Discussion
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Is it really necessary to veer off track on every other thread into the pointless debate about speed cameras/driver capability/rigid enforcement etc.? I am tired of reading about such things, as it happens constantly on these boards and almost always to the detriment of the person asking the question originally.
Every so often we get someone posting a 'Smoking Gun' type thread where the BBC have reported some member of the local council or a high ranking officer bleet on about how unfair the system is. Here is my suggestion :
All PHers (feds too) stop entering into the tiresome ping-pong type exchanges we see all too often. Remember chaps, most feds know the speed enforcement policy is all about money. They know it sucks and is disproportionate, but what can they do? They have to uphold the law.
Do yourselves a favour, debate about something worthwhile. How about the civilian operator argument, or something that CAN be challenged in court?
Cheers.
Is it really necessary to veer off track on every other thread into the pointless debate about speed cameras/driver capability/rigid enforcement etc.? I am tired of reading about such things, as it happens constantly on these boards and almost always to the detriment of the person asking the question originally.
Every so often we get someone posting a 'Smoking Gun' type thread where the BBC have reported some member of the local council or a high ranking officer bleet on about how unfair the system is. Here is my suggestion :
All PHers (feds too) stop entering into the tiresome ping-pong type exchanges we see all too often. Remember chaps, most feds know the speed enforcement policy is all about money. They know it sucks and is disproportionate, but what can they do? They have to uphold the law.
Do yourselves a favour, debate about something worthwhile. How about the civilian operator argument, or something that CAN be challenged in court?
Cheers.
It's easy to moan and groan about how crap things are. Road safety's a farce at the moment, but it will stay the same unless we do something about it.
There is a bias towards the 'Speed Kills' Mantra in government and the media. It is wrong - the death statistics prove that!
Hassle Scamera Partnerships, MPs, press, TV with letters/emails - let them know what exactly what we think of them, join Safespeed, or the ABD, fight any tickets you get (Pepipoo).
We Brits are great at complaining about things, but then that's it, nothing gets done.
I hope this works. Quite fancy it myself!
www.pistonheads.co.uk/gassing/topic.asp?t=161359&f=10&h=0
www.safespeed.org.uk
www.abd.org.uk
www.pepipoo.com
There is a bias towards the 'Speed Kills' Mantra in government and the media. It is wrong - the death statistics prove that!
Hassle Scamera Partnerships, MPs, press, TV with letters/emails - let them know what exactly what we think of them, join Safespeed, or the ABD, fight any tickets you get (Pepipoo).
We Brits are great at complaining about things, but then that's it, nothing gets done.
I hope this works. Quite fancy it myself!
www.pistonheads.co.uk/gassing/topic.asp?t=161359&f=10&h=0
www.safespeed.org.uk
www.abd.org.uk
www.pepipoo.com
DeMolay said:
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Is it really necessary to veer off track on every other thread into the pointless debate about speed cameras/driver capability/rigid enforcement etc.? I am tired of reading about such things, as it happens constantly on these boards and almost always to the detriment of the person asking the question originally.
Every so often we get someone posting a 'Smoking Gun' type thread where the BBC have reported some member of the local council or a high ranking officer bleet on about how unfair the system is. Here is my suggestion :
All PHers (feds too) stop entering into the tiresome ping-pong type exchanges we see all too often. Remember chaps, most feds know the speed enforcement policy is all about money. They know it sucks and is disproportionate, but what can they do? They have to uphold the law.
Do yourselves a favour, debate about something worthwhile. How about the civilian operator argument, or something that CAN be challenged in court?
Cheers.
MMmmh! Y'know, You're right DeMolay! This VERY day, or days, should I say, a game of "ping pong" has been played over this very issue of the Charter of the year 1215. Fought over "tooth and nail"! i.e. The right to face your accuser in court without predudice. THIS IS the very basis of our constitution now that you're messin' with! The House of lords has rejected this 4 times today in defence of the 1215 charter.
Yet! Daily, People are forced here in this "green and pleasant land" to: "pay 60 quid now!" if you give up your rights under this act of 1215.
Or pay £1000 if you don't! WoW!!! Some choice!!
That's preducice, surely!! The outcome should be the same no matter what the proceedure! If you're an advocate of a £1000 fine for exceeding 30 mph then please say so, then we all know where we stand.
P.S. And we will of course vote accordingly.
The issue is the same, and under the same 1215 act! Let me put it this way, I'm a Socialist, Yep! That's right! A fechin' Commie in some folks eyes. But get this: Freedom comes FIRST with me, and today? 11.3.05 I'm with the concervatives, Michael Howard is RIGHT!!!
