From: boltar2003 on
On 1 Jul 2010 10:26:14 GMT
Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>If the law is the law and to be obeyed because it's the law, then...

Traffic laws have - thankfully - always been enforced rather flexibly
since its quite easy to go a few mph over the limit by mistake. Its rather
harder to nick something from a shop by mistake despite Richard Madeley
trying to convince us otherwise a few years back.

B2003

From: bod on
Adrian wrote:
> bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
> saying:
>
>>>>>>>> I never ever exceed any speed limit by more than a few mph - and I
>>>>>>>> believe that people who drive considerably in excess of the speed
>>>>>>>> limits deserve to get booked.
>
>>>>>>> Regardless of conditions?
>
>>>>>> Regardless of conditions. They know what the limit is. If they are
>>>>>> stupid enough to risk prosecution and a ban by driving well in
>>>>>> excess of that limit then, yes, they deserve to be be booked. The
>>>>>> police allow a generous margin before prosecution - exceeding that
>>>>>> by a large margin is really just taking the mick.
>
>>>> Well, that's his point of view and to be fair, it's hard to argue
>>>> against it, because technically he's correct.
>
>>> Maybe, maybe not. He's correct in that it's committing an offence -
>>> exceeding the speed limit. We could argue "deserve" all day - but ICBA.
>>>
>>> My point is that that's where he heads rapidly into hypocrisy - since
>>> he admits to frequently committing the exact same offence. Apparently,
>>> though, he _doesn't_ "deserve" to be nicked.
>
>> Technically, yes. In reality, no.
>
> In what way is exceeding the speed limit not the same as exceeding the
> speed limit?
>
> The exact same offence has been committed. Just as nicking a Twix from
> the newsagent is the same as nicking the till. Except that one is very
> unlikely to be actually prosecuted. Does that make it RIGHT?
>
> If the law is the law and to be obeyed because it's the law, then...
>
>

You're still being pedantic. The law 'allows' a small amount over the
speed limit.

Bod
From: mileburner on

<boltar2003(a)boltar.world> wrote in message
news:i0hr6p$k37$1(a)speranza.aioe.org...
> On 1 Jul 2010 10:26:14 GMT
> Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>If the law is the law and to be obeyed because it's the law, then...
>
> Traffic laws have - thankfully - always been enforced rather flexibly
> since its quite easy to go a few mph over the limit by mistake. Its rather
> harder to nick something from a shop by mistake despite Richard Madeley
> trying to convince us otherwise a few years back.

Yebbut... If the limit is an upper limit, not to be exceeded, common sense
suggests that to avoid going over that limit you should drive below the
limit. What we have though is a culture of "I won't get caught if I only go
over the limit a little" and a law enforcement system which actually allows
people to break the law if it is only a little bit. This is the thin end of
the wedge. What them happens is that it is generally considered OK to drive
a 35 in a 30 limit.

That actually makes a mockery out of speed limits. Stay below 100mph on the
motorway and you will probably keep your licence. Sheesh. What *is* the
point of a law system like that? <rolls eyes>


From: bod on
mileburner wrote:
> <boltar2003(a)boltar.world> wrote in message
> news:i0hr6p$k37$1(a)speranza.aioe.org...
>> On 1 Jul 2010 10:26:14 GMT
>> Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>> If the law is the law and to be obeyed because it's the law, then...
>> Traffic laws have - thankfully - always been enforced rather flexibly
>> since its quite easy to go a few mph over the limit by mistake. Its rather
>> harder to nick something from a shop by mistake despite Richard Madeley
>> trying to convince us otherwise a few years back.
>
> Yebbut... If the limit is an upper limit, not to be exceeded, common sense
> suggests that to avoid going over that limit you should drive below the
> limit. What we have though is a culture of "I won't get caught if I only go
> over the limit a little" and a law enforcement system which actually allows
> people to break the law if it is only a little bit. This is the thin end of
> the wedge. What them happens is that it is generally considered OK to drive
> a 35 in a 30 limit.
>
> That actually makes a mockery out of speed limits. Stay below 100mph on the
> motorway and you will probably keep your licence. Sheesh. What *is* the
> point of a law system like that? <rolls eyes>
>
>

Well, *those* are the laws and you've just mentioned them. They are
quite clear, so you or anyone else knows where the lines are drawn.
What's the problem with the clarity of them then?

Bod
From: Adrian on
bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

> Well, *those* are the laws and you've just mentioned them. They are
> quite clear, so you or anyone else knows where the lines are drawn.
> What's the problem with the clarity of them then?

There is none. To those who can comprehend the difference between "the
law" and some leeway in enforcing it.