Nuxx:J1h0t9$8t4$1@dont-email.me

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!news1.google.com!npeer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!news2.euro.net!feeder.news-service.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Ding Dong  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: More driver wriggling Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2011 16:06:16 +0100 References: <7c811ade-136f-4ff9-aa31-19ea91014cfb@z14g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>    <1bvn37paeo7v786qi7rr02etvdtsabnibh@4ax.com> Lines: 99 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Reply-To: ding@dong.invalid Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2011 15:06:17 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="8psORfuBq3je/hVXnlNHEQ"; logging-data="9124"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+UIrBKx6IxPJNYhppi46JOtHAmslooKPU=" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0 In-Reply-To: <1bvn37paeo7v786qi7rr02etvdtsabnibh@4ax.com> Cancel-Lock: sha1:gdyThfl2k6WRDHeXA6tWh5UOay8= Bytes: 6127 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:820604

On 05/08/2011 15:27, Phil W Lee wrote: > Ding Dong  considered Fri, 05 Aug 2011 09:39:08 > +0100 the perfect time to write: > >> On 05/08/2011 01:15, Phil W Lee wrote: >>> "Jolly polly"  considered Thu, 4 Aug 2011 23:08:51 >>> +0100 the perfect time to write: >>> >>>> >>>> "Simon Mason"  wrote in message >>>> news:7c811ade-136f-4ff9-aa31-19ea91014cfb@z14g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... >>>>> Driver who was done for driving without due care and attention, >>>>> represents himself in court and adopts the kitchen sink approach. >>>>> >>>>> First attempt - "Cyclists was on the pavement" >>>>> No, he wasn't - try again. >>>>> >>>>> Second go - "OK, he was on the road but travelling "too fast"." >>>>> Nope - have another go. >>>>> >>>>> Third attempt. >>>>> "Well, the sun was in my eyes and I couldn't see" >>>>> Sorry - that won't wash either- kerching. >>>>> >>>>> http://www.eastbourneherald.co.uk/news/local-news/driver_is_fined_after_knocking_cyclist_off_road_1_2925908 >>>> >>>> Well what about compensation for injuries, trauma, time off work, damage >>>> caused to mental health and bicycle? >>> >>> Unfortunately, our wonderful legal system forces the victim to take >>> responsibility for taking action to recover all those losses. >>>> >>>> IMHO this sort of driver should not be allowed to hold a driving license, it >>>> should have been withdrawn (if possible). >>> >>> It's possible alright, but rarely actually done. >>> Still, he got 4 points, which means he can do this twice more in any >>> three year period before being banned (and then only for 6 months). >>> The system seems to be aimed at ensuring that very little can be done >>> to impede the ability of shit drivers to cause maximum mayhem. >> >> OK, fine: punish the genuinely dangerous drivers more, by all means. >> And stop giving out ridiculously harsh punishments for trivial >> violations like exceeding pointless speed limits and parking on >> pointless double yellows. Deal? Thought not. Discouraging normal, >> generally law-abiding, safe drivers from getting into the car is just >> too much of a pull for you, isn't it? >> >>> Now if they changed it to 1 point = one month ban, and retained the >>> totting up rules but for a permanent ban, that would be reasonable. >> >> A 3-month ban, with the risk to employment and everything else that goes >> with it, for exceeding a stupid speed limit which was set by a >> car-hating councillor against government guidelines. Well done, that's >> one of your best ever. Why not just go the whole hog and say that you >> want all drivers to be banned forever (you know, the thing that you >> really want)? > > If people were aware that they would get an automatic 3 month ban for > speeding, they wouldn't do it.

Really? Homosexual acts carry the death penalty in Iran. They are still common.

People may not speed as *often* if there was an automatic 3-month ban, but that wouldn't make things safer, as they would be utterly paranoid about a silly number on a dial to the almost complete exclusion of anything else (like actually driving safely). It would be an absolute nightmare for every road user. Any driver who was anywhere near the speed limit would be a nervous wreck in case they drifted over...and for what benefit?

It's not reasonable to expect someone to serve a 3-month ban for 79mph on an empty motorway at night. That is clearly, and massively, disproportionate. You could attempt to justify any disproportionate penalty by saying "Ah, but if we had that penalty then people wouldn't commit the offence concerned". That doesn't make the penalty right. Punishments for different offences need to be kept in proportion to each other, otherwise our justice system becomes meaningless, useless, and a laughing stock (like your friend Chapman).

For example, if we gave people a mandatory 50 years in jail for spitting on the pavement, then few people would do it anymore, but does that justify making the penalty for it higher (usually) than that for murder?

> There are many people who manage to drive their whole lives without > ever paying the idiot tax of a speeding fine

And how many of them do you think didn't speed their whole lives, as opposed to speeding but having the luck not to get caught? Do you ever speed? Well?

>, so those that don't > clearly need a stronger incentive.

...whether or not there is any real safety benefit.

You didn't answer my point about you wanting everyone to stop driving, did you? Don't be shy now.