OUT of all the residents on Moss Shaw estate, I wonder why Mr H. Jolly only has the support of eight when he condemns the proposed traffic calming measures (Dec 21).

Could it be that the other residents fear losing their children more than they fear Mr Jolly's suggested drawbacks of losing a few pounds on the value of their properties or damage to cars?

Speed humps might be a pain for some and may not have slowed traffic quite as much as engineers and safety campaigners had hoped, but what are civilised and responsible members of society supposed to do when faced with such a destructive problem as speeding?

At worst, excessive and inappropriate speed adversely affects enough lives every year to fill a football stadium ten times over, and all to save little more than a handful of seconds or for a cheap thrill.

But year upon year, those few seconds or that cheap thrill, costs tens of thousands of families the lives and health of their loved ones and costs the nation tens of billions of pounds. Maybe the solution lies not in traffic calming but in driver calming in a change of attitude. Maybe it is time after 100 years of senseless killing for speeding drivers to be tagged with the same label as all the other wretched characters that prey on the weak and vulnerable. Such drivers are certainly there at the top of the league when it comes to causing human pain and suffering.

Yes, there are many drivers who have not killed or injured anyone yet. However, surveys have shown 70 per cent of drivers regularly exceed speed limits.

If Mr Jolly and his neighbours can look beyond Moss Shaw, they will find that the "bureaucratic planners" also need to consider the feelings of many others; the victims and their families, the police, the fire brigade, paramedics, doctors and nurses, and even the clergy.

Do they not deserve the same peaceful life that Mr Jolly desires? They are all sick of having to cope with the devastation that speeding drivers leave in their wake.

It is not so much that "big brother" knows best and interferes with our lives, but rather that conscientious and responsible brother needs to do what's best, for everyone's sake, in trying to protect our lives.

While we are on the subject, can I also respond to M. Silver, (Dec 21) who suggests that the town's motorists could club together and buy each of the borough's two cyclists a brand new car.

Would it not be better if the town's motorists clubbed together and joined the Institute of Advanced Motorists? With the roads so much safer, two might become two thousand, and there would then be much more room for those who cannot survive without a car both for driving and parking.

Then, who knows, with the promise of safer roads the "bureaucratic planners" might consider doing away with speed humps altogether.

ALLAN RAMSAY.