All will have had valid National Insurance Numbers - Bank Accounts and have been paying tax and NI for several years - The contractor will have done all legally required checks - The NEWS STORY should be that the UK Immigration Service let people with dodgy documents in to the UK in the first place and will not make the immigration status of non-UK holding passport residents freely available to employers - I have a little experience in this area.....
I would of made just as much if not more of a sweeping generalisation than the man chunes if I could have got one at work. I find Lambeth council along with TFL and a fair few other councils and local authorities within London the absolute bane of my life. Fair play there are decent people in most of these it's just very difficult to find them and once you do they go sick probably due to the workload as every utility and contractor will only deal with them and none of the other fraggles in their department.
Medway coucil is staffed by dickheads. Pure and simple. Maybe not everyone it employs most the ones I have ever spoken to with the exception of the lady who got me a brown bin after 8 weeks of waiting are difficult pigs who belong in a sty.
I'm sure though they all probably think as highly of me.
[cite]Posted By: Badger[/cite]Lambeth may well have sacked or terminated the contracts of 48 parking wardens but councils are moving towards replacing wardens with cctv.
More fines will be issued by people being caught on cctv camera,it's cheaper and just as effective.
Like myself in Bromley town centre earlier this year.....into the bargain I miss read the penalty notice...thought I had 28 days to pay when it was only 14 and ended up paying £120.. for getting out of my car for no more than 3 or 4 minutes to draw £50.. out of a cash machine in The Market Square at 8.30 on a Saturday morning, the place was practicaly deserted and I caused no one any inconvenience for as much as a heart beat.
£120.00......FFS!!!
[cite]Posted By: Badger[/cite]Lambeth may well have sacked or terminated the contracts of 48 parking wardens but councils are moving towards replacing wardens with cctv.
More fines will be issued by people being caught on cctv camera,it's cheaper and just as effective.
Like myself in Bromley town centre earlier this year.....into the bargain I miss read the penalty notice...thought I had 28 days to pay when it was only 14 and ended up paying £120.. for getting out of my car for no more than 3 or 4 minutes to draw £50.. out of a cash machine in The Market Square at 8.30 on a Saturday morning, the place was practicaly deserted and I caused no one any inconvenience for as much as a heart beat.
£120.00......FFS!!!
So, basically you are admitting that you were in the wrong from the start - albeit "for no more than three or four minutes" - and that it was your own error that led to you having to pay more.
It's a bummer alright, but what exactly have the council done wrong in all of this?
[cite]Posted By: Badger[/cite]Lambeth may well have sacked or terminated the contracts of 48 parking wardens but councils are moving towards replacing wardens with cctv.
More fines will be issued by people being caught on cctv camera,it's cheaper and just as effective.
Like myself in Bromley town centre earlier this year.....into the bargain I miss read the penalty notice...thought I had 28 days to pay when it was only 14 and ended up paying £120.. for getting out of my car for no more than 3 or 4 minutes to draw £50.. out of a cash machine in The Market Square at 8.30 on a Saturday morning, the place was practicaly deserted and I caused no one any inconvenience for as much as a heart beat.
£120.00......FFS!!!
So, basically you are admitting that you were in the wrong from the start - albeit "for no more than three or four minutes" - and that it was your own error that led to you having to pay more.
It's a bummer alright, but what exactly have the council done wrong in all of this?
Are we talking legally or morally?
Legally probably nothing as things stand although there must be a Human Rights question as to whether people should be subject to camera surveillance without their explicit consent. One day somebody rich who can afford it or a criminal on Legal Aid convicted because of CCTV evidence may test the issue in court.
Morally though the answer is not clear cut.
A Democracy works by consent of the people as a whole as does the application and rule of Law. If that consent is withdrawn the whole thing collapses like a pack of cards. The Poll tax fiasco under Thatcher was a fleeting example of what I mean. Civil disobedience by way of protest and massive non- payment led to the whole project being abandoned regardless of any merits it may have had.
