|
|
Post by Handyman on Apr 3, 2023 10:09:16 GMT
As much as I dislike what the Officer is doing, as those two have been arrested or will be once the glue has been diluted and they are no longer stuck to the tarmac, the Officers have a duty of care to look after both of them, to avoid a complaint and possibly sued or whatever I don’t think that offering them fluids is the problem,it’s the insinuation from RedRum that they are a different category offender to speeding motorists because he believes their cause will save millions. I may agree with them on the need to protect the Environment I don't agree with their tactics and causing problems for the public trying to go about their business , as for those who do speed down to them if they get caught , speed restrictions were brought in for a good reason, even during lockdown when we could not travel fatal accidents cost and awful lot of lives 27,000 , and seriously injured which the NHS has to try and put back together. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2023 10:12:23 GMT
yes - the speed limits were quite reasonable about 30 years ago. The one weak area was perhaps the 30mph limits in areas like busy high streets. Indeed. Speed limits can be both too high or too low. The former is likely to be the case most often outside urban areas where say a national speed limit for single carriageway roads of 60mph applies even in places - eg sharp bends - where only an absolute nutter would think of trying to go so fast. In other areas, mostly in urban centres, speed limits can be too low for the road which results in them being widely flouted. In my own opinion, speed limits of 30mph are reasonable in most built up areas with cars parked on both sides and junctions. In fact I can think of some in my locale where 20mph would make more sense. But there are other areas, particularly urban duel carriageways or main arterial roads with little in the way of junctions, parked cars, and pedestrian crossings, where 30 is too low for the road, and 40, or even 50 might be more reasonable. But perhaps we should be moving away from speed limits as such which can take no account of climatic conditions or anything variable and refocus more on actual dangerous driving. Because in effect no matter how fast you are driving, if you can do it safely where is the problem? But if you are driving so fast for the road and conditions that it constitutes dangerous driving, then you are a problem that needs to be dealt with. For example, in good conditions it would be perfectly safe to do 90 on a motorway. But if it's blizzard conditions it would be highly dangerous to exceed 30. The inherent problem here of course is subjectivity, what constitutes dangerous driving in terms of speed is open to interpretation. At least with speed limits we all know what the law is. Which of course brings us back to the need to set them at reasonable levels. that's just it. When there no speed limits more people died. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Apr 3, 2023 10:14:38 GMT
A police officer giving water to Just Stop Oil protester Mark Coleman, who had glued his hands to a road just off the M25 in Grays, Essex during rush hour yesterday
🤣hardly a cup of tea.😂 Do you think people who break the law, as this person surely is, should be denied basic rights. Do you think these people are a different category of offenders or not? |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Apr 3, 2023 10:15:30 GMT
Again, people would go along with that and we would have policing by consent if the limits set in the first place were always reasonable. If the limits were reasonable? The limits are what they are they are [...] Is this a beginner's tutorial on how to miss the point and talk past the issue? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2023 10:35:20 GMT
Again, people would go along with that and we would have policing by consent if the limits set in the first place were always reasonable. If the limits were reasonable? The limits are what they are they are not set as a cash cow for councils, if you break the speed limit you know the consequences if you are caught. We all know the consequences of breaking any law if we are caught. Fact remains that in some places speed limits are set unreasonably low, and so are more widely flouted. And of course these locales tend to be the very places where speed camera vans lurk because they catch more people here. Under these circumstances, suspecting the raising of revenue to be a primary goal is not an unreasonable suspicion in the minds of many. It is indeed an inevitable one. This can be avoided if the speed limits are more reasonable for the road in the first place. Of course, if they were, fewer people would break them and less money would be raised. Which of course feeds into that inevitable suspicion again. Do you even understand the concept of policing by consent? Because when you start getting to a situation where a majority of people think a particular law is an ass, consent is effectively lost and the law is widely broken. And attempts to enforce the law anyway under such circumstances simply undermines public confidence in the law still further whilst breeding anti-establishmentarian animosity between public and police. Policing by consent where speed is concerned involves the setting and enforcing of speed limits that a broad majority agree with. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Apr 3, 2023 10:56:11 GMT
I may agree with them on the need to protect the Environment I don't agree with their tactics and causing problems for the public trying to go about their business , as for those who do speed down to them if they get caught , speed restrictions were brought in for a good reason, even during lockdown when we could not travel fatal accidents cost and awful lot of lives 27,000 , and seriously injured which the NHS has to try and put back together. The thing is Handyman, those idiots who block roads get away with it largely because 'we' the great British public, allow them to get away with it. I mentioned this a few weeks ago so if you read it then apologies for repeating myself. My son lives in France, he mentioned (This was last year) that idiots had attempted to stop traffic by sitting in the road, exactly the same as this country. However, the police were not required. Within minutes angry motorists had dragged them off the road and litterally thrown them over crash barriers. He said two minutes after the protest started traffic was flowing freely. We are far too polite in this country, I think it's time for a bit of direct action from the pissed off majority. |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Apr 3, 2023 10:58:53 GMT
If the limits were reasonable? The limits are what they are they are not set as a cash cow for councils, if you break the speed limit you know the consequences if you are caught. We all know the consequences of breaking any law if we are caught. Fact remains that in some places speed limits are set unreasonably low, and so are more widely flouted. And of course these locales tend to be the very places where speed camera vans lurk because they catch more people here. Under these circumstances, suspecting the raising of revenue to be a primary goal is not an unreasonable suspicion in the minds of many. It is indeed an inevitable one. This can be avoided if the speed limits are more reasonable for the road in the first place. Of course, if they were, fewer people would break them and less money would be raised. Which of course feeds into that inevitable suspicion again. Do you even understand the concept of policing by consent? Because when you start getting to a situation where a majority of people think a particular law is an ass, consent is effectively lost and the law is widely broken. And attempts to enforce the law anyway under such circumstances simply undermines public confidence in the law still further whilst breeding anti-establishmentarian animosity between public and police. Policing by consent where speed is concerned involves the setting and enforcing of speed limits that a broad majority agree with. Miles of roads in Lincolnshire have had their limits reduced from 60mph to 50mph though there's no evidence the roads have changed; I'm assuming the reason is the potholes will become more numerous and deeper. |
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Apr 3, 2023 12:11:53 GMT
I may agree with them on the need to protect the Environment I don't agree with their tactics and causing problems for the public trying to go about their business , as for those who do speed down to them if they get caught , speed restrictions were brought in for a good reason, even during lockdown when we could not travel fatal accidents cost and awful lot of lives 27,000 , and seriously injured which the NHS has to try and put back together. The thing is Handyman, those idiots who block roads get away with it largely because 'we' the great British public, allow them to get away with it. I mentioned this a few weeks ago so if you read it then apologies for repeating myself. My son lives in France, he mentioned (This was last year) that idiots had attempted to stop traffic by sitting in the road, exactly the same as this country. However, the police were not required. Within minutes angry motorists had dragged them off the road and litterally thrown them over crash barriers. He said two minutes after the protest started traffic was flowing freely. We are far too polite in this country, I think it's time for a bit of direct action from the pissed off majority. I agree with you I have no problem with the members of the public doing that |
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Apr 3, 2023 12:20:46 GMT
We all know the consequences of breaking any law if we are caught. Fact remains that in some places speed limits are set unreasonably low, and so are more widely flouted. And of course these locales tend to be the very places where speed camera vans lurk because they catch more people here. Under these circumstances, suspecting the raising of revenue to be a primary goal is not an unreasonable suspicion in the minds of many. It is indeed an inevitable one. This can be avoided if the speed limits are more reasonable for the road in the first place. Of course, if they were, fewer people would break them and less money would be raised. Which of course feeds into that inevitable suspicion again. Do you even understand the concept of policing by consent? Because when you start getting to a situation where a majority of people think a particular law is an ass, consent is effectively lost and the law is widely broken. And attempts to enforce the law anyway under such circumstances simply