While increasing speed limits increases the risk of injury to pedestrians, this risk would be practically eliminated if the pedestrians actually used underpasses or crossed when the "man" is green.
More debate about increasing speed limits
I read Colin Hill's letter to the editor The pros and cons of increasing speed limits (October 26) with great interest. While I agree that increasing speed limits increases the risk of injury to pedestrians, this risk would be practically eliminated if the pedestrians actually used underpasses (Hamdan Street anyone?) or crossed when the "man" is green instead of when the traffic light is green for oncoming traffic. Most pedestrians at risk put themselves in that position, breaking the law.
I would not recommend increasing speed limits to 100km/h in built up areas, including the Abu Dhabi central business district, but 60km/h on a main road when the average speed seems to be about 80km/h is not feasible in this driving culture and absurd in areas with four-lane-wide dual carriage ways and sidewalks set in from the road. Yas Island doesn't even have sidewalks coming into the island and yet it's 60km/h approaching Ferrari World and the island's hotels. It just doesn't make sense. Don't even get me started on the Yas Tunnel with a speed limit of 40km/h.
There are traffic monitoring cameras everywhere I turn now and yet I'm seemingly the only one obeying the speed limit (only to avoid any fines). I am possibly an unintentional obstacle for other road users.
Luckily for me, cars riding my bumper, flashing lights and blaring horns when I'm cruising in the right lane do the opposite of intimidating me but what about other more cautious and timid road users who also wish to obey the law? Why should we have to choose between speeding and having an accident?
The main problem is that speed limits do not accurately reflect usual travel speeds for an area, nor are they adhered to. Mr Hill is correct in stating that speed limits should not be increased to accommodate maniacs but without reasonable speed limits being introduced in respective areas, the law will continue to be broken: most people will not follow a speed limit that does not make sense.
Karen Sullivan, Abu Dhabi
Today the speed limit is 60km/h and police allow you to drive at 80km/h. What is next? Will 80km/h allow you to drive 100km/h? That is a highway speed. What about the people living around these roads? Was that considered? In some areas, like Al Salam street, houses and sidewalks are located within less than 10 meters. Is that a safe distance for such speed?
Another important point is the fact that the Sheikh Zayed Bridge is opening soon, so why would we need higher speeds on local roads when we have a new highway that was just completed with 14,000 vehicles per hour capacity?
Make litterers pay for their crimes
Having lived in the UAE for 15 years, I came to one conclusion: so many people do not deserve to live in such a gorgeous country where a wise Government does enormous things for locals and foreigners as well. It is painful to notice how people litter the country. Rubbish thrown around beautiful, expensive buildings.
The municipality tries to clean up every single day but people are very indifferent to the places where they live. Litterers must be fined. This is the only way to make them keep the place clean and see the beauty that they are given and take care of it.
Mrs Muminat, Sharjah
Broken glass ceiling is old news
The article UAE girls shatter glass ceiling (October 18) is dripping with stereotypes and judgements. I fail to see the wow factor here. The feminist waves have long come and gone, and now actual UAE women (nationals) have broken many barriers much more impressive than a girl in a hard hat. I know girls in dusty abayas and hardhats yelling at foremen on construction sites, their gender being an irrelevant factor, and they gain respect for it. This is old news. It's a new UAE, we get it.
M al Muhairi, Abu Dhabi
The "girls" in the headline is ridiculous. And the article reads like two stories were slapped together without making any attempt to integrate them. There's no transition to lead us into the second feature.
Matt Duffy, Abu Dhabi
Editor's dismissal was unjust
In reference to Life goes on for fired CNN editor Octavia Nasr (October 27), even though is nice to think that the reason of the firing was because her tweet message was too short, I disagree. If Nasr had written a longer comment on the death of Grand Ayatollah Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah, the people that pressured CNN to fire Nasr would had done the same thing. That's their policy. There is no middle term. You can't say anything nice about anybody that Israel thinks is a threat. I saw the tweet and the following explanation and it made perfect sense. Nasr is way too smart for CNN and its closed mind.
Fernando F, Abu Dhabi