The Editor,
Re. "Should speed limits be changed in British Columbia?" (Face to Face, The Tri-City News, Jan. 31).
Good topic, but your columnists left something to be desired.
Face to Face columnist Andy Radia conveniently misquotes things like "speed kills." It's "excessive speed kills." Excessive anything can be a problem.
Mr. Radia then goes on to make unsubstantiated assertions such as, "If we raise limits, it stands to reason that people will drive even faster and less safely." Responsible drivers will drive to the capability of the road conditions while idiot drivers will continue to drive like idiots, regardless of the speed limit.
Columnist Jim Nelson quickly decided the question was too far beneath his moral sensitivities and chose to reframe things onto a higher ground. Poverty and job losses are worthy topics but government has proven singularly incapable of making these problems go away. I suspect speed limits, along with revising our antiquated alcohol laws, does matter to lots of people. Just not him.
I believe the speed limit question is valid and I appreciate that the government is treating us like responsible adults by wanting to have a discussion on that topic. Consider that speed limits are not moral edicts from above, they are derived from the results of traffic studies, road conditions and so forth.
Continuing in that vein, taking a serious look at speed limits and having a discussion with responsible drivers seems like a respectful and sensible thing to do.
There is nothing sacrosanct in the current speed limits. Finding the right answer seems to me to be a good thing to do.
I'd like to see more of these public consultations on topics that affect us, not less.
John Holmes, Coquitlam
