Good to see that the posters there are mostly onside. Only two votes for Hughes, and only one of them dared to comment. Predictably his post contained unhelpful oversimplifications such as "if you get to fal fould [sic] of the same law on 4 occasions in 3 years you are certainly deserving of the consequences." So he'd like every driver banned then? Do these people think about what they're actually saying? Oh dear, I feel another rant coming on (well it is General Chat!
)
IMHO a good percentage of pro-camera arguments (like the one quoted) can be made to look ridiculous just by pointing out that all remotely competent drivers speed pretty much every journey they make. In fact a very good percentage of pro-camera arguments that you see on forums and in the news are nothing short of
pathetic. They can be refuted so incredibly easily, usually just by choosing from a short list of standard replies. They're almost unbelievably boring and lame. Basic, textbook, schoolboy errors again and again. So, so poor. If I had a pound for every time I read a pro-camera argument, rolled my eyes, sighed and thought "Not that one
again".... Either they haven't read or remembered any of the Safe Speed site which many of them so often criticise, they're too stupid to understand it, or they're deliberately ignoring it, presumably for less than noble reasons. Their ineptitude would be comical if it wasn't such a serious subject.
Those who are pro-camera and intelligent (I believe that a few may exist) must secretly cringe when they see the general quality of pro-camera argument. There've been so many astoundingly thick pro-camera posters like Gatsos Bloody Forever, yet I've never seen an anti-camera one who's been
anything like so obtuse. I'd love to see the relative average IQs of pro- and anti-camera people.
BTW, that poster also claims that he'd like to deliberately supply incorrect camera locations to satnav companies. Yeah, let's deliberately misreport accident blackspots. It's a prime example of how safety is overlooked by those who have become obsessed with "catching speeding drivers" (i.e. all drivers) any way they can. He's the kind of officer (assuming that he is one) which the public can do without being "served" by.
_________________
Paul Smith: a legend.
"The freedom provided by the motor vehicle is not universally applauded, however: there are those who resent the loss of state control over individual choice that the car represents. Such people rarely admit their prejudices openly; instead, they make false or exaggerated claims about the adverse effects of road transport in order to justify calls for higher taxation or restrictions on mobility." (
Conservative Way Forward:
Stop The War Against Drivers)
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Members
