This has to be the biggest pennis in the world.
Discussion
A well known clown that unfortunately, due to the brainwashing and nannying this country is getting, will win out.
These kind of people are killjoys of the modern age. Mary Whitehouse left the old era.......we now have more focussed and outspoken parties that have a scarily large following...........
We can't win........and that pains me so much..........
These kind of people are killjoys of the modern age. Mary Whitehouse left the old era.......we now have more focussed and outspoken parties that have a scarily large following...........
We can't win........and that pains me so much..........
It's bad driving that kills, not speed per se. But the government and journalists are too lazy to tackle that one.
Government: It's easier to put up more speed cameras than to tackle the real causes of accidents.
Journalists: It's easier to default to a simple message that fits their world view (very narrow if you live in north london, and I should know).
Government: It's easier to put up more speed cameras than to tackle the real causes of accidents.
Journalists: It's easier to default to a simple message that fits their world view (very narrow if you live in north london, and I should know).
Edited by Jonblue on Tuesday 13th November 15:55
I've said it before and I'll say it again. What does the speeding debate have to do with Mr Moonboot's 'green' agenda? Do 55 in a 30 and chances are you'll be polluting less.
Further proof that his arguments don't stand up to scrutiny. Especially considering the hypocrite now owns a car.
Further proof that his arguments don't stand up to scrutiny. Especially considering the hypocrite now owns a car.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/main.jhtml?xml...
Nice to see a counter that doesnt include conjecture and name calling.
In that vein - mombiot, you are the worst sort of prat and not necessary in this country. Please feel free to step out in front of something un necessary like a caravan.
Nice to see a counter that doesnt include conjecture and name calling.
In that vein - mombiot, you are the worst sort of prat and not necessary in this country. Please feel free to step out in front of something un necessary like a caravan.
doing a bit of cherry picking of his own and in so doing misses the point entirely. his collumn is merely there to preach to those miserable bastards already converted to his eco-religion. It is as worthless as his own sorry excuse for a life and adds up to little more than the rantings of an ill informed mad-man. It saddens me that so little of the general public (and more frighteningly government) cant see him for the crank he is.
I am missing the point on this one guys. As people who think about driving we all know that if you drive faster you are more likely to hurt someone that if you drive slowly, I really don't see how anyone can argue with that one. For sure a lot of accidents are caused by people being silly but if you are silly at 100mph you are much more likely to hurt yourself of someone else that if you are silly at 30mph. If I hit a brick wall at 30mph I will probably get out with a stiff neck, if I hit it at 100mph ....
And as for being green then just look at the fuel gauge. Go fast = poor mpg = more emmisions. I don't see how you can argue with that one either.
Look on the positive side guys. I have worked for a race team for 20years where saftey has got better and better and to tell the truth it is pretty nice not to hurt / kill so many drivers.
30mph means 30mph and if they increase the penalty then we all know its coming. You should not be hammering around villages, save it for country roads where no one is around.... actually haven't I just read somewhere that they are going to start dropping the speed limits on country roads as well....oh bugger!!! Take all the back, speed limits are stupid after all.
And as for being green then just look at the fuel gauge. Go fast = poor mpg = more emmisions. I don't see how you can argue with that one either.
Look on the positive side guys. I have worked for a race team for 20years where saftey has got better and better and to tell the truth it is pretty nice not to hurt / kill so many drivers.
30mph means 30mph and if they increase the penalty then we all know its coming. You should not be hammering around villages, save it for country roads where no one is around.... actually haven't I just read somewhere that they are going to start dropping the speed limits on country roads as well....oh bugger!!! Take all the back, speed limits are stupid after all.
Christian - you are well meaning but over simplifying it.
Fuel economy is not directly linked to driving fast (because 56mph is roughly the optimum). Similarly, dangerous driving isn't directly linked to driving fast either. It's driving too fast for the conditions.
We all want idiots off the road, but this obsession with "speed" ignores the complex realities if real accidents.
If you really want to tackle accidents, you need to work on driving standards. This means tougher and broader L tests to begin with. And I'm going to be really radical here and suggest compulsary advanced driving tests. These courses teach you SO much more. And if people fail them, well perhaps it's a cure for congestion as well.
