It can't really be mistaken for a British police car
Discussion
McSam said:
TooMany2cvs said:
McSam said:
Much as I'd like to dispute horse-riders having "as much place as car drivers" on the road, despite being there as a hobby while most car drivers are by necessity, let's leave that aside
No, let's not. Because that same logic could equally be used to term anybody who's driving other than "for necessity" as a similarly second-class road user. And, if you're getting into that hierarchy, is a commute "necessary"? Get on the bus, and leave the road to vans and trucks.To your argument - yes, it could. The roads exist to facilitate quick and easy transportation, something which is now done almost exclusively by motorised vehicles, though some also still by bicycle. I don't know anyone who rides a horse as their primary means of getting around. It's not appropriate to debate which journeys are "necessary", that's down to the judgement of the road user, the question is whether what you're doing on the road is your best/most convenient means of transport from one place to another. I'm sure there are a select few cases where this applies to the horse-rider, just as there are a few cases where you or I might go out for a drive without actually having a destination, but in the overwhelming majority the car driver is trying to get somewhere, and the horse-rider is pursuing a hobby. You must also consider that those of us driving for pleasure or any other unnecessary reason are highly compatible with other motorised vehicle users and cause near-zero inconvenience, whereas the horse is no longer very compatible with other road users.
I'm not saying horses should be banned from the road, not at all, nor do I rate them a second-class road user. They currently have the same rights to the roads as I do, and I think those demanding they "pay road tax" (which doesn't even exist) or "stay in the fields" are selfish and unempathetic. But do I think the horse still has "just as much place" on the roads as motorised vehicles, in the practical and social sense? No. It's no longer a mode of transportation, so in principle perhaps does not have "as much place" as vehicles which are modes of transportation.
GC8 said:
They aren't 'dressing up like a copper'. Mate, you're an idiot.
A lot of insults being thrown out of your pram here.. Congratulations, you're the more morally worthy road user? So what? You get a cookie? You're allowed to be a dick to them? No, at least no more than you were anyway.
I just don't see any point or meaning in making that claim in this context except as a rationalisation for attacking someone.
joe1145 said:
aka_kerrly said:
This is near me (or one similar) guy also has green Focus RSparanoid airbag said:
With all due respect, what does "they have [and implied that they should have] a right to use the road... but 'no place' on it" mean?
Congratulations, you're the more morally worthy road user? So what? You get a cookie? You're allowed to be a dick to them? No, at least no more than you were anyway.
I just don't see any point or meaning in making that claim in this context except as a rationalisation for attacking someone.
I didn't say horses have no place on the road, and never would say that. I did point out that I have absolutely nothing against their use of it. I simply explained why I think, conceptually (NOT practically with the current state of the law or the history of this country), they now have perhaps rather less place than modern modes of transport. To phrase it another way, their continued use of the roads is less vital. That is to say that if usage of the road was dramatically tightened for some reason, horses might no longer be permitted as they are less appropriate. Would you consider horse-riders' ability to use the roads of equal importance to car drivers?Congratulations, you're the more morally worthy road user? So what? You get a cookie? You're allowed to be a dick to them? No, at least no more than you were anyway.
I just don't see any point or meaning in making that claim in this context except as a rationalisation for attacking someone.
Purely hypothetical, vanishingly unlikely and not a rationalisation for any behaviour, just a response to GC8's earlier statement that horses have "just as much place" as car drivers.
McSam said:
I did point out that I have absolutely nothing against their use of it. I simply explained why I think, conceptually (NOT practically with the current state of the law or the history of this country), they now have perhaps rather less place than modern modes of transport. To phrase it another way, their continued use of the roads is less vital.
And, in that simple statement, you laid the ground for tiering of road use according to some arbitrary priority.aka_kerrly said:
That's a brave move but I like it and expect it does generate quite a reaction from those with a slightly nervous/guilty side to them!
a chap down the road from me has a Soarer wrapped up like a police car which is always amusing to see driven about.
I used to see that all the time, but these days every time I see my parents it's just parked up looking a bit sad.a chap down the road from me has a Soarer wrapped up like a police car which is always amusing to see driven about.
TooMany2cvs said:
McSam said:
I did point out that I have absolutely nothing against their use of it. I simply explained why I think, conceptually (NOT practically with the current state of the law or the history of this country), they now have perhaps rather less place than modern modes of transport. To phrase it another way, their continued use of the roads is less vital.
And, in that simple statement, you laid the ground for tiering of road use according to some arbitrary priority.skyrover said:
The police don't drive Avenger's in the states though... they drive charger's, taurus's, caprice's, explorer's and tahoe's.
Anything else just isn't right
5.7 V8, 370 horsepower
3.5 twin turbo, 365 horsepower
6.0 V8, 355 horsepower
3.5 twin turbo, 365 horsepower
6.2 V8, 407 horsepower
Which would be impressive if they didn't all weigh as much as supertankers Anything else just isn't right
5.7 V8, 370 horsepower
3.5 twin turbo, 365 horsepower
6.0 V8, 355 horsepower
3.5 twin turbo, 365 horsepower
6.2 V8, 407 horsepower
Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 17th February 07:25
Devil2575 said:
skyrover said:
Ford Explorer: 2,067kg
Land Rover Discovery: 2,558kg
Ford Taurus: 1,821 kg
Audi A6 Quattro: 1,855 Kg
come again?
Ah yes, two well known Police cars...Land Rover Discovery: 2,558kg
Ford Taurus: 1,821 kg
Audi A6 Quattro: 1,855 Kg
come again?
The point i'm making is the Yank car's are no heavier than their Euro equivalents, police or not.
In fact the charger is based on an e-class mercedes, the taurus and explorer are both based on Ford's D5 platform which is shared with the volvo s60 etc etc
It's a global market.
Edited by skyrover on Wednesday 18th February 07:31
skyrover said:
Well the discovery certainly is, we have loads of them up here up north. I think it's the favored highway patrol car.
The point i'm making is the Yank car's are no heavier than their Euro equivalents, police or not.
In fact the charger is based on an e-class mercedes, the taurus and explorer are both based on Ford's D5 platform which is shared with the volvo s60 etc etc
It's a global market.
Are you 300hp/ton in disguise?The point i'm making is the Yank car's are no heavier than their Euro equivalents, police or not.
In fact the charger is based on an e-class mercedes, the taurus and explorer are both based on Ford's D5 platform which is shared with the volvo s60 etc etc
It's a global market.
Comparing generic US cars to UK cars is utterly pointless. The power output is only half the story, the other half being obvious.....
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff