Distracted? Bloody hell, I would be.I hate the Grand Prix, its expense and its bombast. But that's not what this post is about. It's a tired old gripe of mine and I'm prepared to let it rest for now.
Further, I don't mind Mark Webber calling Australia a 'Nanny State'. After all, I've called it that myself occasionally. What I do object to is him lambasting the enforcement of law.
Speeding really can kill people. You shouldn't speed. It's dangerous. Also, according to the law, you're simply not allowed to exceed the speed limit. If you do, penalties apply. To suggest that penalties shouldn't apply is utterly preposterous. Why shouldn't they be? I don't think there's an adequate answer.
"But I was only doing 63 in a 60 zone!"
That's what speeding is! You know about speeding. You know there are penalties. Cop it.
"Er, I didn't know what the speed limit was."
Fuck off, twerp.
"It's just revenue raising".
No, it's not just revenue raising. Various other other penalties apply. Yes, revenue is raised, but, hey, here's an idea: don't speed and you won't contribute to revenue!
Perhaps we should call the incarceration of murderers "just prison filling".
Posts
26 comments:
Agreed. Why do people always think they should get off when they are only doing a few kms over the limit. If you're over - you're over.
To suggest that penalties shouldn't apply is utterly preposterous. Why shouldn't they be? I don't think there's an adequate answer.
"I was a few K over the limit at the point where the speed limit changed and was in the process of accelerating/decelerating."
"I was overtaking a truck/caravan/some cunt driving 20km under the limit."
"I was in a hurry to get to the hospital."
Others may not agree, but these all sound fairly reasonable to me. I basically agree with what you're saying, Bob, but I don't think a completely inflexible by-the-letter application of the law is such a wonderful thing in every instance. Maybe I'm just an anarchist.
Unfortunately topical for me right now Bob. Our (turned 20 in Jan) boy just lost his licence for six months for doing 108 km/h in a 60 zone. He was racing a friend and only just avoided a dangerous driving charge. A criminal, not traffic, offense.
Here's part of the exchange I had with him.
Me: I've been driving for 28 years mate and I would no more drive at that speed in a 60 zone than fly to the moon.
B20: Maybe I'm a better driver than you. It was really exciting and I don't regret it at all.
Me: You don't regret being an irresponsible fuckwit? Don't talk crap.
It went on to cover issues like whether he drives like that with his girlfriend or younger sister in the car. What would he say if he had an accident and they were hurt etc.
The hardest thing about boys and cars is trying to put an old head on young shoulders. You have to know people who've been killed or maimed in car accidents to realise how dangerous speeding really is.
It's disappointing to see a bloke like Webber giving kids (at 20 he's still a kid) an excuse to take ridiculous risks.
Not to mention poor old missus L is back to having to schlep them everywhere.
Sorry about the long comment. And I should close by saying he's mostly a good kid who is a great help to his mother.
Agreed. I was done for driving in a transit lane recently, and when the cop pulled me over, I think he expected me to argue with him. I had jumped into it to overtake someone, but that's beside the point. He seemed really surprised when I just accepted the ticket, smiled and thanked him and drove off. I broke the law, why shouldn't I be fined for it?
Warning: SMUG ALERT.
**
I have never got a speeding fine in my life. Why? I don't speed.
**
End smug transmission.
Snap, Persey
That's why the Family First Party sound so mentally defective when they say there shouldn't be any speed cameras. Maybe by Family First they mean you should hit a family first in your speeding car
Wari, kids eh
My comment disappeared!
But what I said was that my friend was standing on the footpath once, when a car speeding (65 in a 60 zone), hit another car, which then hit her. As a result she lost her leg.
The driver of the speeding vehicle got a $120 fine and my friend's life was never the same.
So I don't take any risks with speeding in case I wreck someone's life.
Indeed squib, indeed. He's mostly ok as I said, but boys and cars? Someone told me a statistic once that to halve the number of people under 21 killed in car accidents don't let boys under 21 have driver's licences. Don't know if it's true but they certainly seem to be over represented.
And Leilani, want to gve my son a call?
Oh Wari, I am not looking forward to my kids being old enough to drive. I think we are looking at ten straight years of puberty coming up as it is.
I have heard of people taking their kids for a walk through the trauma unit at the hospital to try and shock them into being more responsible drivers.
