Interesting speed check results

Discussion in 'UK and Europe' started by Trevor Barton, Feb 9, 2005.

  1. JLB

    JLB Guest

    Ambrose Nankivell wrote:
    > Trevor Barton wrote:
    >
    >> On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 02:17:28 -0000, Ambrose Nankivell wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> I'd also welcome suggestions as to how to tactfully tell friends and
    >>> acquaintances that they got their just deserts when caught speeding,
    >>> driving in a bus lane or other similar things,

    >>
    >>
    >> Bollox to that, just tell them it serves them right for being a
    >> criminal. That's what I've done.

    >
    >
    > The question is how to do it in a way that makes *them* seem to be in
    > the wrong, not *me* for being rude.


    Socratic dialogue might get you there. The idea would be to avoid
    confronting the person with your contrary opinion, but to ask simple,
    polite questions in such a way that you lead them to the inescapable
    conclusion that getting caught and punished is the correct outcome for
    people who break the law.

    --
    Joe * If I cannot be free I'll be cheap
     


  2. Simon Brooke

    Simon Brooke Guest

    in message <[email protected]>, Ambrose Nankivell
    ('$firstname+'n'@gmail.com') wrote:

    > I'd also welcome suggestions as to how to tactfully tell friends and
    > acquaintances that they got their just deserts when caught speeding,


    Why do you feel the need to be tactful about it? Would you feel a
    similar need if they'd been caught embezzling, for example, or
    shoplifting? It's this 'need to be tactful' (not just on your part, of
    course) which allows people to go on thinking speeding is 'not a real
    crime'.

    --
    [email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

    ;; single speed mountain bikes: for people who cycle on flat mountains.
     
  3. Simon Brooke

    Simon Brooke Guest

    in message <[email protected]>, Trevor Barton
    ('[email protected]') wrote:

    > Ok, I'll admit
    > that there are greater and lesser crimes, perhaps overall speeding
    > isn't in the same class as murder or rape (although you might
    > argue that speeding kills as many people as murder does in the
    > UK each year),


    Exactly. It does. It is, in effect, a more serious crime - not because
    the individual act is more serious, but because, unlike murder, people
    (including me) engage in it thoughtlessly and casually. We all have to
    get rid of this idea that it's OK.

    --
    [email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

    Hobbit ringleader gives Sauron One in the Eye.
     
  4. JLB <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Ambrose Nankivell wrote:
    >> Trevor Barton wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 02:17:28 -0000, Ambrose Nankivell wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> I'd also welcome suggestions as to how to tactfully tell friends and
    >>>> acquaintances that they got their just deserts when caught speeding,
    >>>> driving in a bus lane or other similar things,
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Bollox to that, just tell them it serves them right for being a
    >>> criminal. That's what I've done.

    >>
    >>
    >> The question is how to do it in a way that makes *them* seem to be in
    >> the wrong, not *me* for being rude.

    >
    > Socratic dialogue might get you there. The idea would be to avoid
    > confronting the person with your contrary opinion, but to ask simple,
    > polite questions in such a way that you lead them to the inescapable
    > conclusion that getting caught and punished is the correct outcome for
    > people who break the law.
    >


    Bah! When that fails, scrape their goolies with a cheese grater :)

    --
    Trevor Barton
     
  5. Ambrose Nankivell <$firstname+'n'@gmail.com> wrote:
    > Trevor Barton wrote:
    >> On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 15:41:36 -0000, Ambrose Nankivell wrote:
    >>> Trevor Barton wrote:
    >>>> On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 02:17:28 -0000, Ambrose Nankivell wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I'd also welcome suggestions as to how to tactfully tell friends
    >>>>> and acquaintances that they got their just deserts when caught
    >>>>> speeding, driving in a bus lane or other similar things,
    >>>>
    >>>> Bollox to that, just tell them it serves them right for being a
    >>>> criminal. That's what I've done.
    >>>
    >>> The question is how to do it in a way that makes *them* seem to be
    >>> in the wrong, not *me* for being rude.

    >>
    >> Hang on, it might perhaps be an abrupt way to do it, but it's
    >> nevertheless true. If they were house burglars and were caught
    >> at it would you be too concerned about being rude?

    >
    > It might be true, but is it the best way to stop them doing it? That's the
    > main reason I don't want to be rude, not so much to avoid giving offence.


    Mmmmmmmm. It's hard to continue my pointless rants when you keep snipping
    them off! :)

    --
    Trevor Barton
     
  6. Ian Smith

    Ian Smith Guest

    On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Ambrose Nankivell <$firstname+'n'@gmail.com> wrote:
    > Trevor Barton wrote:
    > > On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 02:17:28 -0000, Ambrose Nankivell wrote:
    > >>
    > >> I'd also welcome suggestions as to how to tactfully tell friends and
    > >> acquaintances that they got their just deserts when caught speeding,
    > >> driving in a bus lane or other similar things,

    > >
    > > Bollox to that, just tell them it serves them right for being a
    > > criminal. That's what I've done.

    >
    > The question is how to do it in a way that makes *them* seem to be in the
    > wrong, not *me* for being rude.


    I find something like "well, how fast _were_ you going?" or similar is
    effective enough. Almost invariably they have to respond to this in
    the defensive.

    regards, Ian SMith
    --
    |\ /| no .sig
    |o o|
    |/ \|
     
  7. > Bah! When that fails, scrape their goolies with a cheese grater :)

    Eugh, that's little unnecessary. I think the group favoured measure is a
    relatively clean snip with some blunt, rusty bolt cutters. Punishment,
    deterrence and pro-active prevention all in one.
     
  8. David Martin

    David Martin Guest

    Simon Brooke wrote:
    > in message <[email protected]>, Ambrose Nankivell
    > ('$firstname+'n'@gmail.com') wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I'd also welcome suggestions as to how to tactfully tell friends and
    >>acquaintances that they got their just deserts when caught speeding,

    >
    >
    > Why do you feel the need to be tactful about it? Would you feel a
    > similar need if they'd been caught embezzling, for example, or
    > shoplifting? It's this 'need to be tactful' (not just on your part, of
    > course) which allows people to go on thinking speeding is 'not a real
    > crime'.
    >

    How about 'would you mind slowing down a bit? I had a friend who had a
    really bad crash and I get nervous when I go too fast in a car'?

    It is even better if it is true.. (is for me..)

    ...d
     
  9. James Annan

    James Annan Guest

    Simon Brooke wrote:


    >
    > Exactly. It does. It is, in effect, a more serious crime - not because
    > the individual act is more serious, but because, unlike murder, people
    > (including me) engage in it thoughtlessly and casually. We all have to
    > get rid of this idea that it's OK.


    Why not just accept that 10 deaths a day is a price well worth paying
    for our freedom to travel? Remember that a substantial proportion of
    those are just numpties wrapping themselves round trees, too.

    James
    (fire extinguisher and asbestos underwear in place)
    --
    If I have seen further than others, it is
    by treading on the toes of giants.
    http://www.ne.jp/asahi/julesandjames/home/
     
  10. JohnB

    JohnB Guest

    James Annan wrote:

    > Why not just accept that 10 deaths a day is a price well worth paying
    > for our freedom to travel? Remember that a substantial proportion of
    > those are just numpties wrapping themselves round trees, too.


    Can i help you? You seem to be lost.
    If you are looking for your friends they are on uk.tosspot ---> --->
    ---> ---> --->

    John B
     
  11. On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 21:53:22 +0000, JohnB wrote:

    > James Annan wrote:
    >
    >> Why not just accept that 10 deaths a day is a price well worth paying
    >> for our freedom to travel? Remember that a substantial proportion of
    >> those are just numpties wrapping themselves round trees, too.

    >
    > Can i help you? You seem to be lost.
    > If you are looking for your friends they are on uk.tosspot ---> --->
    > ---> ---> --->


    Do you honestly believe it's possible to have any kind of mechanised
    transport system without fatalities?
    --
    Michael MacClancy
     
  12. David Martin

    David Martin Guest

    Michael MacClancy wrote:
    > On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 21:53:22 +0000, JohnB wrote:
    >
    >
    >>James Annan wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Why not just accept that 10 deaths a day is a price well worth paying
    >>>for our freedom to travel? Remember that a substantial proportion of
    >>>those are just numpties wrapping themselves round trees, too.

    >>
    >>Can i help you? You seem to be lost.
    >>If you are looking for your friends they are on uk.tosspot ---> --->
    >>---> ---> --->

    >
    >
    > Do you honestly believe it's possible to have any kind of mechanised
    > transport system without fatalities?


    Do you honestly believe that the only possible number of fatalities
    below 10 per day is zero?

    ...d
     
  13. JohnB

    JohnB Guest

    Michael MacClancy wrote:
    >
    > On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 21:53:22 +0000, JohnB wrote:
    >
    > > James Annan wrote:
    > >
    > >> Why not just accept that 10 deaths a day is a price well worth paying
    > >> for our freedom to travel? Remember that a substantial proportion of
    > >> those are just numpties wrapping themselves round trees, too.

    > >
    > > Can i help you? You seem to be lost.
    > > If you are looking for your friends they are on uk.tosspot ---> --->
    > > ---> ---> --->

    >
    > Do you honestly believe it's possible to have any kind of mechanised
    > transport system without fatalities?


    Are you happy that 10 die each day so that motorists can be 'free to travel'?

    John B
     
  14. Simon Brooke

    Simon Brooke Guest

    in message <[email protected]>, Michael
    MacClancy ('[email protected]') wrote:

    > On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 21:53:22 +0000, JohnB wrote:
    >
    >> James Annan wrote:
    >>
    >>> Why not just accept that 10 deaths a day is a price well worth
    >>> paying for our freedom to travel? Remember that a substantial
    >>> proportion of those are just numpties wrapping themselves round
    >>> trees, too.

    >>
    >> Can i help you? You seem to be lost.
    >> If you are looking for your friends they are on uk.tosspot ---> --->
    >> ---> ---> --->

    >
    > Do you honestly believe it's possible to have any kind of mechanised
    > transport system without fatalities?


    _Any form_? Yes. Any form involving speeds greater than walking pace, or
    vehicles weighing more than 50% of average body weight? No. But the
    probability of injury does increase with kinetic energy (actually, the
    possibility of serious injury increases approximately with the SQUARE
    of kinetic energy) so the heavier and faster the vehicles, the greater
    the likelihood of deaths.

    --
    [email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

    ;; When all else fails, read the distractions.
     
  15. Jon Senior

    Jon Senior Guest

    Michael MacClancy wrote:
    > Do you honestly believe it's possible to have any kind of mechanised
    > transport system without fatalities?


    Yes!

    I certainly think that on a ground based, point-to-point system it
    should be possible for the number to be less than 10 per day! Even 1 per
    day would strike me as a failure.

    As has been noted by many others, if the same over-reaction of the rail
    system to any accident was applied to cars then I suspect we'd see speed
    limiters in place already, considerably better road layout design and
    quite possibly a major reduction in the number of cars on the road.

    Do you honestly believe that 10 deaths per day is the price for "freedom"?

    Jon
     
  16. On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 22:33:21 +0000, JohnB wrote:

    > Michael MacClancy wrote:
    >>
    >> On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 21:53:22 +0000, JohnB wrote:
    >>
    >>> James Annan wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Why not just accept that 10 deaths a day is a price well worth paying
    >>>> for our freedom to travel? Remember that a substantial proportion of
    >>>> those are just numpties wrapping themselves round trees, too.
    >>>
    >>> Can i help you? You seem to be lost.
    >>> If you are looking for your friends they are on uk.tosspot ---> --->
    >>> ---> ---> --->

    >>
    >> Do you honestly believe it's possible to have any kind of mechanised
    >> transport system without fatalities?

    >
    > Are you happy that 10 die each day so that motorists can be 'free to travel'?
    >
    > John B


    I'm not happy about it but I do accept that there's risk associated with
    most things in life. As James pointed out, a substantial proportion of the
    fatalities are motorists. You should ask them if their deaths are a price
    worth paying.

    I can't understand the rudeness of your comment to James.
    --
    Michael MacClancy
     
  17. Jon Senior

    Jon Senior Guest

    Michael MacClancy wrote:
    > I can't understand the rudeness of your comment to James.


    uk.tosspot = uk.transport in this world. Does that make it less rude in
    your eyes?

    Jon
     
  18. LSMike

    LSMike Guest

    James Annan wrote:

    > Why not just accept that 10 deaths a day is a price well worth paying


    > for our freedom to travel? Remember that a substantial proportion of
    > those are just numpties wrapping themselves round trees, too.
    >


    Doesn't anyone think that James might be a little tongue in cheek?
     
  19. JohnB

    JohnB Guest

    Michael MacClancy wrote:
    >
    > On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 22:33:21 +0000, JohnB wrote:
    >
    > > Michael MacClancy wrote:
    > >>
    > >> On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 21:53:22 +0000, JohnB wrote:
    > >>
    > >>> James Annan wrote:
    > >>>
    > >>>> Why not just accept that 10 deaths a day is a price well worth paying
    > >>>> for our freedom to travel? Remember that a substantial proportion of
    > >>>> those are just numpties wrapping themselves round trees, too.
    > >>>
    > >>> Can i help you? You seem to be lost.
    > >>> If you are looking for your friends they are on uk.tosspot ---> --->
    > >>> ---> ---> --->
    > >>
    > >> Do you honestly believe it's possible to have any kind of mechanised
    > >> transport system without fatalities?

    > >
    > > Are you happy that 10 die each day so that motorists can be 'free to travel'?
    > >
    > > John B

    >
    > I'm not happy about it but I do accept that there's risk associated with
    > most things in life. As James pointed out, a substantial proportion of the
    > fatalities are motorists. You should ask them if their deaths are a price
    > worth paying.


    uk.tosspot (aka uk.transport) is the pit where this discussion regularly
    gets aired.
    Many of its inhabitants would seem to accept an even higher number of
    fatalities rather than accept any curbs on their driving behaviour.

    > I can't understand the rudeness of your comment to James.


    It was NOT a rude comment to James. I suggest you read his post.
    James is a respected poster on this group, and unless I am mistaken
    James was being a little tongue in cheek, as Mike also noted.

    I'd watch where you put your feet.

    John B
     
  20. dkahn400

    dkahn400 Guest

    Michael MacClancy wrote:
    > On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 21:53:22 +0000, JohnB wrote:
    > > James Annan wrote:
    > >
    > >> Why not just accept that 10 deaths a day is a price well worth
    > >> paying for our freedom to travel? Remember that a substantial
    > >> proportion of those are just numpties wrapping themselves round
    > >> trees, too.

    > >
    > > Can i help you? You seem to be lost.
    > > If you are looking for your friends they are on uk.tosspot
    > > ---> ---> ---> ---> --->

    > Do you honestly believe it's possible to have any kind of mechanised
    > transport system without fatalities?


    No, it's not possible to have a practical transport system with zero
    fatalities. The point about the 10 deaths a day, however, is that most
    of them are not the unavoidable consequence of the transport system,
    but rather the result of idiotic driving, usually involving excess
    speed.

    --
    Dave...
     
Loading...
Loading...