Are Smart Motorways Dangerous?
Discussion
Heaveho said:
Like I said. It's a right that you have to earn. I listed all the reasons why. Like you say, it can be removed. But only for good reason. It's not a privilege. Explain to me why you think it is.
Simply the definition of the words. Driving isn't a right, that's just a plain fact. It's a privilege, which has to be earned. Heaveho said:
Gary C said:
So what ?
Having a hard shoulder would mean you could stop without being in a live lane for 99.999999999% of them.
Way too sensible a comment to be well received in this audience. Applause for the attempt though.Having a hard shoulder would mean you could stop without being in a live lane for 99.999999999% of them.
All compounded by very lax laws imo, it would be far easier and cheaper to address these and make life a bit better for everyone, not just motorway users.
heebeegeetee said:
Simply the definition of the words. Driving isn't a right, that's just a plain fact. It's a privilege, which has to be earned.
There's nothing factual about it other than it's something many have wrongly said and something you've chosen to believe. You're simply repeating a long spouted soundbite without applying reason or individual thinking. I've explained with reason, detail and logic why you're wrong, the fact that you're too entrenched in the way you think prevents any further discussion really.heebeegeetee said:
Heaveho said:
Gary C said:
So what ?
Having a hard shoulder would mean you could stop without being in a live lane for 99.999999999% of them.
Way too sensible a comment to be well received in this audience. Applause for the attempt though.Having a hard shoulder would mean you could stop without being in a live lane for 99.999999999% of them.
All compounded by very lax laws imo, it would be far easier and cheaper to address these and make life a bit better for everyone, not just motorway users.
heebeegeetee said:
But you haven't, your reply is logic free. 
What you have is an opinion, and you're entitled to it, but that's all it is.
Read it. You clearly haven't. It's absolutely logical and you've said nothing that either refutes that or provides a rational opposing viewpoint. And try thinking for yourself instead of just blindly repeating what you see elsewhere.What you have is an opinion, and you're entitled to it, but that's all it is.
Heaveho said:
heebeegeetee said:
But you haven't, your reply is logic free.
What you have is an opinion, and you're entitled to it, but that's all it is.
Read it. You clearly haven't. It's absolutely logical and you've said nothing that either refutes that or provides a rational opposing viewpoint. And try thinking for yourself instead of just blindly repeating what you see elsewhere.What you have is an opinion, and you're entitled to it, but that's all it is.
That is clearly not what a driving licence is, not by and stretch of the imagination or your logic at all.
Thanks for your immature and patronising advice, but I'm happy with the definitions I've seen.
[quote=Heaveho]You don't earn a privilege.
/quote]
Of course you can earn a privilege.
I can see you're going to argue black is white, I've nothing more to say, except: Over in the mad world of Twitter, in the debates over the likes of LTNs and/or cycling etc, it becomes clear that a good many of the populace, certainly those of a right wing bent, truly believe that there is a right or there should be a right, to drive everywhere.
I've never seen anyone express the view that driving is actually a right, so well done, you seemed to have outdone the barking world of Twitter. I thought that would take some doing, congrats.
Are you a member of the ABD by any chance?
/quote]
Of course you can earn a privilege.
I can see you're going to argue black is white, I've nothing more to say, except: Over in the mad world of Twitter, in the debates over the likes of LTNs and/or cycling etc, it becomes clear that a good many of the populace, certainly those of a right wing bent, truly believe that there is a right or there should be a right, to drive everywhere.
I've never seen anyone express the view that driving is actually a right, so well done, you seemed to have outdone the barking world of Twitter. I thought that would take some doing, congrats.
Are you a member of the ABD by any chance?
heebeegeetee]eaveho said:
You don't earn a privilege.
/quote]
Of course you can earn a privilege.
I can see you're going to argue black is white, I've nothing more to say, except: Over in the mad world of Twitter, in the debates over the likes of LTNs and/or cycling etc, it becomes clear that a good many of the populace, certainly those of a right wing bent, truly believe that there is a right or there should be a right, to drive everywhere.
I've never seen anyone express the view that driving is actually a right, so well done, you seemed to have outdone the barking world of Twitter. I thought that would take some doing, congrats.
Are you a member of the ABD by any chance?
Right. You're basing your argument with me on the " barking world of Twitter ", which you clearly inhabit. I don't, never have, and now I know who and what exists there, never will. It's obviously full of deep thinkers. Thanks for the heads up. /quote]
Of course you can earn a privilege.
I can see you're going to argue black is white, I've nothing more to say, except: Over in the mad world of Twitter, in the debates over the likes of LTNs and/or cycling etc, it becomes clear that a good many of the populace, certainly those of a right wing bent, truly believe that there is a right or there should be a right, to drive everywhere.
I've never seen anyone express the view that driving is actually a right, so well done, you seemed to have outdone the barking world of Twitter. I thought that would take some doing, congrats.
Are you a member of the ABD by any chance?
You'll also have to explain ABD to me, as I've no idea what you're on about.
I've never said there should be a right to drive everywhere, or anything like that, so you've embarked on a subject that is tangential at best. Nothing to do with my point.
Your political leanings are clearly apparent, as are your prejudices. Carry on feeling privileged. That's your privilege. I'll carry on feeling like I've earned the right to drive until I do something wrong enough to justify the removal of that right by those tasked with judging us. Until that happens, it can't be removed. Because it's a right.
heebeegeetee said:
"a right is an inherent, irrevocable entitlement "
That is clearly not what a driving licence is, not by and stretch of the imagination or your logic at all.
Thanks for your immature and patronising advice, but I'm happy with the definitions I've seen.
Fully agree, if it was a right, you would not need a licence, anybody could drive.That is clearly not what a driving licence is, not by and stretch of the imagination or your logic at all.
Thanks for your immature and patronising advice, but I'm happy with the definitions I've seen.
Driving along the smart motorway section of the M23 today and a car in front of us had a blowout. I must say that the gantry warning signs came on almost instantly. The car had been travelling in the 'slow' lane but the signs only mentioned an obstruction, not a lane closure. Within a minute the signs had changed to 'slow moving vehicle' so presumably the car had continued on until there was a refuge area. Extra unnecessary stress for the driver.
Heaveho said:
MustangGT said:
Fully agree, if it was a right, you would not need a licence, anybody could drive.
Anyone can drive, provided they've earned the right. Part of that is obtaining a licence by passing the required test. Privilege doesn't come into it.Edited to add: If it was a right, it could not be taken away again.
Edited by MustangGT on Monday 1st May 22:20
heebeegeetee said:
Heaveho said:
This drivel getting trotted out yet again. Driving is a right. You earn it. By becoming of age, by paying to take lessons, passing a test, buying, taxing insuring and MOTing a vehicle and maintaining it to a roadworthy standard. By either driving to the letter of the law, or having enough about you to not get caught misbehaving. If you adhere to this, nobody should be able to take away that right. You've earned it.
It can be removed for health problems, obviously. It's a privilege. No driver has a 'right of way' to or on the road.
otolith said:
heebeegeetee said:
Heaveho said:
This drivel getting trotted out yet again. Driving is a right. You earn it. By becoming of age, by paying to take lessons, passing a test, buying, taxing insuring and MOTing a vehicle and maintaining it to a roadworthy standard. By either driving to the letter of the law, or having enough about you to not get caught misbehaving. If you adhere to this, nobody should be able to take away that right. You've earned it.
It can be removed for health problems, obviously. It's a privilege. No driver has a 'right of way' to or on the road.
Graveworm said:
A right is something where there is a positive assertion that it is a right, rights can be qualified or limited. Something being, licensed, permitted or not prohibited is far short of a right. Take me to the legislation or common law that driving is a right.
Take me to the legislation enshrining your right to wear a hat.We have laws limiting the right to drive a car - until they were created there were no restrictions.
On what grounds can you be arbitrarily prevented from getting a licence and driving?
heebeegeetee said:
I disagree, I think there are very few likely reasons why a vehicle can't reach a refuge. Of course it depends how far a apart they are, and they should have remained at the distance first mooted imo.
All compounded by very lax laws imo, it would be far easier and cheaper to address these and make life a bit better for everyone, not just motorway users.
So what ?All compounded by very lax laws imo, it would be far easier and cheaper to address these and make life a bit better for everyone, not just motorway users.
You say "are very few likely reasons why a vehicle can't reach a refuge" yet it happens every day.
The reasons don't really matter because in the end you cannot argue that a hard shoulder is safer than all live lane running. Its pointless discussing 'rights' and 'privileges', because people will still break down, still have accidents, still make mistakes.
The ideal would be hard shoulder plus refuges plus gantry controlled variable speed.
Of course better driver awareness is good too.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff