The Exploitation of People
Apparently, according to the newspapers(!) we all creep over the speed limit from time to time and getting caught will provide a heavy fine, penalty points, increased insurance premiums or, for persistent offenders, loss of licence altogether. The main reason for having road laws is to make money.
Something to look forward to, then.
According to the advertising "the road safety myth" goes something like this: enforcement of motoring laws often has little or nothing to do with road safety. It's all about money, money, money.
This from the co-author (retired traffic police officer) of a book implying that speeding is OK. This author is not attempting to make money, just promote road safety, of course. Maybe it's more profitable working on behalf of the offender than trying to stop people offending. But it's all about government making money, not about making roads safer on the ever increasingly crowded British roads.
A full page advert in a Sunday paper doesn't come cheap.
Such laudable altruism.
This whole issue highlights one major problem. The shit attitude of some British drivers. That they actually think it's morally acceptable to speed. Speed limits are imposed for a reason. If you exceed that limit then you should expect to get caught. If you use the roads, it is your responsibility to know the speed limit for the zone in which you are driving.
The 'logic', however, seems to argue that speeding nearby to schools, across the zebra crossing, down a highstreet, along any road that has both parked cars and pedestrians (a known hazard), minor roads joining major roads (any junction, in fact) is all about money and not safety.
I consider these great motivators to make people aware of speed. If you believe you can 'creep' over a speed limit, then impose a lesser limit on yourself: 27mph in a 30mph zone, 37 mph in a 40mph zone for just a couple of instances.
Though I appreciate rocket science like that is difficult for some.
If you're not sure about a speed limit then assume it's 30mph. If it's 40mph there is frequent signage. If it's 50mph there's frequent signage. Maybe even BIG numbers painted in the road. Otherwise, 60mph unless on a dual carriageway or motorway where it's 70mph. That's it. The maximum anywhere on British roads is 70mph.
Is this rocket science really difficult to follow?
Drivers make an easy target, even when speeding. It actually equates shoplifting with speeding in a lethal vehicle. Any car at any speed is potentially lethal. Shoplifting is wrong certainly, but it is not likely to endanger life. A shoplifter gets little more than a 'slap on the wrist' while a 'speeder' gets substantially more. It's so unfair.
If there is a real problem it is that the law is weak by loading the evidential proof required in death by dangerous driving, or even serious injury, so much that it favours the driver. It's almost a case of the pedestrian who 'hit my car at 46mph'. Joke? Pathetically, it is not.
Well, clearly discouraging driving shouldn't happen. The real source of money: keeping people driving, of course. Not preventing it. So, a drink driver is banned. More time to spend money drinking, maybe? Still spending money. Money. Money. To the exchequer. Gordon's (drinks) party fund.
On it goes: " you're being used as a source of easy money by the government and could be robbed of your means of transport."
Nothing, of course, to do with you. Just a poor sap going too fast who happened to get caught. So unfair.
But with insider information you can cheat! It actually suggests fighting back! That to me sounds like encouraging (inciting) you to break the law legally. Perverse? Absolutely.
It's all about how to cheat or beat the system after you've broken the law. It's not about encouraging a better attitude towards driving.
And it's not about making money. Bloody Hell! What a suggestion.
Example: how to avoid a crippling fine DOES NOT mention simply keeping your speed down. Just how to avoid the fine - afterwards.
What a load of bollocks.
And if you fall for it? You're obviously such a bright spark you should quickly amass enough points to 'lose' your licence.
Before you kill anyone, of course.
Something to look forward to, then.
According to the advertising "the road safety myth" goes something like this: enforcement of motoring laws often has little or nothing to do with road safety. It's all about money, money, money.
This from the co-author (retired traffic police officer) of a book implying that speeding is OK. This author is not attempting to make money, just promote road safety, of course. Maybe it's more profitable working on behalf of the offender than trying to stop people offending. But it's all about government making money, not about making roads safer on the ever increasingly crowded British roads.
A full page advert in a Sunday paper doesn't come cheap.
Such laudable altruism.
This whole issue highlights one major problem. The shit attitude of some British drivers. That they actually think it's morally acceptable to speed. Speed limits are imposed for a reason. If you exceed that limit then you should expect to get caught. If you use the roads, it is your responsibility to know the speed limit for the zone in which you are driving.
The 'logic', however, seems to argue that speeding nearby to schools, across the zebra crossing, down a highstreet, along any road that has both parked cars and pedestrians (a known hazard), minor roads joining major roads (any junction, in fact) is all about money and not safety.
I consider these great motivators to make people aware of speed. If you believe you can 'creep' over a speed limit, then impose a lesser limit on yourself: 27mph in a 30mph zone, 37 mph in a 40mph zone for just a couple of instances.
Though I appreciate rocket science like that is difficult for some.
If you're not sure about a speed limit then assume it's 30mph. If it's 40mph there is frequent signage. If it's 50mph there's frequent signage. Maybe even BIG numbers painted in the road. Otherwise, 60mph unless on a dual carriageway or motorway where it's 70mph. That's it. The maximum anywhere on British roads is 70mph.
Is this rocket science really difficult to follow?
Drivers make an easy target, even when speeding. It actually equates shoplifting with speeding in a lethal vehicle. Any car at any speed is potentially lethal. Shoplifting is wrong certainly, but it is not likely to endanger life. A shoplifter gets little more than a 'slap on the wrist' while a 'speeder' gets substantially more. It's so unfair.
If there is a real problem it is that the law is weak by loading the evidential proof required in death by dangerous driving, or even serious injury, so much that it favours the driver. It's almost a case of the pedestrian who 'hit my car at 46mph'. Joke? Pathetically, it is not.
Well, clearly discouraging driving shouldn't happen. The real source of money: keeping people driving, of course. Not preventing it. So, a drink driver is banned. More time to spend money drinking, maybe? Still spending money. Money. Money. To the exchequer. Gordon's (drinks) party fund.
On it goes: " you're being used as a source of easy money by the government and could be robbed of your means of transport."
Nothing, of course, to do with you. Just a poor sap going too fast who happened to get caught. So unfair.
But with insider information you can cheat! It actually suggests fighting back! That to me sounds like encouraging (inciting) you to break the law legally. Perverse? Absolutely.
It's all about how to cheat or beat the system after you've broken the law. It's not about encouraging a better attitude towards driving.
And it's not about making money. Bloody Hell! What a suggestion.
Example: how to avoid a crippling fine DOES NOT mention simply keeping your speed down. Just how to avoid the fine - afterwards.
What a load of bollocks.
And if you fall for it? You're obviously such a bright spark you should quickly amass enough points to 'lose' your licence.
Before you kill anyone, of course.
posted by Louis Brothnias at 1:49 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home