Quote:
Originally Posted by Eurosceptic Atlanticist
”Originally Posted by The Bear
Not by me.
Nor would it have been if the driver had been unable to move quickly enough because of the idiot doing the mooning and so being in his way, to avoid hitting a child should one have run into the road.”
But they didn't. Nothing bad happened as a result of this and as such there's no need to prosecute. What If scenarios are pointless. No doubt you support ID cards because one day, someone might commit a crime.
|
What an
amazingly immature attitude to take.
Laws are put in place for a number of reasons, some to deal with criminal behaviour and some to provide protection for people from their own stupidity or the stupidity of others.
“What if” scenarios are essential in determining what should be proscribed, just as they are essential in determining what should be taken into account in engineering design.
ID Cards? A different state of affairs. I do consider that the introduction of a National data base system is now essential in order to deal with the changes that have come about in our society.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eurosceptic Atlanticist
Another What If. The article says nothing about the car not being insured, and in this case nothing bad happened. Ergo no reason to prosecute, again.
|
The subject is safety cameras.
They provide an excellent means of detecting uninsured vehicles and their immediate removal from use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eurosceptic Atlanticist
MOTs are pointless. It's invalid as soon as you take your car off the forecourt, not to mention that you can have a serious accident and you don't need a re-test. And anyway, no indication that the car did not have a current MOT certificate either.
|
MOT tests are imperfect as at present they are annual whereas in my opinion they should be conducted more frequently and possibly based on mileage run, but they do provide an annual check on a vehicle at which time components that are in a dangerous condition can be identified and rectified before the car is allowed to be used on public roads again. The issue is safety cameras and their value in detecting vehicles that do not have valid MOT certification.
BTW, If a vehicle is driven in a manner that might have resulted in damage to the integrity of the vehicle or has been overloaded the police can and do issue a proscribing notice that results in the vehicle being required to pass an MOT before further use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eurosceptic Atlanticist
”Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bear
Fixed speed cameras also serve a far more useful purpose than just catching speeding drivers, they also ensure that far more vehicles are driven inside the speed restriction on a road so keeping the (usually young) fools who want to drive at a speed THEY want to in their place.”
Rubbish. If someone is driving recklessly or dangerously (a criteria that speed itself does not always fill) then fair enough. However, in some circumstances speeding is no more dangerous than driving at 70mph.
|
If the law states that a stretch of highway is subject to a speed restriction then that is the law.
A restriction will have been applied usually for a very good reason.
The principle that anyone should ignore such a restriction simply because THEY can’t understand why a restriction is in place is at once ludicrous and offensive just as to ignore such a speed restriction should result in prosecution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eurosceptic Atlanticist
”
Originally Posted by The Bear
In my case I ALWAYS drive below the posted speed limit and make a point of not cooperating with idiots who flash their lights and blow their horns because they don’t want to, and yes, I also report dangerous driving when appropriate especially where HGV’s are involved.”
I hope you don't use your mobile phone whilst driving then. What do you want, a blue ribbon? Would you report Jews hiding next door?
|
No I do NOT use my mobile ‘phone when driving, I make sure it’s turned off before setting out (I really do) or on a long journey turn off the ring tone so as not to be distracted and check for missed calls or messages on the periodic stops that we all make when nature (or coffee) calls.
As for reporting “Jews next door”, no, but I absolutely would report those that I suspected of being illegally in our country to the authorities just as I would, with any wrong doers.
I have twice reported benefit cheats and was delighted to see them prosecuted on both occasions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eurosceptic Atlanticist
Quote:
”
Originally Posted by The Bear
Far more people should do the same.
Driving on our overcrowded roads is dangerous. Roads are a means of getting from A to B, NOT places of entertainment or fun.
I fully endorse the use of safety cameras, and my regret is that not enough use is made of them.”
Then you're very much in the minority.
|
That’s as maybe. If the minority manage to keep the roads safer by our actions, and we do, then the majority should be thanking us and not condemning us.
Driving on our overcrowded roads is dangerous. Roads are a means of getting from A to B, NOT places of entertainment or fun.