Tony B. Liar!!! You got some thinkin' to do!
AND!!! The Concervatives cannot! now defend the use of "speed cameras" Mr Howard, over to you!!
1215, is the basis of our so called "constituton", so remember it folks, it still applies today!!!!!! in ALL respects!
>> Edited by 8Pack on Saturday 12th March 04:39
gh0st said:
Erm, no-one is forcing you to read the threads here dude, if you find them boring, go play somewhere else?
Gh0st
Granted, but surely everyone can debate something a bit more worthwhile? The same arguments are put forward by the same people time after time after time ad infinitum...
You're never going to convince each other. You may, on occasion, get someone to conceed ground on a point, but that's as far as it will go.
I am as opposed to silly speed enforcement as the next man, and to that end I fight (and help others fight) alleged offences wherever possible, in order to clog up the system and try and force a change. I see this as entirely morally justifiable.
I just don't see the point in wasting time and effort arguing the toss with someone who's never going to agree with me.
The problem is the oppositions intransigence in the face of common sense DeMolay.
Faced with such dogma and utter idiocy we have really no other alternative but to fight back and mull the arguments over here, along the way destroying their incomprehensible Pov's.
Whether common sense will win over the opposition is debatable in itself ( a new thread!
) but for sure it has to be argued out here when the opportunity presents itself.
Whats the alternative? Say nothing? Tis not really an option methinks.
As suggested by others here, fight them by asking difficult questions, FOI requests, information spreading regarding get-outs etc etc.
I can however see where youre coming from as it can be a little heavyily speed orientated in here sometimes.
Faced with such dogma and utter idiocy we have really no other alternative but to fight back and mull the arguments over here, along the way destroying their incomprehensible Pov's.
Whether common sense will win over the opposition is debatable in itself ( a new thread!
) but for sure it has to be argued out here when the opportunity presents itself. Whats the alternative? Say nothing? Tis not really an option methinks.
As suggested by others here, fight them by asking difficult questions, FOI requests, information spreading regarding get-outs etc etc.
I can however see where youre coming from as it can be a little heavyily speed orientated in here sometimes.
Deltafox said:
I can however see where youre coming from as it can be a little heavily speed orientated in here sometimes.
I think that was the point Df - EVERY argument descends into a comparison with speed legislation / practice - and an apparent refusal to RESPECT a different point of view.
The forum is SP&L - but the "S" seems to dominate everything. Well that and plod-baiting, which again is a shame because the BiB on here are usually very helpful and don't deerve it.
Anyway, FWIW I don't always stick to set limits, especially outside built up areas if conditions allow, but I can see why some people do, and although I don't agree, I don't call them stupid morons for holding that view.
Similarly, I don't think that there are very many occasions on public roads when speeds upsides of 140 leptons are entirely safe - but again I agree that it's not the speeds that are unsafe, but the conditions... Given current general driving standards, I wouldn't do it, but if somebody else wants to, that's fine, they're not necessarily stupid either.
Too many threads now seem to end up as meaningless name-calling rather than reasoned debate. This is a pity because I did used to think that PH had a reasonably mature outlook.
This isn't a dig at Df BTW, I only quote what I thought was a valid point.
DeMolay said:
All PHers (feds too) stop entering into the tiresome ping-pong type exchanges we see all too often. Remember chaps, most feds know the speed enforcement policy is all about money. They know it sucks and is disproportionate, but what can they do? They have to uphold the law.
Do yourselves a favour, debate about something worthwhile. How about the civilian operator argument, or something that CAN be challenged in court?
I'm tempted to agree.
However as there is no way to keep up with all the reports from around the country posting the 'news' does allow people to see what is happening and perhaps understand why. Whether the reports need to be debated or even commented upon is another matter.
On the other hand there are new members joining daily. They won't be ready all the historic threads so the new threads and any comments are their usual source of information.
Moreover many of the points 'debated' have unclear outcomes - no debate otherwise. Sometimes one needs to discuss the same or similar events over and over before finding a breakthrough view that makes sense of what has happened or provides a better pro or con argument for future use.
The govt. buzzword of the moment seems to be 'choice'. The topic of choice seems to be speed penalties since many more are likely to get experience of the effects of the tickets than they are of any other legal issue.
Take speed away and you would probably see very few postings relatively speaking.
(Now there's a thought!)
Our personal choices are whether or not to read the posts.
DeMolay said:
Do yourselves a favour, debate about something worthwhile. How about the civilian operator argument, or something that CAN be challenged in court?
Cheers.
If you are interested only in reading about challenging the current laws and evading NIP's etc. then the Pepipoo forums would probably be more to your taste.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff