ULEZ Bomber Found Guilty

[butchstewie]

Man guilty of Ulez camera explosion

The absolute state of that.

[Countdown]

What a cretin.

[otolith]

He was only meant to blow the bloody camera off!

[Gareth79]

At least 15 years I reckon? I'm not sure what would be required for a life sentence, but given there were vehicles passing, one of which was damaged it shows serious recklessness.

[Randy Winkman]

Glad to see someone facing the music for some of the damage that has been done in that part of London. And there has been quite a lot down there. To do something so dangerous to other people was ridiculous.

[valiant]

63 years old.

tt should’ve known better. Hope he enjoys porridge.

[paulw123]

Hope they make a proper example of that cretin

[butchstewie]

valiant said:

63 years old.

tt should ve known better. Hope he enjoys porridge.

And my assumption and hope is that it is a substantial custodial sentence.

[BikeBikeBIke]

Gareth79 said:

At least 15 years I reckon? I'm not sure what would be required for a life sentence, but given there were vehicles passing, one of which was damaged it shows serious recklessness.

He's lucky - if he'd killed someone he'd be looking at 40 and his reputation would be around where Michael Adebolajo's is.

[Earthdweller]

Michael Caine comes to mind "you're only supposed to blow the bloody doors off"

[Earthdweller]

BikeBikeBIke said:

He's lucky - if he'd killed someone he'd be looking at 40 and his reputation would be around where Michael Adebolajo's is.

I think that's a bit of a Leap

[fido]

Earthdweller said:

Michael Caine comes to mind "you're only supposed to blow the bloody doors off"

Ha. First thing I thought of as well. Must have used a substantial amount to cause that much damage.

[Gareth79]

fido said:

Earthdweller said:

Michael Caine comes to mind "you're only supposed to blow the bloody doors off"

Ha. First thing I thought of as well. Must have used a substantial amount to cause that much damage.

Apparently it was black powder, and I don't think you'd need a huge amount if it was used correctly. Think of the bang a firework makes, and the size.

[Earthdweller]

As vehicles become cleaner then surely it won't be needed

Aiui it has made zero/negligible difference to air quality

[Countdown]

Earthdweller said:

Aiui it has made zero/negligible difference to air quality

There are lots of independent studies showing that air quality has improved significantly. But actually, for anyone who has traveled regularly to London over the last 20+ years you can easily notice the difference.

[DonkeyApple]

Countdown said:

Earthdweller said:

Aiui it has made zero/negligible difference to air quality

There are lots of independent studies showing that air quality has improved significantly. But actually, for anyone who has traveled regularly to London over the last 20+ years you can easily notice the difference.

The issue is that as London is the largest buyer of EVs in the U.K. and the smallest buyer of diesels this was always going to be the case regardless of ULEZ. London was always going to benefit first and fastest from the national policy to reduce the sale of the dirtiest cars.

The other issue with ULEZ is that it is set to be a heavily regressive tax and regressive taxes are for the third world, not for developed nations. Run the system off a different set of metrics and you'd have achieved far superior results and without placing any financial duress upon anyone. For example, rather than levying it upon the poorest motorists it could have been levied on the most affluent residents and all non residents. For example, if you were to tax all non resident ICE and all resident ICE with an engine greater than 2L then you'd have seen a far greater shift amd the burden would have fallen just on those with the easy ability to switch habits.

I can drive any of my ICE cars 24/7 around London, spewing out enormous volumes of exhaust gases as can anyone with a large cc ICE that just happens to be relatively modern. And we all do exactly that. Yet all of us could easily pick up a small ICE or EV for that job without batting an eyelid yet the current system completely absolves us while it directly hits our neighbours least able to change even though many of them would really want to.

The criteria are silly and bitter, driven by political dogma rather than overt common sense.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

DonkeyApple said:

I can drive any of my ICE cars 24/7 around London, spewing out enormous volumes of exhaust gases as can anyone with a large cc ICE that just happens to be relatively modern. And we all do exactly that. Yet all of us could easily pick up a small ICE or EV for that job without batting an eyelid yet the current system completely absolves us while it directly hits our neighbours least able to change even though many of them would really want to.

The criteria are silly and bitter, driven by political dogma rather than overt common sense.

But what's in those exhaust gasses. Remember, ULEZ is nothing to do with CO2 and global warming/climate change, it's purely about local air quality. A 2007 Bentley or Lamborghini which meets Euro 4 standards will pump out far less harmful stuff than a small 2005 Euro 3 hatchback.

Also, absolving drivers of new full fat Range Rovers from extra charges whilst penalising Mrs Miggins in her 2004 1.4 Eurobox hardly comes across as political dogma. Quite the opposite from what you'd expect a Labour mayor to do, in fact.

Edited by TwigtheWonderkid on Thursday 29th January 09:24

[Earthdweller]

As DA says air quality is improving but the effect of ULEZ on it ?

[chrispmartha]

What's his username on here?

[Randy Winkman]

BunkMoreland said:

I hate Sadiq Khan.

But the ONLY thing he's done I support in office was expand the ULEZ.

Its worked so well that when I travel elsewhere and get behind some stinky bus or lorry I actually notice it. Whereas before we all became conditioned to the st being pumped out.

I worry when divvy politicians say they'll scrap it. But they binned CritAir in Paris a while ago, so clearly anything's possible!

I wasnt sure that ULEZ expansion was a good idea but I certainly agree with your last point. As a Londoner there's no way I'd vote for someone who said they would scrap it. That would be a pointless gesture now. Especially because it would look like giving in to criminals.