C
Commander Kinsey
Guest
On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 23:39:52 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:
Bullshit. There are loads of people who never speed. I know many of them, they believe it\'s morally wrong and unsafe to do so. And I\'m always stuck behind the buggers.
If I think there are no pigs about, I drive at the speed I consider safe. If I think there\'s a risk of being nicked, I go within 10mph of the limit.
I do, they put hidden speed cameras (which didn\'t get anyone a ticket) on many roads and counted how many broke the limit.
> Drive the speed limit on a highway and you had better be in the right lane or you risk getting rear ended. Even in the right lane, you will have people riding up your bumper and you will catch up with no one. You will catch up with very few even at a few miles over the speed limit.
You\'ll catch up with trucks. I wish I lived where you do. On a motorway here, more people stick to the limit than speed, and there are actually quite a lot that go under (WTF?) the limit.
I (despite there being limits) go as fast as the car permits. Haven\'t been done for a decade.
It does, it\'s Libertarianism. They want to do away with 95% of laws, look it up.
> Here is a definition of libertarianism, \"libertarianism proposes a society of liberty under law, in which individuals are free to pursue their own lives so long as they respect the equal rights of others.\" That\'s what we have today in the US. Those who disagree, such as yourself, simply disagree on the extent of appropriate laws, that\'s all.
Libertarianism in the UK would do away with equal rights for a start. That\'s a pathetic law. The only two laws needed are damage to people and damage to property. So basically murder, assault, theft.
Why are you so keen on Authoritarianism? We are adults, not kids in kindergarten.
It is, it\'s high time we took back the world from the sissies who want everything to be safe.
What do you believe I\'ve misunderstood?
Bullshit. I can relax from driving by weightlifting, but I cannot relax by playing chess, both use the brain.
But it doesn\'t work. They make invalid assumptions based on fucked up statistics. Which is why we still have many accidents.
On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 4:36:11 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 21:19:08 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 3:30:32 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 19:46:11 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 12:40:23 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 00:26:31 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
LOL! So no rules? No regulations? Perhaps you are not aware that we typically start with no rules. Then we have problems and create rules to deal with them. So now we have driver\'s licenses that you must qualify for, rules of driving, rules of commercial driving where you are piloting 40 tons of vehicle at 65 mph. Someone, somewhere thinks it is a good idea for the drivers to be adequately rested. Then there\'s you.
And the rules create more problems than they solve. People are not animals, they don\'t need to be monitored and controlled like children. 99% of us are perfectly moral folk who wouldn\'t cause harm. Don\'t you trust yourself to behave?
That\'s where you are wrong. Everyone breaks the rules even with the threat of punishment. We weight the cost and the likelihood of getting caught against the benefits of getting away with an act and behave appropriately. I am quite certain that if we did away with speed limits, there would be much worse behavior on the roads and many more accidents and deaths.
Bullshit. I ignore the speed limits unless I think there\'s a camera or cop around. If there was no speed limit, I wouldn\'t waste brain power checking and would concentrate on the road more.
And it\'s been shown by a government study that only 4% of accidents are caused by speeding. But for some reason people like you think speeding is a bad thing.
And for some reason, people like you fail to understand that is WITH laws. Without laws about speeding the numbers would be much worse. But it doesn\'t surprise me you think this way. If nothing, you are consistent.
People speed if they want to, the ones that stick to the limit do so because they think it\'s the right thing to do, not because it\'s the law.
You live in a very simple world. Most people, or even nearly all people speed. I\'ve only ever met one person who does not speed at all. But how much they speed is set by the speed limit. If there were no speed limits I have no doubt there would be much higher speeds on many roads, especially highways. People who are happy keeping their speed under 70 because of the risk of getting a ticket would drive at 75 and 80, mostly because others would as well. With no speed limit, those who stick to the speed limit would drive at some arbitrary speed.
There is no justification to say speed limits do not serve to reduce speeds and accidents on highways.
Bullshit. There are loads of people who never speed. I know many of them, they believe it\'s morally wrong and unsafe to do so. And I\'m always stuck behind the buggers.
If I think there are no pigs about, I drive at the speed I consider safe. If I think there\'s a risk of being nicked, I go within 10mph of the limit.
