Glad I'm not a northerner

JRS · 25 Jan 2006 at 16:27

Morba - frankly, I think you should be close to a metal barrier if you're going to **** up at speed. Maybe it'd focus the concentration a tad more if there were spikes there.

The_Dark_Side · 25 Jan 2006 at 18:08

Adz said:
Didn't the Conservatives do that last time? They still lost!

IIRC they promised to look at every camera site again....not remove any.

The Running Man · 25 Jan 2006 at 18:15

as long as they are doing a genuine 70mph and not an indicated 70mph i dont forsee an issue?

the law says 70mph maximum, u shouldnt really be needing to go faster than this, unless u want to break the law?

Lopéz · 25 Jan 2006 at 18:16

Nickg said:
as long as they are doing a genuine 70mph and not an indicated 70mph i dont forsee an issue?

the law says 70mph maximum, u shouldnt really be needing to go faster than this, unless u want to break the law?

And some people want to break the law.

Enforcing the law is the job of the Police force, not civilians.

Adz · 25 Jan 2006 at 18:22

Nickg said:
as long as they are doing a genuine 70mph and not an indicated 70mph i dont forsee an issue?

the law says 70mph maximum, u shouldnt really be needing to go faster than this, unless u want to break the law?

That's a very naive response. Have you ever driven on a motorway? If everybody stuck to 70, cars in the outside lane would be travelling no faster than those in the middle lane and often the inside lane. People would undertake rather than change lanes and it would end up in a complete mess, as it often does when the motorways are congested.

...and as Lopez says, it's really not their place to 'enforce' the speed limit.

Will Gill · 25 Jan 2006 at 18:25

personally I follow one of these twonks that "applied" wait till he filled up with petrol and give him an atomic wedgy

I would then follow him again (at 70mph) and wait for him to stop, follow him out of the car and give him another atomic wedgy, at this point his blue Y fronts would probably have broken due to the force of my wedgy giving ability. I would have planned on this and quickly furnish him with a new pair or pants (he would put them on, not me)

I would then follow him (at 70mph) wait for him to fill up with petrol or purchase "I love being a twonk weekly" then just as he pays for the purchase I would sneakily give him a huge atomic wedgy and laugh when he thanks the shop keeper in a shrill ultra sonic reply.

this would carry on until he saw the error of his ways or his body is split in two, at which point I would have to do two things

a) hire an assistant to follow the other half
b) come up with a painful school yard related bully tactic that didnt involve atmoic wedgys because said person no longer has the ability to receive one

Lopéz · 25 Jan 2006 at 18:27

An atomic wedgie would definitely put me off being a jobsworth.

Will Gill · 25 Jan 2006 at 18:28

Lopéz said:
An atomic wedgie would definitely put me off being a jobsworth.

you knows it

Firestar_3x · 25 Jan 2006 at 18:29

Nice

[TW]Fox · 25 Jan 2006 at 18:31

What sort of person would actually sign up for this?

I have visions of Dark_Side driving around with a sticker in his window

The Running Man · 25 Jan 2006 at 18:36

Lopéz said:
And some people want to break the law.

Enforcing the law is the job of the Police force, not civilians.

distinction - they are not enforcing the law, merely adhering to the law!

if society forgets its moral responsibilities and denies its own laws, then we will end up in a grave state indeed.

and no i am not that naive, i drive 30miles per day, 25 of which are motorway, and last years i was driving in excess of 50 miles per day on the motorway, and even i know its possible to adhere to the law despite owning a relatively nice car,

Will Gill · 25 Jan 2006 at 18:41

well let everyone be warned , I shall be administering atomic wedgies to all who "adhere" to the speed limits too

I might pick people up by their side burns too if they sit in the fast lane at 70mph when the rest of the motorway is empty.

Firestar_3x · 25 Jan 2006 at 18:42

Will Gill said:
well let everyone be warned , I shall be administering atomic wedgies to all who "adhere" to the speed limits too

I might pick people up by their side burns too if they sit in the fast lane at 70mph when the rest of the motorway is empty.

What about middle lane hogs, they also deserve punishment!

Dolph · 25 Jan 2006 at 18:44

Nickg said:
distinction - they are not enforcing the law, merely adhering to the law!

if society forgets its moral responsibilities and denies its own laws, then we will end up in a grave state indeed.

and no i am not that naive, i drive 30miles per day, 25 of which are motorway, and last years i was driving in excess of 50 miles per day on the motorway, and even i know its possible to adhere to the law despite owning a relatively nice car,

You have seen the most recent opinion polls regarding speeding and speed enforcement, right?

http://www.pistonheads.com/speed/default.asp?storyId=12968

for example?

The implied social contract given by laws only works when the law is being enforced with support of the people and thats something the current speeding laws totally fail.

If most people disagree with the way the law is being enforced, is the law still valid under your "moral responsibility" definition?

Adz · 25 Jan 2006 at 18:44

Nickg said:
distinction - they are not enforcing the law, merely adhering to the law!

They're enforcing it if they purposely block the path of someone wishing to travel faster as the original article implies. If they're just adhering to the speed limit, presumably they were doing this previously and thus there is no need for the sticker?

and no i am not that naive, i drive 30miles per day, 25 of which are motorway, and last years i was driving in excess of 50 miles per day on the motorway, and even i know its possible to adhere to the law despite owning a relatively nice car,

The car you drive makes no odds. My point is that nowadays all modern cars are capable of holding 70mph and the majority of people (with the obvious exceptions) travel at at least that speed on the motorway. If everyone adhered to the speed limit, it would be mayhem - the outer 2/3 lanes would be travelling at the same speed!

Edit: Liking the wedgie idea a lot

Firestar_3x · 25 Jan 2006 at 18:47

Not exactly a newsflash but hardly anyone sticks to 70, holding everyone back to this speed will cause chaos, the differential in peoples speed makes for a less congested motorway imho.

lordedmond · 25 Jan 2006 at 18:48

i thought that the highway codes states/stated that you may pass on the left if the lane that you are in is traveling faster that the lane on the right, but you cannot change lane to pass on the left

Firestar_3x · 25 Jan 2006 at 18:51

If the right lane is doing 65 you can pass on the left doing 70, however if your in the right lane doing 65 and pull left to pass at 70 this is no acceptable.

The Running Man · 25 Jan 2006 at 18:52

Dolph said:
If most people disagree with the way the law is being enforced, is the law still valid under your "moral responsibility" definition?

so because people dont agree it shouldnt be enforced? the law is the law until it is challenged and changed by the appropriate means?

ADZ -

you are implying that the maximum speed limit is also a minimum speed limit and that everyone shoudl do 70mph regardless? u may percieve the law to work like that. it doesnt.

Dolph · 25 Jan 2006 at 18:59

Nickg said:
so because people dont agree it shouldnt be enforced? the law is the law until it is challenged and changed by the appropriate means?

The thing with the speeding law is that it never was enforced how it is now until a few years ago. The law has always been written as an absolute, but enforcement was much more discretionary, and the police had the public support.

Since the government's decision to sod road safety in favour of raising money and demand the police practice strict enforcement, that's where the law has started to be disliked.

So who is at fault? The public or the state for changing the rules?

Also where has anyone said the law shouldn't be enforced? The real question is should civilians be paid to break the highway code and increase the dangers on the roads?