clunk click every trip

[vanordinaire]

Now that Jimmy Saville has been discredited should the government rescind the advice he spouted and cancel the seat belt laws?

[Jasandjules]

No. Next.

[Nigel Worc's]

Yes, we need less legislation in the motoring world.

[Vaud]

vanordinaire said:

Now that Jimmy Saville has been discredited should the government rescind the advice he spouted and cancel the seat belt laws?

A SP&L question? really?

[-Pete-]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQtml3rTeiQ

[ferrariF50lover]

Nigel Worc's said:

Yes, we need less legislation in the motoring world.

Tempted to agree with this. Make fitting seatbelts compulsory (well, retain the law), then leave it up to natural selection to choose who wears one. That way, if I'm driving 50 yards and don't feel the need, I don't get knobbled by a jobsworth, but if I'm stupid enough to drive everywhere without one, eventually Darwin will catch up with me and the human race can progress as nature demands with the survival of the best specimens. Win-win, for me.

Simon.

[Vaud]

More discretion in applying the fine, maybe. As a fundamental should we wear seat belts - yes, we should.

[tbc]

Innocent until proven guilty

only joking

filthy tracksuit wearing marathon running child abusing bd

[Nigel Worc's]

tbc said:

Innocent until proven guilty

only joking

filthy tracksuit wearing marathon running child abusing bd

No, your first line is correct.

Gary Glitter was guilty, Stuart Hall was guilty, nobody else, so far.

The one that really surprises me is Michael Jackson, nobody seems to be hounding him after his death like they are with Sir Jim, yet neither stood trial.

[SVTRick]

tbc said:

Innocent until proven guilty

only joking

filthy tracksuit wearing marathon running child abusing bd

Never convicted so technicley died an innocent man - the fkin pervert

[Steve H]

ferrariF50lover said:

Tempted to agree with this. Make fitting seatbelts compulsory (well, retain the law), then leave it up to natural selection to choose who wears one. That way, if I'm driving 50 yards and don't feel the need, I don't get knobbled by a jobsworth, but if I'm stupid enough to drive everywhere without one, eventually Darwin will catch up with me and the human race can progress as nature demands with the survival of the best specimens. Win-win, for me.

Simon.

So long as they change the civil law as well so the muppet who drives into me and then does a superman through the windscreen then can't sue me for the cost of a new head.

[carinaman]

Get with the programme, seatbelts are sexy:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/8053871/A...

I'm not qualified to say whether that image and reference to the late Mr Savile are coincidental.

[jmorgan]

Some people need protection from the stupid.

[p1esk]

Nigel Worc's said:

Yes, we need less legislation in the motoring world.

That we do.

TBH I would prefer it to be left to the individual to decide whether or not to wear a seatbelt. Most people probably would wear them, so we'd get most of the benefit in terms of less deaths and injuries, and this would still leave some freedom for those who wish to decide for themselves.

[fausTVR]

It is one law we could do without. I would always use them as would all self respecting PHers, but it would make it a tad easier to spot the retards on the road and give them wider berths.

Other known signifiers are the cripple hook, glued on Halfords tat, Audis, pickups, big hairy ears, the b-post slouch.