undermines public confidence in the law still further whilst breeding anti-establishmentarian animosity between public and police. Policing by consent where speed is concerned involves the setting and enforcing of speed limits that a broad majority agree with. Miles of roads in Lincolnshire have had their limits reduced from 60mph to 50mph though there's no evidence the roads have changed; I'm assuming the reason is the potholes will become more numerous and deeper. You could well be right, last thing I want to hit is a pothole at 30mph never mind 60mph , the problem I have is our Motorways are littered with all sort of rubbish, bits of metal fallen off the backs or lorries, bits of tyres hit something like that at 70mph and get an instant flat is not pleasant. What pisses me off is Hooray Henries or dopy Doris driving two tonnes of Chelsea Tractors doing 90mph or over coming up behind me flashing their lights when you are doing an overtake , they don't have a hope in hell of stopping quickly if they need to, accidents waiting to happen |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2023 12:25:57 GMT
We all know the consequences of breaking any law if we are caught. Fact remains that in some places speed limits are set unreasonably low, and so are more widely flouted. And of course these locales tend to be the very places where speed camera vans lurk because they catch more people here. Under these circumstances, suspecting the raising of revenue to be a primary goal is not an unreasonable suspicion in the minds of many. It is indeed an inevitable one. This can be avoided if the speed limits are more reasonable for the road in the first place. Of course, if they were, fewer people would break them and less money would be raised. Which of course feeds into that inevitable suspicion again. Do you even understand the concept of policing by consent? Because when you start getting to a situation where a majority of people think a particular law is an ass, consent is effectively lost and the law is widely broken. And attempts to enforce the law anyway under such circumstances simply undermines public confidence in the law still further whilst breeding anti-establishmentarian animosity between public and police. Policing by consent where speed is concerned involves the setting and enforcing of speed limits that a broad majority agree with. Miles of roads in Lincolnshire have had their limits reduced from 60mph to 50mph though there's no evidence the roads have changed; I'm assuming the reason is the potholes will become more numerous and deeper. In my locale of Plymouth, before they built the duel carriageway through the city in the early 80s, the A38 ran through urban areas. Some of it was still duel carriageway. All of it was considered a major arterial road. For most of it's length the speed limit was 60. When the duel carriageway was built, it replaced this latter road as the main route but it still remained a busy city road. Then for no good reason they made it single carriageway throughout it's entire length and reduced the limit to 50, then a few years later to 40. Within the last ten years it was reduced to 30. Another major road where the speed limit was 40, had it "temporarily" reduced to 30 whilst major road refurbishments were undertaken. Of course, it was never put back up to 40 again once the work was completed. One of the main roads into Plymouth from the east which used to have a limit of 50 and is duel carriageway for its entire length, had its limit reduced to 40 for no good reason. These are just examples of the sort of thing happening everywhere, pushed through by a coalition of car hating, muesli eating, bicycle riders on the one hand in cahoots with elderly local civil servants nearing the end of their career whose concept of speed is excessively cautious since they are some of the ones pottering around at a snails pace holding everyone else up and thinking everyone else wants to go too fast. There are calls for reducing the speed limit on the main duel carriageway through the city - an effective motorway in all but name - from 70 to 50 again for no good reason, by the aforementioned anti speed coalition of grandad driver civil servants and muesli-eating, car hating cyclists. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2023 12:37:10 GMT
Miles of roads in Lincolnshire have had their limits reduced from 60mph to 50mph though there's no evidence the roads have changed; I'm assuming the reason is the potholes will become more numerous and deeper. You could well be right, last thing I want to hit is a pothole at 30mph never mind 60mph , the problem I have is our Motorways are littered with all sort of rubbish, bits of metal fallen off the backs or lorries, bits of tyres hit something like that at 70mph and get an instant flat is not pleasant. What pisses me off is Hooray Henries or dopy Doris driving two tonnes of Chelsea Tractors doing 90mph or over coming up behind me flashing their lights when you are doing an overtake , they don't have a hope in hell of stopping quickly if they need to, accidents waiting to happen The latter is something I have seen happening. But most of the time I have seen it, it appears to be because the overtaking vehicle is barely exceeding the speed of the vehicle it is overtaking. If drivers are not travelling fast enough to overtake a slightly slower vehicle promptly, maybe they should not be overtaking it at all. Personally, I think it should be legal to temporarily exceed the speed limit on motorways by 5mph solely when overtaking, so that slower vehicles can be overtaken fairly promptly. I tend to put my foot down when overtaking anything, all the more so on single carriageway highways when other vehicles might start coming from the opposite direction whilst you are on their side of the road overtaking. The faster you can get past, the shorter the time on the wrong side of the road and the safer the overtake. Once past I will drop back to my original speed. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Apr 3, 2023 14:52:38 GMT
Again, people would go along with that and we would have policing by consent if the limits set in the first place were always reasonable. If the limits were reasonable? The limits are what they are they are not set as a cash cow for councils, if you break the speed limit you know the consequences if you are caught. That’s how some would like though,it’s not as though some have not made a fortune from bus lane/bus gate cameras and box junctions is it? www.localgov.co.uk/Council-blocked-by-DfT-over-unlawful-speed-enforcement/55596 |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Apr 3, 2023 15:35:53 GMT
You could well be right, last thing I want to hit is a pothole at 30mph never mind 60mph , the problem I have is our Motorways are littered with all sort of rubbish, bits of metal fallen off the backs or lorries, bits of tyres hit something like that at 70mph and get an instant flat is not pleasant. What pisses me off is Hooray Henries or dopy Doris driving two tonnes of Chelsea Tractors doing 90mph or over coming up behind me flashing their lights when you are doing an overtake , they don't have a hope in hell of stopping quickly if they need to, accidents waiting to happen The latter is something I have seen happening. But most of the time I have seen it, it appears to be because the overtaking vehicle is barely exceeding the speed of the vehicle it is overtaking. If drivers are not travelling fast enough to overtake a slightly slower vehicle promptly, maybe they should not be overtaking it at all. Personally, I think it should be legal to temporarily exceed the speed limit on motorways by 5mph solely when overtaking, so that slower vehicles can be overtaken fairly promptly.I tend to put my foot down when overtaking anything, all the more so on single carriageway highways when other vehicles might start coming from the opposite direction whilst you are on their side of the road overtaking. The faster you can get past, the shorter the time on the wrong side of the road and the safer the overtake. Once past I will drop back to my original speed. Two or three months ago I overtook one of those four passenger pick-up trucks so beloved by farmers up here. He'd been doing 30-40 with an occasional 60mph, probably due to him being on and off the phone. So when I got half a mile of clear road I overtook him but never exceeded 60 since I knew it was a favourite stealth van spot. Sure enough the van was there and no doubt the copper was taking delight in seeing me pull out to evertake but he would have been disappointed. I have, however, wondered whether they booked the other driver for going too slowly. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2023 15:46:43 GMT
The thing is Handyman, those idiots who block roads get away with it largely because 'we' the great British public, allow them to get away with it. I mentioned this a few weeks ago so if you read it then apologies for repeating myself. My son lives in France, he mentioned (This was last year) that idiots had attempted to stop traffic by sitting in the road, exactly the same as this country. However, the police were not required. Within minutes angry motorists had dragged them off the road and litterally thrown them over crash barriers. He said two minutes after the protest started traffic was flowing freely. We are far too polite in this country, I think it's time for a bit of direct action from the pissed off majority. I agree with you I have no problem with the members of the public doing that Part of the problem lies in another inherent difference between us and the French. Provided that no serious injury has been inflicted upon anyone, the French police would be much more inclined to let everyone get on with it, glad that they themselves have been saved the bother. Over here the police would divert even more resources from the non-investigation of burglaries and thefts, to go after the people taking the law into their own hands and prosecuting them. We know instinctively that this will happen in a way the French don't have to worry about. So our reluctance to act is understandable since the full force of the law will be used against us here if we do. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Apr 3, 2023 17:40:14 GMT
🤣hardly a cup of tea.😂 Do you think people who break the law, as this person surely is, should be denied basic rights. Do you think these people are a different category of offenders or not? Absolutely so am I, I am using a 20valve turbo running an insane amount of power and dodgy plates obviously, I am different. Ever since Sidney went around blocking off roads I am now on fast roads only, I get to race everyone to 60mph and they never win. |
|
