Three options in speeding dilemma


To the editor:

As I see it, there are three options to consider: 1) no speed limits at all, 2) unenforced speed limits, and 3) enforced speed limits.

Most people would reject option one because there is a collective belief that having speed limits promotes safe conditions. We don’t ask if a community should be except from having speed limits because it has a good safety record. Option two is a lot like option one except that law-abiding and safety-conscious people will observe speed limits even when they aren’t enforced. It’s the scofflaws that speed. I am in favor of option three because I see too many people driving too fast (often more than 10 mph over the limit) on our residential streets.

But that leads to the question of what is the best use of limited policing resources. Granting that it is harder to catch a speeder than to ticket a car violating some parking rule, I feel that even a small effort by our local police could have a large effect, especially if it is combined with frequently published statistics showing that speeders are getting caught. But certainly it is up to the chief of police to determine the best use of his staff for the safety of the public. That’s what we pay him for.

Finally, I like the signs on Morgan Street in the block west of Main Street. I’d love to see more signs like those around town.

Kevin Weidenbaum