Fuel economy is not directly linked to driving fast (because 56mph is roughly the optimum). Similarly, dangerous driving isn't directly linked to driving fast either. It's driving too fast for the conditions.
We all want idiots off the road, but this obsession with "speed" ignores the complex realities if real accidents.
If you really want to tackle accidents, you need to work on driving standards. This means tougher and broader L tests to begin with. And I'm going to be really radical here and suggest compulsary advanced driving tests. These courses teach you SO much more. And if people fail them, well perhaps it's a cure for congestion as well.
Jonblue said:
If you really want to tackle accidents, you need to work on driving standards. This means tougher and broader L tests to begin with. And I'm going to be really radical here and suggest compulsary advanced driving tests. These courses teach you SO much more. And if people fail them, well perhaps it's a cure for congestion as well.
It would help if people who didn't find driving interesting weren't on the roads. Yes Moonboot, that means you, planet killer!Christian43 said:
I am missing the point on this one guys. As people who think about driving we all know that if you drive faster you are more likely to hurt someone that if you drive slowly, I really don't see how anyone can argue with that one. For sure a lot of accidents are caused by people being silly but if you are silly at 100mph you are much more likely to hurt yourself of someone else that if you are silly at 30mph. If I hit a brick wall at 30mph I will probably get out with a stiff neck, if I hit it at 100mph ....
So we should change the limit on motorways to 30mph? Or 4mph with a man with a flag infront of us...?Christian43 said:
And as for being green then just look at the fuel gauge. Go fast = poor mpg = more emmisions. I don't see how you can argue with that one either.
If you work in the motor-racing industry then you are a hypocrit - how economical is an F1 car? As it is, emmissions cause 
all of greenhouse gases, which in turn cause all of climate change, given thet the climate has been changing for the past 4 billion years. A bit of plant food has such little affect as to be non-existent.Christian43 said:
Look on the positive side guys. I have worked for a race team for 20years where saftey has got better and better and to tell the truth it is pretty nice not to hurt / kill so many drivers.
Was this achieved by your race team driving at 30 mph on track? No, didn't think so....Christian43 said:
30mph means 30mph and if they increase the penalty then we all know its coming. You should not be hammering around villages, save it for country roads where no one is around.
There are plenty of inappropriate 30, 40 or 50 limits nowhere near villages.The governments speed focussed road safety policy is costing lives, our roads are no-longer the safest in Europe despite scameras, reduced limits, speed bumps etc. Do you think that maybe the government is ignoring the 96% of crashes not caused by speeding (as per the DfT's own figures?).
Christian, I feel for you, you must have halitosis from the amount of government bullshit that you have swallowed and regurgitated on here....
Why are people incapable of taking facts from differing sources and then piecing these together to arrive at a balanced informed view? With this debate it is not the case that either side of the argument can be 100% correct. Monbiot is as guilty of this as certain contributors to this forum.
Bing o, your response to Christian's comments is just childish. He made no suggestions about changing Motorway speed limits, did not claim that his race team was environmentally-friendly (!) and was trying to throw some balance back into the argument. Your attempts to shoot him down were not helpful and may well deter others from engaging in this discussion and offering useful insight that may be of benefit to us all.
Monbiot is blatantly ignoring simple facts such as massive improvements in car safety, yet he is also making a valid point that Smith needs to formalise his work rather than just rant.
It is not possible to apply a broadbrush approach to such a complex issue - at the moment, government decisions are being based on limited research that appears to have been borne out of a biased slant. It is a potentially dangerous state of affairs, and personally, it doesn’t feel right. I am not going to turn round and claim that speed cameras do nothing to help public safety though.
Bing o, your response to Christian's comments is just childish. He made no suggestions about changing Motorway speed limits, did not claim that his race team was environmentally-friendly (!) and was trying to throw some balance back into the argument. Your attempts to shoot him down were not helpful and may well deter others from engaging in this discussion and offering useful insight that may be of benefit to us all.
Monbiot is blatantly ignoring simple facts such as massive improvements in car safety, yet he is also making a valid point that Smith needs to formalise his work rather than just rant.
It is not possible to apply a broadbrush approach to such a complex issue - at the moment, government decisions are being based on limited research that appears to have been borne out of a biased slant. It is a potentially dangerous state of affairs, and personally, it doesn’t feel right. I am not going to turn round and claim that speed cameras do nothing to help public safety though.