The motorist in particular but basically law abiding people in general (bin fascism etc) have been increasingly persecuted by the servants we consented to put into Central and Local Government to act on our behalves. Some of this has occurred because they have given away their powers to make a difference to Brussels without our consent. The main problem is a Nazi-like bullying mentality amongst public servants which essentially says we can do what the hell we like you are just an insignificant, powerless little man get out of my way or I will crush you.
They can get away and have got away with it for a while but the time is approaching whereby the law abiding decent majority in this country will remove their consent from these Nazi pygmies who seek to blight their lives and the civil disruption over the Poll Tax will look like a picnic in comparison.
The moral is don't sh** on the people who pay your wages through their taxes or else.
[cite]Posted By: Badger[/cite]Lambeth may well have sacked or terminated the contracts of 48 parking wardens but councils are moving towards replacing wardens with cctv.
More fines will be issued by people being caught on cctv camera,it's cheaper and just as effective.
Like myself in Bromley town centre earlier this year.....into the bargain I miss read the penalty notice...thought I had 28 days to pay when it was only 14 and ended up paying £120.. for getting out of my car for no more than 3 or 4 minutes to draw £50.. out of a cash machine in The Market Square at 8.30 on a Saturday morning, the place was practicaly deserted and I caused no one any inconvenience for as much as a heart beat.
£120.00......FFS!!!
So, basically you are admitting that you were in the wrong from the start - albeit "for no more than three or four minutes" - and that it was your own error that led to you having to pay more.
It's a bummer alright, but what exactly have the council done wrong in all of this?
Are we talking legally or morally?
Legally probably nothing as things stand although there must be a Human Rights question as to whether people should be subject to camera surveillance without their explicit consent. One day somebody rich who can afford it or a criminal on Legal Aid convicted because of CCTV evidence may test the issue in court.
Morally though the answer is not clear cut.
A Democracy works by consent of the people as a whole as does the application and rule of Law. If that consent is withdrawn the whole thing collapses like a pack of cards. The Poll tax fiasco under Thatcher was a fleeting example of what I mean. Civil disobedience by way of protest and massive non- payment led to the whole project being abandoned regardless of any merits it may have had.
The motorist in particular but basically law abiding people in general (bin fascism etc) have been increasingly persecuted by the servants we consented to put into Central and Local Government to act on our behalves. Some of this has occurred because they have given away their powers to make a difference to Brussels without our consent. The main problem is a Nazi-like bullying mentality amongst public servants which essentially says we can do what the hell we like you are just an insignificant, powerless little man get out of my way or I will crush you.
They can get away and have got away with it for a while but the time is approaching whereby the law abiding decent majority in this country will remove their consent from these Nazi pygmies who seek to blight their lives and the civil disruption over the Poll Tax will look like a picnic in comparison.
The moral is don't sh** on the people who pay your wages through their taxes or else.
I do wonder how you leave the house sometimes Len, the paranoia must be awful
[cite]Posted By: Badger[/cite]Lambeth may well have sacked or terminated the contracts of 48 parking wardens but councils are moving towards replacing wardens with cctv.
More fines will be issued by people being caught on cctv camera,it's cheaper and just as effective.
Like myself in Bromley town centre earlier this year.....into the bargain I miss read the penalty notice...thought I had 28 days to pay when it was only 14 and ended up paying £120.. for getting out of my car for no more than 3 or 4 minutes to draw £50.. out of a cash machine in The Market Square at 8.30 on a Saturday morning, the place was practicaly deserted and I caused no one any inconvenience for as much as a heart beat.
£120.00......FFS!!!
So, basically you are admitting that you were in the wrong from the start - albeit "for no more than three or four minutes" - and that it was your own error that led to you having to pay more.
It's a bummer alright, but what exactly have the council done wrong in all of this?
Are we talking legally or morally?
Legally probably nothing as things stand although there must be a Human Rights question as to whether people should be subject to camera surveillance without their explicit consent. One day somebody rich who can afford it or a criminal on Legal Aid convicted because of CCTV evidence may test the issue in court.
Morally though the answer is not clear cut.
