JO Ripley's letter (November 15 issue) misses the point of my "protest."
Why is it that those whose agenda would have us all revert to the horse and cart in a mythical sylvan landscape can so consistently trot out statistics that by extension can only be improved to their satisfaction by exactly that?
It is as if anyone who raises a question about the practicality of a speed limit is deemed to be anti safety, or worse, pro death, to the extent that any real discussion is out of the question.
To clarify, anyone who read my letter properly would notice that I do not object to (let alone "protest" against) 20mph speed limits where but more importantly when they would be appropriate.
Otherwise, on what remains of the main road network, can we please refrain from the 24 hours a day 365 days a year approach to speed limits?
As to rural roads and I hope we are talking about so-called C or un-classified roads here why are these roads seeing a disproportionate increase in traffic?
Perhaps it is because the main roads have all been downgraded and neglected so much and are filled to what remains of their capacity that in many cases minor roads are the only ways to actually get anywhere.
As I remarked in my letter, no useful roads are being built that would assist in this regard.
Yet there is no end to the plugging in of more traffic from housing and other developments on to this woefully undesigned (yes, the roads we are talking about were never "designed") and creaking infrastructure.
Unless this changes, speed limits will soon become an irrelevance as we won't be going anywhere.
Brian W Smith
Devizes
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article