The 'Bladerunners' are right

[Lotobear]

Good on them, It's about time we started getting a bit more 'French' about stuff - if more did that we might not end up with such crappy ideas/overeach

Poll tax riots anyone?

[smn159]

Rise up Sheeple!

Is there a list of public infrastructure that it's OK to destroy? There's a pedestrian crossing on my way to work that slows me down sometimes. I expect that Khan installed it personally...

[JagLover]

smn159 said:

Is there a list of public infrastructure that it's OK to destroy? .

Those parts that have been installed to oppress the people rather than serve them.

[smn159]

JagLover said:

smn159 said:

Is there a list of public infrastructure that it's OK to destroy? .

Those parts that have been installed to oppress the people rather than serve them.

You know that they can track you using cellphone towers presumably - are they fair game as well? How about Facebook and the banks - should their offices be firebombed?

Do you expect your children to be asking what you did in the great Gammon uprising in years to come?

[Rufus Stone]

At least it's not inconveniencing anyone going about their daily business.

[ingenieur]

smn159 said:

Rise up Sheeple!

Is there a list of public infrastructure that it's OK to destroy? There's a pedestrian crossing on my way to work that slows me down sometimes. I expect that Khan installed it personally...

Arguably it's not public infrastructure if the means by which it came into being aren't of the people.

[smn159]

ingenieur said:

Arguably it's not public infrastructure if the means by which it came into being aren't of the people.

Well it was installed by an elected authority and it's expansion was backed by an elected government, so not sure what you mean by that

[Killboy]

Did we vote on any of the cameras installed?

Lets see the spittle fly when the asylum seekers start cutting down cameras.

[C5_Steve]

CheesecakeRunner said:

[smn159]

Killboy said:

Did we vote on any of the cameras installed?

Khan was re-elected in 2021, winning against a candidate pledged to stop ULEZ expansion.

Londoners clearly want them.

[C5_Steve]

Yeah, remember when speed cameras were first introduced and people were doing the same to them? How long did that last......

Do I agree with the ULEZ extension? No. Do I think this is another step on the route to controlling society? Also no.

[Hereward]

CheesecakeRunner said:

Bravo

[Killboy]

smn159 said:

Khan was re-elected in 2021, winning against a candidate pledged to stop ULEZ expansion.

Londoners clearly want them.

But apparently no one asked them? All very confusing.

Elections soon again. Maybe this time someone will vote for something?

[ingenieur]

smn159 said:

ingenieur said:

Arguably it's not public infrastructure if the means by which it came into being aren't of the people.

Well it was installed by an elected authority and it's expansion was backed by an elected government, so not sure what you mean by that

I think you do know what I mean by that but you're pretending not to understand on purpose.

If people really were asked they would have said 'no'. Supposedly when they got a load of negative responses to their consultations the results were thrown in the bin.

The Uxbridge byelection had in some ways taken the form of a proxy vote on ULEZ and caused Labour to lose a seat they thought they had a chance of winning. Sir Kier Starmer is straddling his fence and pouring cold water on it. Various councils have mounted legal challenges against it.

I don't think you can seriously claim that there's nothing to see here.

[ingenieur]

C5_Steve said:

Yeah, remember when speed cameras were first introduced and people were doing the same to them? How long did that last......

What do you mean 'how long did that last' ?

They're still being attacked: https://www.shropshirestar.com/news/crime/2022/12/...

[smn159]

ingenieur said:

smn159 said:

ingenieur said:

Arguably it's not public infrastructure if the means by which it came into being aren't of the people.

Well it was installed by an elected authority and it's expansion was backed by an elected government, so not sure what you mean by that

I think you do know what I mean by that but you're pretending not to understand on purpose.

If people really were asked they would have said 'no'. Supposedly when they got a load of negative responses to their consultations the results were thrown in the bin.

The Uxbridge byelection had in some ways taken the form of a proxy vote on ULEZ and caused Labour to lose a seat they thought they had a chance of winning. Sir Kier Starmer is straddling his fence and pouring cold water on it. Various councils have mounted legal challenges against it.

I don't think you can seriously claim that there's nothing to see here.

Sean Baily stood against Khan on a platform of stopping the ULEZ expansion.

https://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/17453762.sh...

Londoners were in no doubt that a vote for Khan was a vote to expand ULEZ.

Or does 'the will of the people' only count when it suits?

[Faust66]

Pickle_Party_247 said:

Morons committing vandalism and wasting public money. Anyone kicking off about ULEZ charges is a complete child in any reasonable person's book. What's next, vandalising DVSA offices because they charge VED?

What happened to new users having to wait a year/make 1000 posts before being allowed to venture in to NP&E?

[Biggy Stardust]

kambites said:

Panamax said:

UK is believed to be the most "monitored" country on this planet.

Believed by whom exactly? Someone monumentally clueless, I suspect.

UK has circa 25% of the world's CCTV cameras.

https://www.politics.co.uk/reference/cctv/

[Cold]

smn159 said:

ingenieur said:

smn159 said:

ingenieur said:

Arguably it's not public infrastructure if the means by which it came into being aren't of the people.

Well it was installed by an elected authority and it's expansion was backed by an elected government, so not sure what you mean by that

I think you do know what I mean by that but you're pretending not to understand on purpose.

If people really were asked they would have said 'no'. Supposedly when they got a load of negative responses to their consultations the results were thrown in the bin.

The Uxbridge byelection had in some ways taken the form of a proxy vote on ULEZ and caused Labour to lose a seat they thought they had a chance of winning. Sir Kier Starmer is straddling his fence and pouring cold water on it. Various councils have mounted legal challenges against it.

I don't think you can seriously claim that there's nothing to see here.

Sean Baily stood against Khan on a platform of stopping the ULEZ expansion.

https://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/17453762.sh...

Londoners were in no doubt that a vote for Khan was a vote to expand ULEZ.

Or does 'the will of the people' only count when it suits?

Yep, and this is why the ULEZ only targets those who live in London. If you're visiting from elsewhere you won't be charged.

[C5_Steve]

ingenieur said:

What do you mean 'how long did that last' ?

They're still being attacked: https://www.shropshirestar.com/news/crime/2022/12/...

I'm sorry, clearly still "sticking it to the man" up in Shropshire.

(for those of us old enough to remember the introduction of the Gatso, same groups made the sane noise when they launched. Made chuff all difference)