When my friend was in hospital after the accident it was bloody confronting. She was surrounded by road accident victims and it was pretty bloody hard going.
Apologies in advance for being a know-it-all parent, Wari, but why is Mrs L having to drive him everywhere? Let him catch the bus/train/walk/buy a bike. Then it might be more of a consequence. Sounds like he needs an attitude adjustment and a bit of "inconvenience" might help him with that.
Parents are too soft these days. Maybe Webber's mummy drove him everywhere too at the age of 20.
And by the way. Read some of the comments to that Age article you. I think they frightened me more than the two idiots Webb and Hamilton.
Puppies, what a pair..... I wonder if the glasses are a prop?
I've only been done once for the speeding thing, I was doing one of those 63 in a 60 zones - on Kingsway going from home in St K to a mates in Pascoe Vale South . My first thought was bugger another bill to pay (it turned up in the mail). My second thought was how funny in an ironic kind of way it was, so close but just over, cause you know if you hit someone at 63 or at 60 - the person would have pretty much the same amount of damage or death wouldnt they, and you cant have different levels of dead can you. But you've gotta draw a line somewhere dont you, and I paid my fine like a good little chickadee, cause I was probably doing it, and if I wasnt that time, I sure as hell was lots of other times.
Sounds like Leilianis friend was terribly unlikely though, but would 5km made much of difference? I cant really tell the difference between 65 and 60 when I'm standing on the footpath watching the cars go by.
People are just massive whingers, and will whine about anything, I was door bitching at a charity gig last night, and the amount of rude angry pricks I had to deal with who thought they were too good to pay was disgusting.
Maybe the solution is to have every irresponsible bastard caught speeding subjected to a "right bollocking" from an an Essex Primary School Student. It's worked in the recent past.
Quite, Mr E, quite.
And I accepted that punishment with the good grace it deserved.
Devonport drivers are cunts.
Why single out Devonport?
Let's hear it for Tassy drivers in general!
With the possible exclusion of Ms. Shorts.
Because I'm not in Tassie anymore? I'm sure that's what you mean. I'm an ace driver. (That's a lie. I'm a shit driver, but I don't drive anymore so that makes up for it.)
Devonport drivers are pricks.
Burnie drivers are very ... slow, and polite.
And it's Miss, thankyouverymuch.
I was a fairly irresponsible driver until recently when my pregnant cousin's husband was killed, through his own stupidity.
Now i'm trying to be more patient. Its bloody hard to change old habits though.
I have never got a speeding fine in my life. Why? I don't speed.
My Mum would say the same thing. Except she once got booked for momentarily exceeding the speed limit while overtaking a cattle truck on the highway (one lane either way) a hundred miles from the nearest town.
Are you sure you never ever speed, Perseus?
The only time I ever got done for speeding was 80 in a 60 zone in the lower Blue Mountains (20 years ago). The main road up to Katoomba goes from an 80 zone to a 60 all the way up, being 60 in the shopping centres and more built up areas. Rather frustrating at 5am to be slowing down to 60 when there's not a soul around. The Lower Blue Mtns police are very vigilant I might add so if you're ever up there, don't speed.
Nowadays I'm more likely to be speeding simply because I'm keeping up with the traffic and not paying sufficient attention to the meter rather than because I'm in a hurry to get anywhere but I stick to the limit within reason. I've driven around for a job for some years and to be honest I'd rather folks were watching the road than their speedometers generally so I think busting someone for going less than 5 over is possibly a bit counter productive where safety is concerned.
Our pleasure...Two Underlined Boxes.
I'm pretty sure the second character means "in Blackbean Sauce". But I may be wrong.
cause you know if you hit someone at 63 or at 60 - the person would have pretty much the same amount of damage or death There is an extensive television campaign running in Victoria that would beg to differ. But I think they're running a flawed argument. You might hit someone less hard at a lower speed, and perhaps do less damage, (depending entirely on a huge list of variables) but if they had not been in that exact spot at that exact moment in time, then the outcome would have been different anyway. I suspect there's a little bleed into philosophy here, and I apologize for that.
*comments are playing up, if this posts twice...
I agree Catlick, the figures are kinda rubbery. There is no optimal figure. Obviosuly 60 (or 70 or 100) is nominal. 55 would do less damge, 50 even less, and so on.
I suppose the bottom line is, the harder the hit, the more damage done.
Post a Comment