Safe Speed Forums

I remember an article in New Scientist a while back about a tounge in cheek study where the researcher found that, accross the board, peoples pay was generally inversly proportional to how much socioty would actually miss them if they stopped working (or their "role" was made to dissappear)

For the most part, he was right too.

Bizarre!

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

Several thoughts and feelings surface reading this thread. Many of them remind me of the thoughts and feelings originally inspired before I joined these forums.

I'm just gonna go 'stream of consciousness' here ...Only when you 'really' needed them. I am accustomed to hearing in my mind, the motto, "to serve and protect", but the vast majority of my interactions with them occur in speedtraps ... which means the vast majority of the time, no, I wouldn't miss them. If there never is a cop around when you really need them, then, as a general rule, most of us, most of the time, wouldn't miss them.

They exist because we'd rather let someone else protect us, than do it ourselves.
Excuse the grammatical error, but 'us' created 'them'. Keep that in mind when those whom 'we' have 'consented' to 'protect us' do more and more things that 'we' wouldn't miss.
Who would miss them?
As a former U.S. Marine, it significantly raises my blood pressure, not to answer this question ...
At some point, Amerikans who do not support the W. Bush regime's military actions are asked, "but do you support the troops?"

Answering yes is wrong, because the question itself is a relatively rare red herring.

If your son/daughter was on either side of a gunfight between the Crips and the Bloods, you'd already be assured that they were there for the wrong reasons, so you wouldn't support the cause. You also wouldn't start throwing them additional ammo and armor, either - except perhaps under the following condition - they extricate themselves from the battleground, which is what you really want for them.

Whenever asked if I support the troops, I'd say I want as many of them to come home safe and sound as possible, and I will hold responsible all those who prevent and delay their safe and speedy return from a military campaign that is saturated with lies of omission and commission from those who truly do not support them - the Amerikan government.

Rigpig wasn't confrontational, at least not with *Sir* Paul Smith. The nobility of the armed forces' sacrifices are ... overshadowed ... by the reasons they were sent, and those that sent them, neither support them, nor respect them, nor can conceive of nobility, except as an entitlement to treat others as resources.

Most people choose not to consider the possibility that, "If the armed forces were given the remit to do similar for every scenario they found themselves in", and the vast majority of the armed forces - which, by extension, means the vast majority of the public - were as smart and as convicted as the late *Sir* Paul Smith, most orders rooted in megalomania would be checked, many before they were even uttered. I know I sound like an idealist when I say that the only things likely to get done would be those orders which would serve the good of the greatest number of people, but who profited from the skyrocketing prices of oil? Who quietly consented?
Can you picture a world where the kind of bu11$h!t that came out of George Dubya Bush's mouth during his reign would never be tolerated, or condoned, or even excused?

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

*Both in regards to my previous post, and to these quotes, I think you all should know that, as far as I am concerned, I call him 'the late Sir Paul Smith' to my friends. He fought with his intellect - tirelessly, at great cost to his livelihood, and to his death, if I'm not mistaken - to protect people from being victimized and treated as resources. He clearly and eloquently defended our rights. He represented the vast majority of us. If more people were as thoughtful, as unafraid to speak for the masses at their own expense, as tireless against the steady stream of bu11$h!t, as careful with their words, and as humble as he ...

We'd be better people, and we'd be better off.

Y'know, there was a time when I thought I would get tired of fighting my speeding tickets - shortly before I visited this website. I still think of him - and all of you - every time I fight one. I also take the time to talk to others who are answering the court's summons. Every time I successfully help someone who got caught in a speedtrap or a stoptrap negotiate or argue for a lower fine, or for less points on their license, I'm not doing it against 'the system', I feel compelled to help my fellow man to my best capacity, as I'm sure Sir Paul Smith did when he spoke up for us.

If he isn't a knight, he is certainly an example from which we have much to learn. Preserving his body of work in general, and his last words in particular, would be much more than just for posterity. Acting on them, and their underlying inspirations, would serve our growth, betterment, and progress toward real liberty.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

If they were to go on strike, it is very likely that the root cause[s] would be either their perception of being treated unfairly, or asked to do something so offensive, that they cannot resist the urge to dissent.

In either case, it can certainly be said that those who give them such cause[s] suffer from a lack of morality, ethics, responsibility, and empathy.

How unfortunate that there are not more devices in place to prevent such unfair treatments and orders.

If a strike is a reaction, and strikes are not to be employed by those who directly tend to the defense and betterment of all our lives, then what precautions should they be taking? How can they employ foresight to their advantage, and in our defense?

Scanny,I wish you good luck as well. I hope that 'going up through the ranks', in your case, serves to preserve and heighten your considerable empathy.What does that say about what we truly value as a society?

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

Hey .. we are not allowed to strike. We are supposed to negotiate our lot in life


Personally .. I have never had any gripes about pay/conditions. I think OK overall comapred to other jobs in all reality.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

Maybe that will come when people wake up to what's going on, a "true" knight if ever there was one.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

does that view take into account the changes in the job? my grandad was a dog handler and while that job may or may not have changed much (i dont know), the role of the average bobby certainly has. police officer/social worker/counsellor/who knows what else seems to be the more relevant job title these days. i know from rumour (reliable but confidential source) that FLO is a tough job that creates a lot of sick leave due to stress. i can understand a police officer passing on the news should the worst happen but surely it should then be the job of a bereavement counsellor from then on. no offence to the officers but everyone has their limits and it sure as hell isnt something i expect from the police. i actually resent the fact that my taxes are spent in that way. i expect the police to fight crime and they cant do that if they are taken off the streets to do someone elses job.

_________________
Richie

SSAFA supporter
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=126025031585