Having defended the use of the word speed in 'general terms', he then goes on to suggest that introducing and enforcing a speed limit will somehow protect safe drivers and residents.

Common Sense does not seem to understand my letter (Write Back, June 17) nor indeed that of A Cunningham (Write Back, June 23).

This letter writer cites excess speed recorded as the cause of just 2% of collisions. How then will police deal with the other 98%?

Common Sense has, however, unwittingly hit the nail on the head when he talks about enforcement.

If the police had the resources to use the Mark One human eyeball from a patrol car, rather than the undiscerning lens from a camera, bad driving and its actual causes could be addressed. This is something upon which I suspect both Common Sense and I could agree.

Grey Matter User

Comber