And think about my 4% again. Do you know hoe many people speed? Again, a government stat - a third. So even if everyone sped, that would make it 12% of accidents caused by speeding, the rest by morons doing something stupid.
I don\'t know how they came up with a 33% number.
I do, they put hidden speed cameras (which didn\'t get anyone a ticket) on many roads and counted how many broke the limit.
> Drive the speed limit on a highway and you had better be in the right lane or you risk getting rear ended. Even in the right lane, you will have people riding up your bumper and you will catch up with no one. You will catch up with very few even at a few miles over the speed limit.
You\'ll catch up with trucks. I wish I lived where you do. On a motorway here, more people stick to the limit than speed, and there are actually quite a lot that go under (WTF?) the limit.
I (despite there being limits) go as fast as the car permits. Haven\'t been done for a decade.
You also don\'t understand Libertarianism, it\'s not a free for all you can murder folk, it\'s about removing rules from things where we don\'t need them.
You had not mentioned Libertarianism until now. Why did you bring it up? I\'ve not been discussing it.
That\'s the name of what we\'re discussing you ignoranus.
No, that\'s the name of what YOU are discussing now, but not what you proposed previously. I\'m talking about your proposal to have no laws. That doesn\'t have a name, even if it deserves one.
It does, it\'s Libertarianism. They want to do away with 95% of laws, look it up.
> Here is a definition of libertarianism, \"libertarianism proposes a society of liberty under law, in which individuals are free to pursue their own lives so long as they respect the equal rights of others.\" That\'s what we have today in the US. Those who disagree, such as yourself, simply disagree on the extent of appropriate laws, that\'s all.
Libertarianism in the UK would do away with equal rights for a start. That\'s a pathetic law. The only two laws needed are damage to people and damage to property. So basically murder, assault, theft.
\"We need to let people make heir own choices. The nanny society is beyond a joke.\"
\"And the rules create more problems than they solve.\"
I don\'t see any limitation to your proposal. That\'s a very, very extreme version of libertarianism, if it is that at all. Sounds more like chaos to me.
Why are you so keen on Authoritarianism? We are adults, not kids in kindergarten.
The rules may create problems, but most people feel requiring truckers to take appropriate rest breaks is better than seeing more people die on the highways.
No, you shouldn\'t assume someone will crash without a rest break. You should get him in trouble if he crashes, for whatever reason. What if the rest break involves him playing football? I bet that\'s not on the tachograph.
Unfortunately, once they have the crash and kill someone, it\'s too late. Laws are to prevent harm. Enforcement is too late, but the threat of enforcement is what gives the laws an impact. Otherwise they are just recommendations.
Stop being such a pansy.
That is a convincing argument. The \"pansy\" philosophy.
It is, it\'s high time we took back the world from the sissies who want everything to be safe.
This way would work far batter - instead of getting an insurance premium rise when you cause a crash, no matter how minor, get points on your license. X number of crashes and you\'re off.
You simply are unable to understand anything I\'ve said, eh?
What do you believe I\'ve misunderstood?
A trucker doesn\'t need to sleep after driving for the max time. He just has to stop driving and do something else. Talking about playing football is just being silly, but again, consistent for you.
You really are stupid, do you seriously think using your brain for something else is a rest?!
Absolutely. We rest by doing things that do not use the same thought paths or the same muscles. Playing cards can be relaxing, or chess. They involve thought, but not the same sort as being an air traffic controller, so appropriate for a break. Driving in mentally fatiguing, not so much physically. So do something else that uses a different part of your brain. That is very relaxing and refreshing.
Bullshit. I can relax from driving by weightlifting, but I cannot relax by playing chess, both use the brain.
They don\'t assume anyone will crash without a break. They *know* it will happen to some, too many. Those laws were passed and are enforced to prevent history from repeating.
They assume because it happens to some it happens to all. I might crash because I didn\'t get any sleep last night, well before my break time. Only taking account of driving time is insanity.
No, there\'s no such assumption. The point is to prevent the few accidents by imposing reasonable requirements.
But it doesn\'t work. They make invalid assumptions based on fucked up statistics. Which is why we still have many accidents.