Death in fast lane

Share this article
Have your say

Given the nature of the road, I agree that the A9 should be upgraded to dual carriageway for the entire route, as soon as possible (Letters, 27 August).

However, speed enforcement must be maintained, as we certainly do not want drivers to drive at any speed they fancy on dual carriageways.

Even if exceeding the speed limit has not caused a particular accident, it is not an argument for dropping speed enforcement, any more than we would suspend the drink-drive limit or mobile phone use at the wheel solely because these were not causal factors in a given accident.

There are many causes of road traffic accidents but it is speed, more precisely impact speed, that, ceteris paribus, determines the extent of a victim’s injuries and whether they live or die.

Thus, speed-limit enforcement is also about reducing collateral damage to human flesh and bone in the event of an accident, irrespective of the cause.

Some people are blasé about the effects of impact speed until they visit their loved ones in 

Stephen McBride



I refer to the article (24 August) which says that “to improve overtaking” on the A9, trees will be felled.

The problem is not trees. Far too many drivers do not observe the speed limit. Far too many overtake irresponsibly at points where the line of sight is too short.

Far too many ignore red line markings.

The word “improve” is not helping. The design of the road is at fault to a certain extent but the overwhelming reason for the accidents is very bad driving.

I drive between Perth and Pitlochry frequently and am appalled at the stupid, reckless and dangerous driving.

(Dr) Maurice R Wright