Speeding discretions to go?

[L00b]

The law doesn't work like that.

Where driving offenses are concerned, indeed it does, save for any amount of discretion available to the police officer (the proposed 1% is, by definition, still discretion - just less of it).

People are expected to take reasonable steps to see that their behaviour falls within the letter of the law. The justice system is expected to refrain from disciplining the people unless they have failed to do so.

Justice is not as simple as a rule-book and I don't think you'd like to live in a society where it was.

LOL

Your position makes everybody a criminal, and in doing so makes a mockery of the law itself.

Nope, only those who break the speed limit + 10% and bits (currently) or 1% (as proposed). And such an offense is not 'criminal', btw.

If you really think this is how it's supposed to work, I suggest that every time you accidentally drift over the speed limit for a moment, you surrender yourself to the police for punishment.

The law enforcement doesn't work like that: you only get punished if those upholding the law can prove that you committed an offense. Presumed innocent until proven guilty. It's a great system, fair as they come

[unbeliever]

Please don't let me distract anyone from your hyperbole, but being slightly over the speed limit is not criminal offence.

 

It's a punishable offence.

If it's right for people to be punished for accidentally drifting ever so slightly over the speed limit, then surely anybody of good conscience should volunteer for such punishment when they catch themselves doing it.

 

---------- Post added 05-08-2015 at 09:08 ----------

 

The law enforcement doesn't work like that: you only get punished if those upholding the law can prove that you committed an offense. Presumed innocent until proven guilty. It's a great system, fair as they come

 

So it only counts if you get caught.

That's brilliant. So I can break any law I want and as long as I don't get caught, it's okay is it?

Ridiculous.

[L00b]

If it's right for people to be punished for accidentally drifting ever so slightly over the speed limit, then surely anybody of good conscience should volunteer for such punishment when they catch themselves doing it.

Drop that strawman already. It's idiotic

So it only counts if you get caught.

That's brilliant. So I can break any law I want and as long as I don't get caught, it's okay is it?

Ridiculous.

I don't believe that you are naïve or dumb, based on your posting history. All I'm seeing here is wheels coming off your debating position, and a hole nearing the Earth core.

[unbeliever]

Drop that strawman already. It's idiotic

 

A straw man argument is pretending that your opponent is making a case that they're not and then attacking the imaginary case rather than the real one.

Where have I done that?

 

You're confusing facing a straw man argument with a defeat.

[SnailyBoy]

It's a punishable offence.

If it's right for people to be punished for accidentally drifting ever so slightly over the speed limit, then surely anybody of good conscience should volunteer for such punishment when they catch themselves doing it.

 

---------- Post added 05-08-2015 at 09:08 ----------

 

 

So it only counts if you get caught.

That's brilliant. So I can break any law I want and as long as I don't get caught, it's okay is it?

Ridiculous.

 

So now it's just a punishable offence.

 

As for the rest, please stop, I'm actually starting to feel embarrassed for you.

[L00b]

A straw man argument is pretending that your opponent is making a case that they're not and then attacking the imaginary case rather than the real one.

Where have I done that?

 

You're confusing facing a straw man argument with a defeat.

Keep telling yourself that

 

On planet unbeliever, drivers form orderly queues in their millions every day handing themselves to their local plod for speeding, talking on their mobiles while driving, not fastening their seatbelts, dangerous overtakes & cutting up other drivers, driving without insurance, <etc.>.

 

Meanwhile, back on planet Earth, life goes on as normal, and people may have to watch their speed a bit more carefully

[unbeliever]

Keep telling yourself that

 

On planet unbeliever, drivers form orderly queues in their millions every day handing themselves to their local plod for speeding, talking on their mobiles while driving, not fastening their seatbelts, dangerous overtakes & cutting up other drivers, driving without insurance, <etc.>.

 

Meanwhile, back on planet Earth, life goes on as normal, and people may have to watch their speed a bit more carefully

 

I'm not seeing you pointing out where I've made a straw man argument.

 

I never use my mobile phone whilst driving, nor should anybody else. I always fasten my seatbelt, as should everybody else. I certainly never cut up or overtake dangerously and I have never for one second driven without insurance. All good drivers obey these rules.

 

I have however accidentally drifted over the speed limit briefly as has practically everybody else who drives regularly.

You're still talking nonsense.

 

I see you trying to ridicule my case without actually countering it. It smacks of desperation.

Edited August 5, 2015 by unbeliever

[L00b]

I'm not seeing you pointing out where I've made a straw man argument.

There, I've emboldened it for you, as you're clearly having neurone problems this morning:

 

If it's right for people to be punished for accidentally drifting ever so slightly over the speed limit, then surely anybody of good conscience should volunteer for such punishment when they catch themselves doing it.

 

Your "volunteering for punishment" argument is the informal fallacy you use to give the impression of refuting my argument that speed limit enforcement at 1% is the normal order of things just like at 10% or any %, when what you're really refuting is an argument I haven't made at all, that everybody who speeds should get punished. It's you who has made that argument as the opening part your sentence.

 

Don't worry, I'll not hold my breath for an apology.

Edited August 5, 2015 by L00b

[Cyclone]

Keep telling yourself that

 

On planet unbeliever, drivers form orderly queues in their millions every day handing themselves to their local plod for speeding, talking on their mobiles while driving, not fastening their seatbelts, dangerous overtakes & cutting up other drivers, driving without insurance, <etc.>.

 

Meanwhile, back on planet Earth, life goes on as normal, and people may have to watch their speed a bit more carefully

 

So what advantage does the removal of the allowance provide?

 

More people will be caught for going a small amount above the speed limit. Road safety will not increase at all. Slightly more fines will be generated.

 

Looks like a revenue generating exercise TBH. And on that basis it should be opposed.

[L00b]

So what advantage does the removal of the allowance provide?

After a period of time (months to a year or two), lower average speeds across the road network and generally better standards of everyday driving.

 

It's exactly what happened in France when enforcement there went 'zero tolerance' in the early to mid 2000s. Completely different country to drive in today, compared to 7 years ago and earlier.