Print Story Has it come to this?
Diary
By dmg (Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:11:54 AM EST) (all tags)
Is this the face of dissent in the modern UK?


I would have a bit more respect if people stopped moaning and making ineffective gestures, and started doing something useful.

There is a limit to the retarded approach of the police to such direct action. Will we see cameras pointed at the cameras pointed at the cameras?

< summer is here! | You were working as a waitress in a cocktail bar, when I met you >
Has it come to this? | 19 comments (19 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
Yep by gpig (2.00 / 0) #1 Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:16:46 AM EST
It's a shame people don't have anything better to do than complain about speed limits which are too high anyway. Remember, driving is a privilege, not a right.
---
(,   ,') -- eep
"This option is deprecated, as it is conceptually flawed." -- man psql


If they were too high by dmg (2.00 / 0) #5 Mon May 05, 2008 at 12:18:54 PM EST
Hundreds of thousands of people would not break them every day despite the threat of draconian penalties. All the evidence suggests they are too low by approx 20%.
--
Hard work is morally wrong.
[ Parent ]

Unless people are stupid. by ambrosen (2.00 / 0) #7 Mon May 05, 2008 at 12:58:33 PM EST
Or poor at assessing risk, as in this case.

[ Parent ]

Do we live in a democracy or not? by dmg (2.00 / 0) #8 Mon May 05, 2008 at 01:17:56 PM EST
Don't bother answering that one!
--
Hard work is morally wrong.
[ Parent ]

Oh yeas by dmg (2.00 / 0) #9 Mon May 05, 2008 at 01:19:33 PM EST
Cameras do not improve road safety. FACT.
--
Hard work is morally wrong.
[ Parent ]

Safespeed, by ambrosen (2.00 / 0) #10 Mon May 05, 2008 at 01:38:09 PM EST
Pedlars of fact-free junk statistics that pander to the base motives of newspaper advertisers and their lazy poor risk assessing miniscule-thrill seeking readers.

Newspapers sell car ads, car ads sell the dream of the open road, rubbishing speed cameras perpetuates the myth of the open road.

[ Parent ]

Maybe. by dmg (2.00 / 0) #11 Mon May 05, 2008 at 02:17:25 PM EST
But it is a fact that speed per-se does not kill, and the driver is best placed to make the judgement. Motorways are the safest roads after all...
--
Hard work is morally wrong.
[ Parent ]

But it is a fact by ambrosen (4.00 / 1) #13 Mon May 05, 2008 at 03:09:47 PM EST
that speed per-se does make any given crash more likely to kill someone.

And another fact that drivers vastly overestimate their own skill.

[ Parent ]

The very idea of a speed limit is slightly mad by Alan Crowe (4.00 / 1) #12 Mon May 05, 2008 at 02:27:37 PM EST
On a long journey you meet varying driving conditions. In one part of the country you may halve your speed in response to very heavy rain and poor visibility. Never mind. 100 miles further on you may find the traffic lighter, the road dry, the sunshine bright, and make up some of your lost time.

Speed limits are a compromise. If they were set low enough that it was always safe to drive that fast even in the worst of conditions the idea of a mandatory maximum painted permanently on a sign would be discredited. So they are set "too high". Road safety continues to depend on the common sense of the driver, slowing below the limit when it is dark, the road is busy, the rain is pissing down.

What do speed limits do? They forbid you making up lost time in good conditions, but permit excessive speed when conditions are poor. If speed limits are not to have a detrimental effect on safety we are depending on drivers being mature enough to drive below the limit when conditions are poor. But if they can do that, why have speed limits at all?

[ Parent ]

If they were too high by gpig (4.00 / 1) #14 Mon May 05, 2008 at 03:18:55 PM EST
thousands of people would be killed in road accidents every year.
---
(,   ,') -- eep
"This option is deprecated, as it is conceptually flawed." -- man psql
[ Parent ]

Define 'accident'. by ambrosen (2.00 / 0) #15 Mon May 05, 2008 at 03:26:36 PM EST
What level of negligence does an accident involve?

[ Parent ]

I don't know by gpig (2.00 / 0) #16 Mon May 05, 2008 at 04:10:58 PM EST
and it wasn't relevant to my point.

Substitute 'incident' if you like -- what I was thinking of was that if cars go slower, there will be fewer road deaths, even if there are the same number of collisions. This applies especially to collisions involving pedestrians or cyclists.
---
(,   ,') -- eep
"This option is deprecated, as it is conceptually flawed." -- man psql
[ Parent ]

I was being pedantic, by ambrosen (4.00 / 1) #17 Mon May 05, 2008 at 04:16:26 PM EST
and agreeing with your point.

I like the word 'crash', which pretty accurately describes any injury-causing incident, or 'collision', like you used. Neither of them are awkward or pretentious. Unlike the current mood I'm in. <sigh>

[ Parent ]

What exactly are they dissenting? by laffnowcry (4.00 / 2) #2 Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:54:50 AM EST
traffic laws? Cameras?



Clothes by Rogerborg (2.00 / 0) #3 Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:13:36 AM EST
No trouser.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.
[ Parent ]

I think its just general impotent rage... by dmg (4.00 / 1) #6 Mon May 05, 2008 at 12:21:26 PM EST
The authoritarian government of the UK no longer even pretends to listen to the proletariat, so they are reduced to expressing their disenfranchisement by mooning, or binge drinking, or leaving the lid of their bin open wider than the regulations allow.
--
Hard work is morally wrong.
[ Parent ]

I suppose that could be impotent rage by laffnowcry (2.00 / 0) #19 Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:23:44 PM EST
or just boorishness?


[ Parent ]

First they come for your guns by Rogerborg (4.00 / 4) #4 Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:16:59 AM EST
Then they make you late for interviews.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.


I don't like pants either by duxup (2.00 / 0) #18 Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:12:48 PM EST
but I'm not going to horrify people by showing them my ass.
____


Has it come to this? | 19 comments (19 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback