Fine for a dirty number plate?
Discussion
Devil2575 said:
I suspect your reasoning is based on a dislike of certain rules and so a desire to not adhere to them.
My reasoning is based on the fact that we don't live in a world where rules can only come into force if nobody disagrees with them. Again, in that world I might agree with you, but that world is a practical impossibility. In this world, the inevitable outcome is that just about everybody will disagree with some rules and would prefer not to have to adhere to them. There can be precious few people who, if they were hypothetically given the chance to edit all of the state's rules, would choose to leave every single one of them exactly as it is.That leaves the state with a predicament. It either has to enforce rules against people who don't support that rule, which isn't a nice thing to do, or it has to allow "But I don't think this should be a rule" to be a defence. The latter is clearly nonsense so the state is left with the former as a necessary evil. But that predicament is peculiar to the state. Nothing traps individuals into that necessary evil - they are free to choose not to be so evil.
Remember what sort of rule we're talking about here. A balance of privacy and the right to go about one's life unmolested by the state on the one hand, and security and crime prevention on the other hand, has led to the conclusion that we must all display unique identifiers on our cars. There are pros and cons and everyone will have their own opinion on where the balance should be struck and - importantly - if we are to have number plates, on how much monitoring should take place. To be absolutely clear lest anyone (deliberately) misconstrues, I am not attempting to build an argument against the requirement to display a number plate. The point is that the balance of pros and cons exists and so there is scope for legitimate difference of opinion about that balance. Contrast that with the examples of a completely different type of rules from earlier in the thread - mugging and hit and run. There is no equivalent balance there and no equivalent legitimate difference of opinion on whether we should have the right to beat each other up or run each other over.
SK425 said:
Devil2575 said:
I suspect your reasoning is based on a dislike of certain rules and so a desire to not adhere to them.
My reasoning is based on the fact that we don't live in a world where rules can only come into force if nobody disagrees with them. Again, in that world I might agree with you, but that world is a practical impossibility. In this world, the inevitable outcome is that just about everybody will disagree with some rules and would prefer not to have to adhere to them. There can be precious few people who, if they were hypothetically given the chance to edit all of the state's rules, would choose to leave every single one of them exactly as it is.That leaves the state with a predicament. It either has to enforce rules against people who don't support that rule, which isn't a nice thing to do, or it has to allow "But I don't think this should be a rule" to be a defence. The latter is clearly nonsense so the state is left with the former as a necessary evil. But that predicament is peculiar to the state. Nothing traps individuals into that necessary evil - they are free to choose not to be so evil.
Remember what sort of rule we're talking about here. A balance of privacy and the right to go about one's life unmolested by the state on the one hand, and security and crime prevention on the other hand, has led to the conclusion that we must all display unique identifiers on our cars. There are pros and cons and everyone will have their own opinion on where the balance should be struck and - importantly - if we are to have number plates, on how much monitoring should take place. To be absolutely clear lest anyone (deliberately) misconstrues, I am not attempting to build an argument against the requirement to display a number plate. The point is that the balance of pros and cons exists and so there is scope for legitimate difference of opinion about that balance. Contrast that with the examples of a completely different type of rules from earlier in the thread - mugging and hit and run. There is no equivalent balance there and no equivalent legitimate difference of opinion on whether we should have the right to beat each other up or run each other over.
To them, dirty plate = potential hit and run child killer.
It's not nuanced, it's self-exculpatory rubbish.
You can't "distance" that it is a duty incumbent on drivers to exercise reasonable care to keep a registration plate visible from the reason WHY we have to do so - that the selfish and craven will try to escape responsibility for their actions.
Trying to conflate a desire to have no consequences for your actions with a desire for privacy is likewise rubbish.
We live in a society, we have responsibilities to that society - despite the libertarian crackpots trying to suggest that we are each a nation of one, beholden and subject to no one but ourselves.
You can't "distance" that it is a duty incumbent on drivers to exercise reasonable care to keep a registration plate visible from the reason WHY we have to do so - that the selfish and craven will try to escape responsibility for their actions.
Trying to conflate a desire to have no consequences for your actions with a desire for privacy is likewise rubbish.
We live in a society, we have responsibilities to that society - despite the libertarian crackpots trying to suggest that we are each a nation of one, beholden and subject to no one but ourselves.
Dammit said:
It's not nuanced, it's self-exculpatory rubbish.
You can't "distance" that it is a duty incumbent on drivers to exercise reasonable care to keep a registration plate visible from the reason WHY we have to do so - that the selfish and craven will try to escape responsibility for their actions.
Trying to conflate a desire to have no consequences for your actions with a desire for privacy is likewise rubbish.
We live in a society, we have responsibilities to that society - despite the libertarian crackpots trying to suggest that we are each a nation of one, beholden and subject to no one but ourselves.
It's just a dirty number plate.You can't "distance" that it is a duty incumbent on drivers to exercise reasonable care to keep a registration plate visible from the reason WHY we have to do so - that the selfish and craven will try to escape responsibility for their actions.
Trying to conflate a desire to have no consequences for your actions with a desire for privacy is likewise rubbish.
We live in a society, we have responsibilities to that society - despite the libertarian crackpots trying to suggest that we are each a nation of one, beholden and subject to no one but ourselves.
9mm said:
Dammit said:
It's not nuanced, it's self-exculpatory rubbish.
You can't "distance" that it is a duty incumbent on drivers to exercise reasonable care to keep a registration plate visible from the reason WHY we have to do so - that the selfish and craven will try to escape responsibility for their actions.
Trying to conflate a desire to have no consequences for your actions with a desire for privacy is likewise rubbish.
We live in a society, we have responsibilities to that society - despite the libertarian crackpots trying to suggest that we are each a nation of one, beholden and subject to no one but ourselves.
It's just a dirty number plate.You can't "distance" that it is a duty incumbent on drivers to exercise reasonable care to keep a registration plate visible from the reason WHY we have to do so - that the selfish and craven will try to escape responsibility for their actions.
Trying to conflate a desire to have no consequences for your actions with a desire for privacy is likewise rubbish.
We live in a society, we have responsibilities to that society - despite the libertarian crackpots trying to suggest that we are each a nation of one, beholden and subject to no one but ourselves.
Devil2575 said:
9mm said:
Dammit said:
It's not nuanced, it's self-exculpatory rubbish.
You can't "distance" that it is a duty incumbent on drivers to exercise reasonable care to keep a registration plate visible from the reason WHY we have to do so - that the selfish and craven will try to escape responsibility for their actions.
Trying to conflate a desire to have no consequences for your actions with a desire for privacy is likewise rubbish.
We live in a society, we have responsibilities to that society - despite the libertarian crackpots trying to suggest that we are each a nation of one, beholden and subject to no one but ourselves.
It's just a dirty number plate.You can't "distance" that it is a duty incumbent on drivers to exercise reasonable care to keep a registration plate visible from the reason WHY we have to do so - that the selfish and craven will try to escape responsibility for their actions.
Trying to conflate a desire to have no consequences for your actions with a desire for privacy is likewise rubbish.
We live in a society, we have responsibilities to that society - despite the libertarian crackpots trying to suggest that we are each a nation of one, beholden and subject to no one but ourselves.
9mm said:
Honestly, I might clean my cars (exterior) twice to three times a year. I'm careful about lights and glass but not much else, certainly plate cleaning isn't any kind of concern. There's not the slightest intention to hide the plate and I've had speeding tickets in the past. However, if I ever saw someone doing a valet on my car they'd be getting a mouthful at best and a boot up the arse at worst. I'm gobsmacked that anyone would even think of doing that but I suppose I shouldn't be, given the self righteousness and obsession with other people's behaviour that's so prevalent on this forum.
To be honest it wouldn't actually cross my mind to clean a number plate, but I don't like the "It's no ones business attitude". It's akin to the view that it's no one business if I slap my Girlfriend or I'm driving on bald tyres etc. 9mm said:
Honestly, I might clean my cars (exterior) twice to three times a year. I'm careful about lights and glass but not much else, certainly plate cleaning isn't any kind of concern. There's not the slightest intention to hide the plate and I've had speeding tickets in the past. However, if I ever saw someone doing a valet on my car they'd be getting a mouthful at best and a boot up the arse at worst. I'm gobsmacked that anyone would even think of doing that but I suppose I shouldn't be, given the self righteousness and obsession with other people's behaviour that's so prevalent on this forum.
Bury a friend because some asshat decided stopping after mowing then down was too much trouble and report back.If you don't clean your plates someone else will. You don't have to like it, you just have to live with it. You can't change it, so your options are limited.
9mm said:
Honestly, I might clean my cars (exterior) twice to three times a year. I'm careful about lights and glass but not much else, certainly plate cleaning isn't any kind of concern. There's not the slightest intention to hide the plate
So if you were cleaning your lights and windows, and the plate was so filthy as to be illegible, you'd not give it a wipe-over at the same time, whilst you've got the damp cloth handy?TooMany2cvs said:
9mm said:
Honestly, I might clean my cars (exterior) twice to three times a year. I'm careful about lights and glass but not much else, certainly plate cleaning isn't any kind of concern. There's not the slightest intention to hide the plate
So if you were cleaning your lights and windows, and the plate was so filthy as to be illegible, you'd not give it a wipe-over at the same time, whilst you've got the damp cloth handy?
9mm said:
TooMany2cvs said:
9mm said:
Honestly, I might clean my cars (exterior) twice to three times a year. I'm careful about lights and glass but not much else, certainly plate cleaning isn't any kind of concern. There's not the slightest intention to hide the plate
So if you were cleaning your lights and windows, and the plate was so filthy as to be illegible, you'd not give it a wipe-over at the same time, whilst you've got the damp cloth handy?TooMany2cvs said:
9mm said:
TooMany2cvs said:
9mm said:
Honestly, I might clean my cars (exterior) twice to three times a year. I'm careful about lights and glass but not much else, certainly plate cleaning isn't any kind of concern. There's not the slightest intention to hide the plate
So if you were cleaning your lights and windows, and the plate was so filthy as to be illegible, you'd not give it a wipe-over at the same time, whilst you've got the damp cloth handy?LucreLout said:
9mm said:
Honestly, I might clean my cars (exterior) twice to three times a year. I'm careful about lights and glass but not much else, certainly plate cleaning isn't any kind of concern. There's not the slightest intention to hide the plate and I've had speeding tickets in the past. However, if I ever saw someone doing a valet on my car they'd be getting a mouthful at best and a boot up the arse at worst. I'm gobsmacked that anyone would even think of doing that but I suppose I shouldn't be, given the self righteousness and obsession with other people's behaviour that's so prevalent on this forum.
Bury a friend because some asshat decided stopping after mowing then down was too much trouble and report back.If you don't clean your plates someone else will. You don't have to like it, you just have to live with it. You can't change it, so your options are limited.
Do you clean the plates on cars that don't belong to you?
What's your motive?
Implication of everyone taking your attitude not something you've thought of then?
It might strike you as absurd, but if your attitude became widespread then the usefulness of the number plate as a means to identify a vehicle would become seriously degraded - which would give a nice justification to always-on GPS telemetry logging where your car is at all times.
i.e. you are choosing to ignore the social contract that enables policing by consent, and inviting a more "forceful" method of ensuring compliance with the rules.
There is a degree of irony here, given your use of terms such as Stasi to describe people who have a better understanding of the consent model, and the responsibilities it implies.
It might strike you as absurd, but if your attitude became widespread then the usefulness of the number plate as a means to identify a vehicle would become seriously degraded - which would give a nice justification to always-on GPS telemetry logging where your car is at all times.
i.e. you are choosing to ignore the social contract that enables policing by consent, and inviting a more "forceful" method of ensuring compliance with the rules.
There is a degree of irony here, given your use of terms such as Stasi to describe people who have a better understanding of the consent model, and the responsibilities it implies.
Dammit said:
Implication of everyone taking your attitude not something you've thought of then?
It might strike you as absurd, but if your attitude became widespread then the usefulness of the number plate as a means to identify a vehicle would become seriously degraded - which would give a nice justification to always-on GPS telemetry logging where your car is at all times.
i.e. you are choosing to ignore the social contract that enables policing by consent, and inviting a more "forceful" method of ensuring compliance with the rules.
There is a degree of irony here, given your use of terms such as Stasi to describe people who have a better understanding of the consent model, and the responsibilities it implies.
I imagine society would rapidly break down, riots on the streets, cannibalism, etc.It might strike you as absurd, but if your attitude became widespread then the usefulness of the number plate as a means to identify a vehicle would become seriously degraded - which would give a nice justification to always-on GPS telemetry logging where your car is at all times.
i.e. you are choosing to ignore the social contract that enables policing by consent, and inviting a more "forceful" method of ensuring compliance with the rules.
There is a degree of irony here, given your use of terms such as Stasi to describe people who have a better understanding of the consent model, and the responsibilities it implies.
I'll ask you the same two questions as I've just asked Lucrelout.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Each persons morals will be different. There is no moral high ground in anything we do.The rest of it I really don't worry about. I can't fight, before anyone thinks I wash my Weetabix down with redbull. It's just that in 20 years, the worst that has happened is being told to eff off and mind my own business.
Proper criminals will have a cloned plate rather than a dirty one. A dirty plate is most likely Nigel, from accounts, and his specific set of skills acquired through a long career amount to double entry book keeping, and profit & loss statements. About as much of a threat then as I am.
9mm said:
Just two questions:
Do you clean the plates on cars that don't belong to you?
What's your motive?
The answer to both lies in my first post on this thread.Do you clean the plates on cars that don't belong to you?
What's your motive?
Yes, and I genuinely believe people who are not identifiable are more predisposed to hit and run than those who are identifiable.
Ambulances arrive quicker if the person knocking someone down stops and calls one. I care not about your avoiding speed cameras.
What is your motive for driving around without a plate? For that is the effect of obscuring it with dirt. The only reason to do this rather than remove it is the hope that plod might go easier on you when stopped.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff