How public view road traffic law
Page 8
Page 9
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• Injuring a pedestrian while driving carelessly and driving after drinking too much are rated by the public as more serious offences than burgling from a house while the owners are away.
The public's choice of penalties for a motorist driving at 50mph in a 30mph limit is strongly affected by whether someone is subsequently killed or injured If someone is killed, more than 40% choose disqualification and about one third choose prison as the most appropriate penalty.
Four out of five people agreed that "the roads would be safer if drivers kept to the speed limit," but half disagree with the statement that "the roads would be safer if speed limits were lower."
These are some of the main findings in a survey on public attitudes to road traffic law carried out by Social and Community Planning Research for the Transport and Road Research Laboratory, available at a cost of £7 on written request to the Cashier, TRRL, Old Wokingham Road, Crowthorne, Berkshire.
The survey of some 1,500 adults was designed to establish respondents views on: • The relative seriousness of road traffic offences and other crimes.
• The most suitable penalty for a motorist committing an offence with varying levels of intent and consequence.
• A number of statements about road traffic law, including speed limits, levels of police enforcement and the role of the courts.
The survey was carried out to supplement the work of the Road Traffic Law Review headed by Dr Peter North which has also published its findings and recommendations.
Some of the more detailed findings are summarised in the following tables.