Two Things You Might Not Know

89 UKDM BA4 4WS (resto job!) · Post by **wurlycorner** » Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:00 pm

Smoking pusher...

mercutio · Post by **mercutio** » Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:03 pm

It is sad that the government has to legislate for these things but when the majority of the populace have a mental age smaller than their shoe size what can you do.
If you dont want a nanny state grow the drokk up and take some responsibility for yourself and your actions and the effects you have on others.

Nuff said

JLB · Post by **JLB** » Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:15 pm

The carrier bag situation is slightly confusing. If you buy raw meat product you can have a free bag, however if you put something else in the bag you then have to pay for it. I believe there are other exceptions as well. You can always count on the government to over complicate something!

On a positive Morrisons is donating all proceeds from carrier bags to charities that benefit people in the UK.

YouTube · Post by **Sailor** » Thu Oct 01, 2015 12:45 am

What I find galling is the way theses things come about. I'm convinced more laws have been enacted in the last two decades than in the two centuries before that. Why? I can only assume that by showing that they're doing something, anything, politicians feel that they're more electable. In other words, tweaking stuff helps me keep my job.

The mobile phone in cars thing was a classic case in point. Studies had already shown that people who use their phones are less likely to concentrate than those who don't. Surely this alone would make have made an existing law fit? (Driving without due care and attention.)

The anti-smoking lobby is a powerful one. It must be appeased. The tobacco tax is significant. It must be maintained. What to do? Let's show willing by fiddling around the edges! Shilly-shally.

Is it easier to introduce laws, enforceable or not, than it is to educate?

Post by **paul bristol uk** » Thu Oct 01, 2015 1:43 am

What next eating anything in cars so you don't encourage children to be obese? No I don't mean a burger whilst driving anything including a polo mint!
How about banning all screens such as sat navs? Where will it all end?
Its already illegal to fit bull bars to a 4x4 unless it came from the factory with them. So when I had a shogun without them it was illegal to fit the OEM ones from Mitsibushi yet the same vehicle that rolled of the production line with them was not.
Some laws are good,like the mobile phone one and I would even ban hands free.(having a heated exchange with someone does not encourage you to concentrate on your driving)

Thats it for tonight folks, goodnight.

Post by **simonc** » Thu Oct 01, 2015 8:43 am

Instead of blithering around regarding plastic bags why don't they just change over to paper bags? They're recyclable and surely the economy of scale, given a massive production volume, will make them cost effective for the supermarkets/retailers.
Just a thought.

Although I'm a smoker, I don't smoke indoors (and not just because Linda doesn't like it) but because frankly, it stinks out the house and stains paintwork over time. I don't smoke in the car either, hate the smell and loath a used ashtray.

My ten penn'orth for the day.

89 UKDM BA4 4WS (resto job!) · Post by **wurlycorner** » Thu Oct 01, 2015 9:24 am

Sailor wrote:What I find galling is the way theses things come about. I'm convinced more laws have been enacted in the last two decades than in the two centuries before that. Why? I can only assume that by showing that they're doing something, anything, politicians feel that they're more electable. In other words, tweaking stuff helps me keep my job.

Elements of that, I agree, yes. However in general society is taking less and less personal responsibility. This is a response to that, rather than driving it, IMO.

The mobile phone in cars thing was a classic case in point. Studies had already shown that people who use their phones are less likely to concentrate than those who don't. Surely this alone would make have made an existing law fit? (Driving without due care and attention.)

Criminal prosecutions must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, rather than balance of probability and on a case-case basis, rather than by precedent.
Much quicker and cheaper (using tax payers money for the prosecutions remember) if it's a clean law, rather than having to prove the rationale behind it. That means you only have to prove you were doing it, rather than to prove you were doing it and what the impact/potential impact was.

Is it easier to introduce laws, enforceable or not, than it is to educate?

Flat answer... Yes. Because it's not about education, it's about mass human behaviour and that is a very very slow thing to change by education. Faster by enforceable instruction (in this instance - law). Sad but true - that's just how humans work.

It is all largely irrelevant unfortunately though, because the police are now so under funded, there is laughable/negligable enforcement. This means that sensible, generally honest people will obey the new laws, but the majority who were engaging in such behaviour will continue to flout it anyway. Credibility of the system is going completely out of the window and it will not be reversed until there is something like the London riots again where they actually fail to regain control without calling in the army this time.

A wodge of police situated on Ilford high road could take hundreds of very dangerous drivers off the road in an hour, the behaviour of drivers is absolutely appalling, blatent waving a phone in the window while talking on it, horrendous speeding, ignoring red lights, driving down long stretches of the wrong side of a single carriageway road and the wrong way across junctions because they don't like the look of the queuing traffic... But do you ever see a policeman, or if you do, ever see them even attempt to do anything? No. Completely irrelevant presence.

Post by **indigolemon** » Thu Oct 01, 2015 12:09 pm

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/soci ... 1001102508

89 UKDM BA4 4WS (resto job!) · Post by **wurlycorner** » Thu Oct 01, 2015 9:43 pm

^^^ Double result on the fitness front for the kid, then

Incidentally, while I was in a waiting area in an office today, I saw some stupid bint interviewed on Sky News who said the no smoking in cars while kids are there law, was unfair and unworkable for her, because she needed to smoke in order to be able to drive...

(apparently she got stressed while driving if she couldn't smoke)

mercutio · Post by **mercutio** » Thu Oct 01, 2015 9:48 pm

the real problem is just the total and seemingly depthless stupidity and greed for stupid lawsuits of people when you have to print and a pack of salted peanuts "may contain nuts" it kinda says it all

Lude Generation

Two Things You Might Not Know

Re: Two Things You Might Not Know