Reader views (3)

 Add your view

Even though I am a cyclist I am actually against lowering the limit. We already have some of the most severe penalties for exceeding the limit, in the world. As far as I am aware, nowhere else in Europe or the Americas automatically ban offenders for a minimum of 12 months (and indeed, empirical evidence suggests that magistrates are beginning to ban drivers for 18 months, for first offences). We may have a higher limit but the penalty for exceeding this limit is also higher.

- Ross, London, UK, 29/07/2009 17:06
Report abuse

Just make it zero. Nobody knows what a unit is anyway.

- Bloke, London, 29/07/2009 16:22
Report abuse

So Inspector Knacker is looking at near misses, to get an idea of who fell just short of breaking the law. This is so that he can lower the limit to criminalise those who are not breaking the law. This would then raise shed loads of money for the beleagured govt without plod having to do anything. This would have very little effect on road safety or those people who continually flout the insurance, road tax and vehicle roadworthiness regulations, who can apparently do what ever they want with impunity, because there are no traffic cops doing spot checks. It's the finances of it really, Buy a scrap car for £50, with bald tyres. It's a damn sight cheaper getting that crushed, and being fined, (which you don't have to pay) than it is insuring £600 Taxing £200 and MOT ing £150 a vehicle. Isn't it about time plod got off their backsides and actually did something to reenforce road safety, rather than just waiting for someone to have an accident, turning up, saying blow into this, and got you!!! Whilst they are at it, will they also look at the number of officers who drive transit vans whilst holding cups of coffee as they do up here, and will they prosecute all officers who break speed limits but hide under spurious defences?

- Alan, carlisle uk, 29/07/2009 16:20
Report abuse

Add your comment