue is that car speedometers are inaccurate. I own two cars – one a Rover 75 which, when bought new, had the option of either 15in, 16in or 17in inch alloy rims and a selection of different tyres. However, Rover only fitted one type of speedometer, so it’s obvious that the accuracy of the speedo will be in question, but I’m not to know that, or indeed the variance that could be two or three miles per hour out – either plus or minus.
My other car is a 1979 classic car, again with a speedo that is 40 years old and so will not be as accurate as perhaps a brand new car with digital equipment, so once again, where does that leave me as regards zero-tolerance?
Presumably we will be allowed to contest any fines or convictions in court because, arguably, one has unwittingly committed an offence not due to negligence, but through misinformation by equipment fitted. Are the police going to check everyone’s speedometer for accuracy? A two to three mph error is quite common on cars.
Admittedly sat-navs can inform you of your true speed, but how many of us use a sat-nav all the time? I think this is a flawed suggestion and the police would be far better off catching the real speeders with unmarked traffic patrol cars.
Karl Sheridan via email