Today's Forum Topics
Set as homepage
|
View
New Forum Topics Today's Forum Topics Set as homepage |
 |
|
|||||||
| |
||||
Welcome to CyclingForums.com You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread. By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
20-05.-2008, 12:39 AM
|
#31 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: 50% increase in cyclists prosecuted for cycling on footpaths 2002-2006
Quoting Ekul Namsob <notmyaddress.1.ekulnamsob@wronghead.com>:
>David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote: >>Quoting Ekul Namsob <notmyaddress.1.ekulnamsob@wronghead.com>: >>>I would agree with you. Sadly, the dangerous drivers could insist that >>>there should not be more prosecutions of dangerous drivers while the >>>enormously more serious problems of muggings, rapes and murders by >>>pedestrians exist. >>Those are not more serious problems. Dangerous drivers kill people. >Last I checked, a greater proportion of murderers had killed people than >had dangerous drivers. That's a silly way of counting it up, though; a more sensible thing to say would be that drivers kill about 4-5 times as many people as murder and manslaughter together (at least in the strange world we live in where manslaughter isn't manslaughter if you use a car...) -- David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Kill the tomato! Today is Chedday, May. |
|
|
20-05.-2008, 02:13 AM
|
#32 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: 50% increase in cyclists prosecuted for cycling on footpaths2002-2006
David Damerell wrote:
> Quoting Ekul Namsob <notmyaddress.1.ekulnamsob@wronghead.com>: >> David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote: >>> Quoting Ekul Namsob <notmyaddress.1.ekulnamsob@wronghead.com>: >>>> I would agree with you. Sadly, the dangerous drivers could insist that >>>> there should not be more prosecutions of dangerous drivers while the >>>> enormously more serious problems of muggings, rapes and murders by >>>> pedestrians exist. >>> Those are not more serious problems. Dangerous drivers kill people. >> Last I checked, a greater proportion of murderers had killed people than >> had dangerous drivers. > That's a silly way of counting it up, though; a more sensible thing to say > would be that drivers kill about 4-5 times as many people as murder and > manslaughter together (at least in the strange world we live in where > manslaughter isn't manslaughter if you use a car... ....or if the death is caused by lack of cleaning in a hospital). |
|
|
|
20-05.-2008, 04:42 AM
|
#33 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: 50% increase in cyclists prosecuted for cycling on footpaths 2002-2006
David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> Quoting Ekul Namsob <notmyaddress.1.ekulnamsob@wronghead.com>: > >David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote: > >>Quoting Ekul Namsob <notmyaddress.1.ekulnamsob@wronghead.com>: > >>>I would agree with you. Sadly, the dangerous drivers could insist that > >>>there should not be more prosecutions of dangerous drivers while the > >>>enormously more serious problems of muggings, rapes and murders by > >>>pedestrians exist. > >>Those are not more serious problems. Dangerous drivers kill people. > >Last I checked, a greater proportion of murderers had killed people than > >had dangerous drivers. > > That's a silly way of counting it up, though; a more sensible thing to say > would be that drivers kill about 4-5 times as many people as murder and > manslaughter together (at least in the strange world we live in where > manslaughter isn't manslaughter if you use a car...) In case you hadn't noticed, I consider the whole argument that coppers should not go after one sort of miscreant because other miscreants exist to be a red herring. If people believe they will get into trouble for breaking even 'minor' laws, they may well be less likely to break the more serious laws. Cheers, Luke -- Red Rose Ramblings, the diary of an Essex boy in exile in Lancashire <http://www.shrimper.org.uk> |
|
|
|
20-05.-2008, 08:52 PM
|
#34 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: 50% increase in cyclists prosecuted for cycling on footpaths 2002-2006
Quoting Ekul Namsob <notmyaddress.1.ekulnamsob@wronghead.com>:
>to be a red herring. If people believe they will get into trouble for >breaking even 'minor' laws, they may well be less likely to break the >more serious laws. Yes, I'm sure lots of potential murderers are deterred by being told off for littering because... no, wait. -- David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> flcl? Today is Stilday, May - a weekend. |
|
|
|
20-05.-2008, 09:38 PM
|
#35 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: 50% increase in cyclists prosecuted for cycling on footpaths 2002-2006
David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
> Quoting Ekul Namsob <notmyaddress.1.ekulnamsob@wronghead.com>: >>to be a red herring. If people believe they will get into trouble for >>breaking even 'minor' laws, they may well be less likely to break the >>more serious laws. > > Yes, I'm sure lots of potential murderers are deterred by being told off > for littering because... no, wait. No, he has a point. I for one have often planned armed bank robberies with violence, only to be put off by the prospect of having the getaway car ticketed for parking on a single yellow outside the building. Of course, now that parking offences are decriminalised this need be a problem no longer. But now I need stockings for a mask, I'd be too embarrassed to buy them in case people I know see me, and I don't want to get caught shoplifting. -dan |
|
|
|
21-05.-2008, 01:01 AM
|
#36 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: 50% increase in cyclists prosecuted for cycling on footpaths2002-2006
David Damerell wrote:
> Quoting Ekul Namsob <notmyaddress.1.ekulnamsob@wronghead.com>: >> to be a red herring. If people believe they will get into trouble for >> breaking even 'minor' laws, they may well be less likely to break the >> more serious laws. > Yes, I'm sure lots of potential murderers are deterred by being told off > for littering because... no, wait. "Zero Tolerance" is actually a respected policy for crime prevention, as illustrated by the New York Giuliani experience. Even if it didn't work to prevent later "serious" crime (the sort the police prefer dealing with - they don't really like dealing with lower-level anti-social behaviour), it's still worthwhile on a quality of life basis. As a retired police officer of my acquaintance says, the Krays started off smashing windows and street-lamps, before progressing to screwing gas meters. Life with fewer broken windows and streetlamps, as well as intact gas-meters, is still better. |
|
|
Linear Mode