Christian43 said:
I am missing the point on this one guys. As people who think about driving we all know that if you drive faster you are more likely to hurt someone that if you drive slowly, I really don't see how anyone can argue with that one. For sure a lot of accidents are caused by people being silly but if you are silly at 100mph you are much more likely to hurt yourself of someone else that if you are silly at 30mph. If I hit a brick wall at 30mph I will probably get out with a stiff neck, if I hit it at 100mph ....
If you are being that pedantic then at 100mph, you would probably go through the wall and be no worse off - but then what id10t drives at a wall at 100mph?, especially in a 30 zone? Bing o said:
So we should change the limit on motorways to 30mph? Or 4mph with a man with a flag infront of us...?
Speed doesnt kill - reckless driving and not driving to the conditions of the road, kills. Even the figures that the govt have produced and dont want you to see say this. Do you believe everything the govt say? How are those weapons of mass distraction?Christian43 said:
And as for being green then just look at the fuel gauge. Go fast = poor mpg = more emmisions. I don't see how you can argue with that one either.
Bing o said:
If you work in the motor-racing industry then you are a hypocrit - how economical is an F1 car? As it is, emmissions cause all of greenhouse gases, which in turn cause all of climate change, given thet the climate has been changing for the past 4 billion years. A bit of plant food has such little affect as to be non-existent.
all of greenhouse gases, which in turn cause all of climate change, given thet the climate has been changing for the past 4 billion years. A bit of plant food has such little affect as to be non-existent.Christian43 said:
Look on the positive side guys. I have worked for a race team for 20years where saftey has got better and better and to tell the truth it is pretty nice not to hurt / kill so many drivers.
Bing o said:
Was this achieved by your race team driving at 30 mph on track? No, didn't think so....
The emissions one is another big lie. I suggest you do some research into how much effect the emissions of cars actually has on CO2 levels and total production in this country. I then suggest you do a little investigation as to the scientific proof behind the "emissions scare tactics" used by our "trustworthy" government. Even the esteemed Al Gore exagerated and manipulated data in order to create a horror story instead of a science based film.Christian43 said:
30mph means 30mph and if they increase the penalty then we all know its coming. You should not be hammering around villages, save it for country roads where no one is around.
Who said anything about "hammering around villages"? If you are going to exagerate the point being made then at least do it right and say " doing 150 in the local playground". No one objects to sensible speed limits in areas that require it. The speed camera tactics are not sensible or reasonable. They are specifically put into places where cash can be generated (extorted).Bing o said:
There are plenty of inappropriate 30, 40 or 50 limits nowhere near villages.
The governments speed focussed road safety policy is costing lives, our roads are no-longer the safest in Europe despite scameras, reduced limits, speed bumps etc. Do you think that maybe the government is ignoring the 96% of crashes not caused by speeding (as per the DfT's own figures?).
Christian, I feel for you, you must have halitosis from the amount of government bullshit that you have swallowed and regurgitated on here....
If you want the simple truth about this governments policy then just examine who is making money. The governments speed focussed road safety policy is costing lives, our roads are no-longer the safest in Europe despite scameras, reduced limits, speed bumps etc. Do you think that maybe the government is ignoring the 96% of crashes not caused by speeding (as per the DfT's own figures?).
Christian, I feel for you, you must have halitosis from the amount of government bullshit that you have swallowed and regurgitated on here....
I am actually not sure if you original post is "toungue in cheek". If so I have swallowed the bait almost to the reel. But hey ho. I love a good rant.
RHY 11S said:
It is not possible to apply a broadbrush approach to such a complex issue
That's exactly what Paul Smith is saying.RHY 11S said:
- at the moment, government decisions are being based on limited research...
That's just not true, is it. Goverment decisions in this area actually fly in the face of the research that has been done.RHY 11S said:
It is a potentially dangerous state of affairs, and personally, it doesn’t feel right.
Amen to that.RHY 11S said:
I am not going to turn round and claim that speed cameras do nothing to help public safety though.
I am. Wherever they're placed they're a distraction to drivers and are a cast iron guarantee of people spending more time looking down at their speedo than concentrating on what is happening around them on the road. As a cyclist that it an immensely worrying prospect. Obviously I don't cycle on motorways but the research done on the effects of cameras there illustrates the point exactly.DaveR said:
RHY 11S said:
I am not going to turn round and claim that speed cameras do nothing to help public safety though.