A Democracy works by consent of the people as a whole as does the application and rule of Law. If that consent is withdrawn the whole thing collapses like a pack of cards. The Poll tax fiasco under Thatcher was a fleeting example of what I mean. Civil disobedience by way of protest and massive non- payment led to the whole project being abandoned regardless of any merits it may have had.
The motorist in particular but basically law abiding people in general (bin fascism etc) have been increasingly persecuted by the servants we consented to put into Central and Local Government to act on our behalves. Some of this has occurred because they have given away their powers to make a difference to Brussels without our consent. The main problem is a Nazi-like bullying mentality amongst public servants which essentially says we can do what the hell we like you are just an insignificant, powerless little man get out of my way or I will crush you.
They can get away and have got away with it for a while but the time is approaching whereby the law abiding decent majority in this country will remove their consent from these Nazi pygmies who seek to blight their lives and the civil disruption over the Poll Tax will look like a picnic in comparison.
The moral is don't sh** on the people who pay your wages through their taxes or else.
I do wonder how you leave the house sometimes Len, the paranoia must be awful
I wish it was paranoia.
Sadly I write from bitter personal experince about the sheer bloody mindedness and unaccountability of public servants.
I won't bore you with too many examples but the most recent concerned the death of my father-in-law who fought for this country in World War 2 and lived in a council house nearly fifty miles away.
A faceless bureaucrat told my grieving wife that if the house wasn't cleared in 3 weeks all his belongings would be tossed into a skip hired at our expense. I should mention that we were quite happy to carry on paying the rent until we could clear the place. I have never drawn any form of benefit from the State and if I have my way I never will. However our offer of continuity of rent was not good enough for this fascist bastard and she reiterated the Skip option.
I must praise my Labour MP who when I explained the position intervened on my behalf and obtained us some extra time.
Experiences such as that of our wonderful Local Government servants are NOT paranoia Rothko. They are all too traumatic FACT.
Sorry Len, but I don't go in for all of this "persecuted motorist" stuff. We all know the rules, be it parking, speeding or whatever.
"I was doing 80 but road conditions were perfect" or "I only stopped there for two minutes while I nipped into a shop" are simply admissions of guilt in my eyes. It seems to me that the reason people get so worked up is because "everyone else does it" and seemingly gets away with it - not because they didn't do anything wrong in the first place.
People then say that there should be a degree of discretion. Why? Or do they mean that discretion should only be exercised when they themselves have f*cked up?
It's the same with football referees to some extent. People seem to demand that referees use their discretion, but then moan when there is no consistency - but one referees idea of discretion will never be the same as anothers.
The rules should be clear to all. Break them - get caught - and face the consequences like an adult. People should take more responsibility for their own actions and stop blaming everyone else for their mistakes.
[cite]Posted By: Rothko[/cite]So one arsehole colours your world view?
As I said above that is just one example of many so a number of arseholes not just one.
However to answer your question it is inevitable that one's view of the world is coloured by experience.
Another example.
I was robbed in the street once by a group of youths. Ever since then I see a group of youths and I am wary and on my guard no matter how hard I try to fight that irrational reaction. In my own way I am serving a life sentence of fleeting fear everytime I see a group of youths because of what happened.
They say lightning never strikes twice, it's fear of crime not actual crime blah, blah, blah but that doesn't wash with those who have been on the receiving end even if they want to believe it.
[cite]Posted By: Off_it[/cite]Sorry Len, but I don't go in for all of this "persecuted motorist" stuff. We all know the rules, be it parking, speeding or whatever.
"I was doing 80 but road conditions were perfect" or "I only stopped there for two minutes while I nipped into a shop" are simply admissions of guilt in my eyes. It seems to me that the reason people get so worked up is because "everyone else does it" and seemingly gets away with it - not because they didn't do anything wrong in the first place.
People then say that there should be a degree of discretion. Why? Or do they mean that discretion should only be exercised when they themselves have f*cked up?
It's the same with football referees to some extent. People seem to demand that referees use their discretion, but then moan when there is no consistency - but one referees idea of discretion will never be the same as anothers.
The rules should be clear to all. Break them - get caught - and face the consequences like an adult. People should take more responsibility for their own actions and stop blaming everyone else for their mistakes.
Agreed. I've got three points on my license for doing 47 in a 40, on an empty dual carriageway at 2:15 in the morning. Sickening, but the fact remains that I was speeding - thus I was in the wrong and had to accept it. I also had my car towed - from outside my house, at two minutes past seven on a Saturday morning because I overslept and forgot to move it - 225 quid later and, though I knew it was bordering on extortion, i realised I had to accept it and just moved on.
However, where do you stand on people who have the money to pay shyster lawyers to get them off? Witness Alex Ferguson's pathetic defence that he was suffering from diarrhoea which caused him to speed whilst looking for a public toilet, or Beckham's defence that he was being followed by a paparazzo who wanted to take photos of him and was driving dangerously in an attempt to evade him.
I incline toward yours and Rothko's view - you've broken the law, you know you've broken the law, you have to suffer the consequences. However, it does seem at times that we are having the absolute psis taken out of us as citizens - not by local authorities (though mine (Croydon) is probably amongst the worst in the country for resident-based extortion) but by systems designed simply to extract money from people. Anyone trying to convince themselves they live in a democracy is deluding themselves - nothing anyone does makes a jot of difference when it comes to instruments designed to make money from taxpayers - never has done and never will.
[cite]Posted By: Off_it[/cite]Sorry Len, but I don't go in for all of this "persecuted motorist" stuff. We all know the rules, be it parking, speeding or whatever.
"I was doing 80 but road conditions were perfect" or "I only stopped there for two minutes while I nipped into a shop" are simply admissions of guilt in my eyes. It seems to me that the reason people get so worked up is because "everyone else does it" and seemingly gets away with it - not because they didn't do anything wrong in the first place.
People then say that there should be a degree of discretion. Why? Or do they mean that discretion should only be exercised when they themselves have f*cked up?
It's the same with football referees to some extent. People seem to demand that referees use their discretion, but then moan when there is no consistency - but one referees idea of discretion will never be the same as anothers.
The rules should be clear to all. Break them - get caught - and face the consequences like an adult. People should take more responsibility for their own actions and stop blaming everyone else for their mistakes.
You have admitted elsewhere on the forum that you are not a motorist so just possibly your lack of understanding towards the motorist is coloured by that.
If a fraction of the resources spent on cameras to trap motorists for what are arbitary technical offences rather than crimes that hurt other people were spent on preventing street violence then this country would be a much better place in my opinion.
[cite]Posted By: Off_it[/cite]Sorry Len, but I don't go in for all of this "persecuted motorist" stuff. We all know the rules, be it parking, speeding or whatever.
"I was doing 80 but road conditions were perfect" or "I only stopped there for two minutes while I nipped into a shop" are simply admissions of guilt in my eyes. It seems to me that the reason people get so worked up is because "everyone else does it" and seemingly gets away with it - not because they didn't do anything wrong in the first place.
People then say that there should be a degree of discretion. Why? Or do they mean that discretion should only be exercised when they themselves have f*cked up?
It's the same with football referees to some extent. People seem to demand that referees use their discretion, but then moan when there is no consistency - but one referees idea of discretion will never be the same as anothers.
The rules should be clear to all. Break them - get caught - and face the consequences like an adult. People should take more responsibility for their own actions and stop blaming everyone else for their mistakes.
You have admitted elsewhere on the forum that you are not a motorist so just possibly your lack of understanding towards the motorist is coloured by that.
If a fraction of the resources spent on cameras to trap motorists for what are arbitary technical offences rather than crimes that hurt other people were spent on preventing street violence then this country would be a much better place in my opinion.
Poor poor motorists, the hardest done by sector of the community.
[cite]Posted By: Off_it[/cite]Sorry Len, but I don't go in for all of this "persecuted motorist" stuff. We all know the rules, be it parking, speeding or whatever.
"I was doing 80 but road conditions were perfect" or "I only stopped there for two minutes while I nipped into a shop" are simply admissions of guilt in my eyes. It seems to me that the reason people get so worked up is because "everyone else does it" and seemingly gets away with it - not because they didn't do anything wrong in the first place.
People then say that there should be a degree of discretion. Why? Or do they mean that discretion should only be exercised when they themselves have f*cked up?
It's the same with football referees to some extent. People seem to demand that referees use their discretion, but then moan when there is no consistency - but one referees idea of discretion will never be the same as anothers.
The rules should be clear to all. Break them - get caught - and face the consequences like an adult. People should take more responsibility for their own actions and stop blaming everyone else for their mistakes.
You have admitted elsewhere on the forum that you are not a motorist so just possibly your lack of understanding towards the motorist is coloured by that.
If a fraction of the resources spent on cameras to trap motorists for what are arbitary technical offences rather than crimes that hurt other people were spent on preventing street violence then this country would be a much better place in my opinion.
Poor poor motorists, the hardest done by sector of the community.
In many ways yes. They are being criminalised for political and stealth tax raising reasons.
or they are criminalised for breaking the law of the land.
If I get done for jumping a red cycling to work, I'll pay the fine and admit I was a feckless chunt. I get the feeling if you got caught jumping a red you would blame anyone but yourself.
You're right of course Leroy - as is Len. There are far too many arseholes out there enforcing these rules. It's not the rules themselves I mind so much - but more the way some of these arseholes operate. It's like a Little Hitler syndrome - power corrupts and all that.
And if you're rich enough unfortunately you don't have to follow the same rules as the rest of us, because you can afford to pay someone to get you out of it by coming up with some clever argument or another. The tax system is the same. I could go on, but we'll only all get depressed!
[cite]Posted By: Rothko[/cite]So one arsehole colours your world view?
[cite]Posted By: Rothko[/cite]
[cite]Posted By: LenGlover[/cite]
[cite]Posted By: Off_it[/cite]Sorry Len, but I don't go in for all of this "persecuted motorist" stuff. We all know the rules, be it parking, speeding or whatever.
"I was doing 80 but road conditions were perfect" or "I only stopped there for two minutes while I nipped into a shop" are simply admissions of guilt in my eyes. It seems to me that the reason people get so worked up is because "everyone else does it" and seemingly gets away with it - not because they didn't do anything wrong in the first place.
People then say that there should be a degree of discretion. Why? Or do they mean that discretion should only be exercised when they themselves have f*cked up?
It's the same with football referees to some extent. People seem to demand that referees use their discretion, but then moan when there is no consistency - but one referees idea of discretion will never be the same as anothers.
The rules should be clear to all. Break them - get caught - and face the consequences like an adult. People should take more responsibility for their own actions and stop blaming everyone else for their mistakes.
You have admitted elsewhere on the forum that you are not a motorist so just possibly your lack of understanding towards the motorist is coloured by that.
If a fraction of the resources spent on cameras to trap motorists for what are arbitary technical offences rather than crimes that hurt other people were spent on preventing street violence then this country would be a much better place in my opinion.
Poor poor motorists, the hardest done by sector of the community.
If you break the speed limit you get points and a fine. If you overstay your parking ticket by five minutes, you get a fine. I've had both, it is annoying and expensive, but it is right.
[cite]Posted By: Rothko[/cite]or they are criminalised for breaking the law of the land.
If I get done for jumping a red cycling to work, I'll pay the fine and admit I was a feckless chunt. I get the feeling if you got caught jumping a red you would blame anyone but yourself.
Not at all.
I wouldn't jump a red because there is a good reason for red lights. They enable pedestrians to cross the road safely.
As I said in my original post though democracy and Laws have to be based on consent or else sooner or later they fall apart and I cited Poll Tax as an example of that.
Leroy whilst grudgingly accepting the situation acknowledges we are having the p**s taken out of us as citizens.
I agree with that and sooner or later there will be mass civil disobedience as these little Hitlers will take the pi** once too often.
Len, do you think there should be a speed limit on any road? and if so, by how much should someone be allowed to break it by before they are subject to being pulled for it?
You have admitted elsewhere on the forum that you are not a motorist so just possibly your lack of understanding towards the motorist is coloured by that.
Oh come on Len, "Lack of understanding" - just listen to yourself!
The law is the law. I don't make them, I don't agree with them all, but if I break them I know I run the risk of getting punished if I'm caught.
I'm not a drug addict, but does that mean I would have a "lack of understanding" of drug addicition if I thought one of them should be punished for robbing you on the street?
Is it ok to ignore some rules/laws but not others? And if so, who makes that call - you? Me?
And for the record, I can't stand those fecking cyclists who jump red lights. I shouted at one once from about two yards away and then chased him down the road for a few yards, just to reinforce my message that what he had just done was wrong.
You should've seen the look on his face. The little sh*t almost broke the land speed record trying to pedal away. The mate I was with was doubled up with laughter at the whole incident for a good couple of minutes!
[cite]Posted By: Rothko[/cite]Len, do you think there should be a speed limit on any road? and if so, by how much should someone be allowed to break it by before they are subject to being pulled for it?
Come on mate. Now you're just being rude for the sake of it.....
PS Because of issues surrounding the placing of cameras and the lines in the road and them potentially being out, you won't get flashed if you're travelling at 8% over the speed limit.
Equally if you get a ticket through for the average speed cameras you get on Motorways then ask them to show you the details of your average speed. When this comes through it will also have details of the placing of the cameras and what measurements they were using to calculate your speed. If there is a different between what the calculation should be and what it was then the ticket is null and void. Naturally this has been kept quite because it would lose too much revenue......And who says it JUST a safety initiative.
You have admitted elsewhere on the forum that you are not a motorist so just possibly your lack of understanding towards the motorist is coloured by that.
Oh come on Len, "Lack of understanding" - just listen to yourself!
The law is the law. I don't make them, I don't agree with them all, but if I break them I know I run the risk of getting punished if I'm caught.
I'm not a drug addict, but does that mean I would have a "lack of understanding" of drug addicition if I thought one of them should be punished for robbing you on the street?
Is it ok to ignore some rules/laws but not others? And if so, who makes that call - you?
It is quite simple. If somebody is robbed in the street there is a tangible victim who will almost certainly suffer a life sentence of fear when in a similar scenario.
Speed limits are arbitary and are changed for arbitary reasons (ie shortly after a camera is put in place). If I drive at afew miles an hour above that arbitary limit where is the victim? Who is hurt by my actions unlike my first example?
The full absurdity of the whole thing is that I could legally drive on a Motorway in thick fog with zero visibility at 70 MPH! No account is taken of road and weather conditions so speed limits are not about the safety of road users despite the "spin" they are about licensed extortion.
Why are there never any speed cameras outside schools and old peoples' homes yet plenty hidden behind bridges on dual carriage ways like the A2?
The motorist is seen as a cash cow pure and simple. It also "diversifies" the types of criminal apprehended which keeps the pc lot happy with their crime stats. Another "benefit" is instant crime instant detection which enables Brown or Blair to pat themselves on the back at how they are solving crimes.
Comments
Medway coucil is staffed by dickheads. Pure and simple. Maybe not everyone it employs most the ones I have ever spoken to with the exception of the lady who got me a brown bin after 8 weeks of waiting are difficult pigs who belong in a sty.
I'm sure though they all probably think as highly of me.
More fines will be issued by people being caught on cctv camera,it's cheaper and just as effective.
Like myself in Bromley town centre earlier this year.....into the bargain I miss read the penalty notice...thought I had 28 days to pay when it was only 14 and ended up paying £120.. for getting out of my car for no more than 3 or 4 minutes to draw £50.. out of a cash machine in The Market Square at 8.30 on a Saturday morning, the place was practicaly deserted and I caused no one any inconvenience for as much as a heart beat.
£120.00......FFS!!!
;-)
Too right...if I'd been in the Smart Car they may well have turned a blind eye...well at least to the 28/14 day thingy!
Well being a Car hater like you cannot say I am surprised, Traffic warden would suit you mate :-)
So, basically you are admitting that you were in the wrong from the start - albeit "for no more than three or four minutes" - and that it was your own error that led to you having to pay more.
It's a bummer alright, but what exactly have the council done wrong in all of this?
Are we talking legally or morally?
Legally probably nothing as things stand although there must be a Human Rights question as to whether people should be subject to camera surveillance without their explicit consent. One day somebody rich who can afford it or a criminal on Legal Aid convicted because of CCTV evidence may test the issue in court.
Morally though the answer is not clear cut.
A Democracy works by consent of the people as a whole as does the application and rule of Law. If that consent is withdrawn the whole thing collapses like a pack of cards. The Poll tax fiasco under Thatcher was a fleeting example of what I mean. Civil disobedience by way of protest and massive non- payment led to the whole project being abandoned regardless of any merits it may have had.
The motorist in particular but basically law abiding people in general (bin fascism etc) have been increasingly persecuted by the servants we consented to put into Central and Local Government to act on our behalves. Some of this has occurred because they have given away their powers to make a difference to Brussels without our consent. The main problem is a Nazi-like bullying mentality amongst public servants which essentially says we can do what the hell we like you are just an insignificant, powerless little man get out of my way or I will crush you.
They can get away and have got away with it for a while but the time is approaching whereby the law abiding decent majority in this country will remove their consent from these Nazi pygmies who seek to blight their lives and the civil disruption over the Poll Tax will look like a picnic in comparison.
The moral is don't sh** on the people who pay your wages through their taxes or else.
I do wonder how you leave the house sometimes Len, the paranoia must be awful
I wish it was paranoia.
Sadly I write from bitter personal experince about the sheer bloody mindedness and unaccountability of public servants.
I won't bore you with too many examples but the most recent concerned the death of my father-in-law who fought for this country in World War 2 and lived in a council house nearly fifty miles away.
A faceless bureaucrat told my grieving wife that if the house wasn't cleared in 3 weeks all his belongings would be tossed into a skip hired at our expense. I should mention that we were quite happy to carry on paying the rent until we could clear the place. I have never drawn any form of benefit from the State and if I have my way I never will. However our offer of continuity of rent was not good enough for this fascist bastard and she reiterated the Skip option.
I must praise my Labour MP who when I explained the position intervened on my behalf and obtained us some extra time.
Experiences such as that of our wonderful Local Government servants are NOT paranoia Rothko. They are all too traumatic FACT.
"I was doing 80 but road conditions were perfect" or "I only stopped there for two minutes while I nipped into a shop" are simply admissions of guilt in my eyes. It seems to me that the reason people get so worked up is because "everyone else does it" and seemingly gets away with it - not because they didn't do anything wrong in the first place.
People then say that there should be a degree of discretion. Why? Or do they mean that discretion should only be exercised when they themselves have f*cked up?
It's the same with football referees to some extent. People seem to demand that referees use their discretion, but then moan when there is no consistency - but one referees idea of discretion will never be the same as anothers.
The rules should be clear to all. Break them - get caught - and face the consequences like an adult. People should take more responsibility for their own actions and stop blaming everyone else for their mistakes.
As I said above that is just one example of many so a number of arseholes not just one.
However to answer your question it is inevitable that one's view of the world is coloured by experience.
Another example.
I was robbed in the street once by a group of youths. Ever since then I see a group of youths and I am wary and on my guard no matter how hard I try to fight that irrational reaction. In my own way I am serving a life sentence of fleeting fear everytime I see a group of youths because of what happened.
They say lightning never strikes twice, it's fear of crime not actual crime blah, blah, blah but that doesn't wash with those who have been on the receiving end even if they want to believe it.
However, where do you stand on people who have the money to pay shyster lawyers to get them off? Witness Alex Ferguson's pathetic defence that he was suffering from diarrhoea which caused him to speed whilst looking for a public toilet, or Beckham's defence that he was being followed by a paparazzo who wanted to take photos of him and was driving dangerously in an attempt to evade him.
I incline toward yours and Rothko's view - you've broken the law, you know you've broken the law, you have to suffer the consequences. However, it does seem at times that we are having the absolute psis taken out of us as citizens - not by local authorities (though mine (Croydon) is probably amongst the worst in the country for resident-based extortion) but by systems designed simply to extract money from people. Anyone trying to convince themselves they live in a democracy is deluding themselves - nothing anyone does makes a jot of difference when it comes to instruments designed to make money from taxpayers - never has done and never will.
You have admitted elsewhere on the forum that you are not a motorist so just possibly your lack of understanding towards the motorist is coloured by that.
If a fraction of the resources spent on cameras to trap motorists for what are arbitary technical offences rather than crimes that hurt other people were spent on preventing street violence then this country would be a much better place in my opinion.
Poor poor motorists, the hardest done by sector of the community.
In many ways yes. They are being criminalised for political and stealth tax raising reasons.
If I get done for jumping a red cycling to work, I'll pay the fine and admit I was a feckless chunt. I get the feeling if you got caught jumping a red you would blame anyone but yourself.
And if you're rich enough unfortunately you don't have to follow the same rules as the rest of us, because you can afford to pay someone to get you out of it by coming up with some clever argument or another. The tax system is the same. I could go on, but we'll only all get depressed!
I thought Ken was out of office now
Imagine what the fine would have been for urinating all over public transport?
If you overstay your parking ticket by five minutes, you get a fine.
I've had both, it is annoying and expensive, but it is right.
He's allowed to cos he's posh
It would probably improve the cleanliness TBF
Not at all.
I wouldn't jump a red because there is a good reason for red lights. They enable pedestrians to cross the road safely.
As I said in my original post though democracy and Laws have to be based on consent or else sooner or later they fall apart and I cited Poll Tax as an example of that.
Leroy whilst grudgingly accepting the situation acknowledges we are having the p**s taken out of us as citizens.
I agree with that and sooner or later there will be mass civil disobedience as these little Hitlers will take the pi** once too often.
Oh come on Len, "Lack of understanding" - just listen to yourself!
The law is the law. I don't make them, I don't agree with them all, but if I break them I know I run the risk of getting punished if I'm caught.
I'm not a drug addict, but does that mean I would have a "lack of understanding" of drug addicition if I thought one of them should be punished for robbing you on the street?
Is it ok to ignore some rules/laws but not others? And if so, who makes that call - you? Me?
You should've seen the look on his face. The little sh*t almost broke the land speed record trying to pedal away. The mate I was with was doubled up with laughter at the whole incident for a good couple of minutes!
And yes, I had had a drink!
Come on mate. Now you're just being rude for the sake of it.....
PS Because of issues surrounding the placing of cameras and the lines in the road and them potentially being out, you won't get flashed if you're travelling at 8% over the speed limit.
Equally if you get a ticket through for the average speed cameras you get on Motorways then ask them to show you the details of your average speed. When this comes through it will also have details of the placing of the cameras and what measurements they were using to calculate your speed. If there is a different between what the calculation should be and what it was then the ticket is null and void. Naturally this has been kept quite because it would lose too much revenue......And who says it JUST a safety initiative.
It is quite simple. If somebody is robbed in the street there is a tangible victim who will almost certainly suffer a life sentence of fear when in a similar scenario.
Speed limits are arbitary and are changed for arbitary reasons (ie shortly after a camera is put in place). If I drive at afew miles an hour above that arbitary limit where is the victim? Who is hurt by my actions unlike my first example?
The full absurdity of the whole thing is that I could legally drive on a Motorway in thick fog with zero visibility at 70 MPH! No account is taken of road and weather conditions so speed limits are not about the safety of road users despite the "spin" they are about licensed extortion.
Why are there never any speed cameras outside schools and old peoples' homes yet plenty hidden behind bridges on dual carriage ways like the A2?
The motorist is seen as a cash cow pure and simple. It also "diversifies" the types of criminal apprehended which keeps the pc lot happy with their crime stats. Another "benefit" is instant crime instant detection which enables Brown or Blair to pat themselves on the back at how they are solving crimes.