A RECENT letter from a reader hammering speeding drivers is clearly not from a driver.

I have just paid a speeding penalty of £60 plus three points on my driving licence for driving at 35mph in a 30mph limit.

I have driven without any fines or accidents for more than 30 years and I am not a better driver as a result of this punishment.

I should be looking at the road ahead, not looking at my speedometer and instead of driving steadily in top gear I am now chopping and changing to lowers gears which is not environmentally friendly.

I do, indeed, fell harassed by the local police. Dangerous driving is not necessarily directly related to speed. It is usually speed combined with another factor, for example very busy roads, poor weather conditions etc.

Perhaps the police could explain how driving at 80 miles per hour on a totally empty motorway in good weather conditions is dangerous?

Sometimes accidents do happen, perhaps relating relating to mechanical failure but speed alone is not dangerous, only when it is combined with various other conditions.

Speed cameras bring the problem of accidents down to the lowest common denominator and take no account of drivers' judgement of conditions at this time.

It might be more acceptable if speed cameras did not only recall the speed of the vehicles at the time, but also the road conditions.

A speed camera showing precisely why the speed achieved was dangerous at the time would at least help the driver to appeal the penalty and probably allow the police to be more discerning in who they prosecute.

Often the law is being used to bother and harass drivers, sometimes for no genuine reason.

Most cars do not have an audible or visual signal to warn drivers if they are exceeding the limit slightly.

When concentrating on road conditions, speed does tend to happen. It may be true that speed is a related factor in critical accidents, but if you take this logic to its obvious extreme we should be driving around at 5mph.

Name and address supplied