I am. Wherever they're placed they're a distraction to drivers and are a cast iron guarantee of people spending more time looking down at their speedo than concentrating on what is happening around them on the road. As a cyclist that it an immensely worrying prospect. Obviously I don't cycle on motorways but the research done on the effects of cameras there illustrates the point exactly.If this benefit outweighs what you see as the danger of drivers checking their speedos - which is something I regularly do anyway in a 30-zone - then they do offer some benefit. Which takes me back to my point that I am not going to turn round and claim that speed cameras do nothing to help public safety.
As I said, just trying trying to throw some balance into the argument.
Gooby said:
Christian43 said:
I am missing the point on this one guys. As people who think about driving we all know that if you drive faster you are more likely to hurt someone that if you drive slowly, I really don't see how anyone can argue with that one. For sure a lot of accidents are caused by people being silly but if you are silly at 100mph you are much more likely to hurt yourself of someone else that if you are silly at 30mph. If I hit a brick wall at 30mph I will probably get out with a stiff neck, if I hit it at 100mph ....
If you are being that pedantic then at 100mph, you would probably go through the wall and be no worse off - but then what id10t drives at a wall at 100mph?, especially in a 30 zone? Bing o said:
So we should change the limit on motorways to 30mph? Or 4mph with a man with a flag infront of us...?
Speed doesnt kill - reckless driving and not driving to the conditions of the road, kills. Even the figures that the govt have produced and dont want you to see say this. Do you believe everything the govt say? How are those weapons of mass distraction?Christian43 said:
And as for being green then just look at the fuel gauge. Go fast = poor mpg = more emmisions. I don't see how you can argue with that one either.
Bing o said:
If you work in the motor-racing industry then you are a hypocrit - how economical is an F1 car? As it is, emmissions cause all of greenhouse gases, which in turn cause all of climate change, given thet the climate has been changing for the past 4 billion years. A bit of plant food has such little affect as to be non-existent.
all of greenhouse gases, which in turn cause all of climate change, given thet the climate has been changing for the past 4 billion years. A bit of plant food has such little affect as to be non-existent.Christian43 said:
Look on the positive side guys. I have worked for a race team for 20years where saftey has got better and better and to tell the truth it is pretty nice not to hurt / kill so many drivers.
Bing o said:
Was this achieved by your race team driving at 30 mph on track? No, didn't think so....
The emissions one is another big lie. I suggest you do some research into how much effect the emissions of cars actually has on CO2 levels and total production in this country. I then suggest you do a little investigation as to the scientific proof behind the "emissions scare tactics" used by our "trustworthy" government. Even the esteemed Al Gore exagerated and manipulated data in order to create a horror story instead of a science based film.Christian43 said:
30mph means 30mph and if they increase the penalty then we all know its coming. You should not be hammering around villages, save it for country roads where no one is around.
Who said anything about "hammering around villages"? If you are going to exagerate the point being made then at least do it right and say " doing 150 in the local playground". No one objects to sensible speed limits in areas that require it. The speed camera tactics are not sensible or reasonable. They are specifically put into places where cash can be generated (extorted).Bing o said:
There are plenty of inappropriate 30, 40 or 50 limits nowhere near villages.
The governments speed focussed road safety policy is costing lives, our roads are no-longer the safest in Europe despite scameras, reduced limits, speed bumps etc. Do you think that maybe the government is ignoring the 96% of crashes not caused by speeding (as per the DfT's own figures?).
Christian, I feel for you, you must have halitosis from the amount of government bullshit that you have swallowed and regurgitated on here....
If you want the simple truth about this governments policy then just examine who is making money. The governments speed focussed road safety policy is costing lives, our roads are no-longer the safest in Europe despite scameras, reduced limits, speed bumps etc. Do you think that maybe the government is ignoring the 96% of crashes not caused by speeding (as per the DfT's own figures?).
Christian, I feel for you, you must have halitosis from the amount of government bullshit that you have swallowed and regurgitated on here....
I am actually not sure if you original post is "toungue in cheek". If so I have swallowed the bait almost to the reel. But hey ho. I love a good rant.
Gassing Station | Elise/Exige/Europa/340R | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff