On Sun, 4 Sep 2005 11:45:49 +0000 (UTC), "Knight Of The Road"
I doubt there's anywhere that doesn't enforce speed limits - no point in having them if they aren't enforced to some degree.
I don't think that many of us really have a problem with the notion of speed limit enforcement. It's the way that they are enforced that's the problem.
If you get a speeding ticket you get two punishments: - £60 fine - 3 penalty points
ISTM that the penalty points alone provide sufficient deterrent for habitual speeders. If you're caught four times in a rolling three year period, you (normally) lose your licence under totting-up rules. It's fair in that it affects almost every driver equally - the exception being the new drivers for whom the limit is six points in their first two years.
If the real and true motivation is to improve road safety, no fine is required as a deterrent.
It amuses me how the resources available for speed limit enforcement have gone into over-drive since the fine was upped from £40 to £60.
In the past drivers had a chance of talking their way out of a ticket, because the police would generally stop the driver and speak to them about the offence.
These days speeding fines are simply churned out by the thousand because the available technology has made it easy to do so, and the Government has ensured that there's money in it.
In the vast majority of cases, speeding is a purely administrative offence and no harm is done to anybody. In situations where speeding does harm or injure someone or something, the book should be thrown at the offender.
I'm feeling all philosophical today.
HVB.
