I QUOTED evidence that suggests that drivers convicted of speeding are safer than those who are not (HAS, April 27).

Barry Wood claims I am, therefore, suggesting that it would be safer for everyone to drive at 100mph (HAS, May 1).

I am not that daft. I don’ think that because alcohol in small quantities is beneficial, therefore alcohol in large quantities is even more beneficial.

However, if faster drivers really are safer, this merits investigation. There are numerous possibilities. For example, it could be that slow drivers spend much of their time looking out for speed limit signs – and speed limits change about every half-mile in urban areas.

Plus, they spend much of the rest of their time looking at their speedometers. Result: they crash into someone or something.

Mr Wood also quotes evidence that “disqualification works”.

The relevant Department of Transport study does show that disqualification results in slower speeds. But does it result in more safety?

Punishment for speeding seems to be a crude measure. It could be that more emphasis on punishment for dangerous driving, regardless of speed, would be better?

Ralph Musgrave, Durham