Big Brother in Britain

[Grammatron]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Big Brother in Britain

I’m considering the liberty of everyone. Giving the government power to stop me in a car opens up all kinds of doors for abuse of power. The person living in fear does not have a right to infringe on my liberty. It is their responsibility to deal with their fear.

Tony, how is a cop's ability to switch on the lights and legally force you to pull over that much different than a cop's ability to push a button and physically force you to pull over?

 

[Jon_in_london]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Big Brother in Britain

I’m considering the liberty of everyone. Giving the government power to stop me in a car opens up all kinds of doors for abuse of power. The person living in fear does not have a right to infringe on my liberty. It is their responsibility to deal with their fear.

Im not talking about people living in fear, Im talking about the people who are killed and maimed every year by selfish and irresponsible drivers.

Liberty should be unrestricted until the property and lives of others are under threat. In that case we need laws to protect people.

Would you agree that its fine for me to blind-fold myself and swing about wildly with a baseball bat in a crowded public place? Or do think I should be stopped from doing so?

 

[Andonyx]

I am against speed governors of any kind, it's up to the police to enforce the laws.

But the govorners here in the US are not mandated by law. They are placed for insurance reasons. Most manufacturers place these on their car because somehow limiting their cars to 120, or 130 makes a huge difference in their litigation insurance as opposed to allowing the car to hit 150.

Makes no sense to me personally.

A good example is the Hyabusa Motorcycle. When it originally arrived, even the production model could hit something like 191 on straights with the proper tires.

Honda got slammed by insurance problems and oddly, some press, and later models were capped at like 172.

Seems like a petty difference at that point.

 

[Grammatron]

But the govorners here in the US are not mandated by law. They are placed for insurance reasons. Most manufacturers place these on their car because somehow limiting their cars to 120, or 130 makes a huge difference in their litigation insurance as opposed to allowing the car to hit 150.

Makes no sense to me personally.

A good example is the Hyabusa Motorcycle. When it originally arrived, even the production model could hit something like 191 on straights with the proper tires.

Honda got slammed by insurance problems and oddly, some press, and later models were capped at like 172.

Seems like a petty difference at that point.

Is there much difference between flying off a motorcycle at 191 and 172?

 

[Tony]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Big Brother in Britain

Tony, how is a cop's ability to switch on the lights and legally force you to pull over that much different than a cop's ability to push a button and physically force you to pull over?

None really, except the button gives the cops more power thus more power to abuse. For the record, I am against the current laws that give the police the power to pull you over.

 

[Grammatron]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Big Brother in Britain

None really, except the button gives the cops more power thus more power to abuse. For the record, I am against the current laws that give the police the power to pull you over.

I wouldn't really mind a device in my car if it would help stop some moron from flying through rush hour traffic and killing 3 people. I doubt police would abuse the power since they would be slammed quite hard if they did.

 

[BTox]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Big Brother in Britain

For the record, I am against the current laws that give the police the power to pull you over.

For the record, are you in favor of any laws? Just curious.

 

[Tony]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Big Brother in Britain

Liberty should be unrestricted until the property and lives of others are under threat. In that case we need laws to protect people.

You can attribute this argument to anything. This isn’t a reason, its a justification. You are treating normal people as a threat with no reason or evidence.

Would you agree that its fine for me to blind-fold myself and swing about wildly with a baseball bat in a crowded public place?

Yes, I would. But you cross the line when you hit someone, when and if that happened you would have to account for your error in a civil court. That's the risk you take.

 

[Tony]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Big Brother in Britain

For the record, are you in favor of any laws? Just curious.

Yes I am.

 

[Jon_in_london]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Big Brother in Britain

None really, except the button gives the cops more power thus more power to abuse. For the record, I am against the current laws that give the police the power to pull you over.

I ahve to agree with Tony here. If I am a terrorist with a car full of explosive that Im going to ram into a bus-load of school kids, those evil police should not have the power to stop me. /sarcasm.

 

[BTox]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Big Brother in Britain

Yes I am.

Care to give a few examples - again, just curious.

 

[Tony]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Big Brother in Britain

Care to give a few examples - again, just curious.

Laws against murder, robbery and raping are a few examples.

 

[BTox]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Big Brother in Britain

You can attribute this argument to anything. This isn’t a reason, its a justification. You are treating normal people as a threat with no reason or evidence.

You do not consider someone driving in traffic at 100 mph a threat? The evidence is speed as determined by radar.

 

[Jon_in_london]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Big Brother in Britain

You can attribute this argument to anything. This isn’t a reason, its a justification. You are treating normal people as a threat with no reason or evidence.

I am not attributing it to 'anything'. I am attributing it to reckless driving. Do I really have to drege up references to convince you that reckless driving is a bad thing and kills and maims thousands of people every year?

Yes, I would. But you cross the line when you hit someone, when and if that happened you would have to account for your error in a civil court. That's the risk you take.

So lets say that many many people all adopted this practice of wildly swinging baseball bats in crowded public places while blindfolded. Do you not think you could preserve more liberty by taking steps to prevent this behaviour than by allowing it to continue unchecked? Is it not better to prevent a tradgedy than to pick up the pieces afterwards?

 

[Tony]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Big Brother in Britain

You do not consider someone driving in traffic at 100 mph a threat? The evidence is speed as determined by radar.

This is a gross misunderstanding of my point.

 

[Grammatron]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Big Brother in Britain

So lets say that many many people all adopted this practice of wildly swinging baseball bats in crowded public places while blindfolded. Do you not think you could preserve more liberty by taking steps to prevent this behaviour than by allowing it to continue unchecked? Is it not better to prevent a tradgedy than to pick up the pieces afterwards?

I wonder how would you put a governor on a baseball bat?

 

[BTox]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Big Brother in Britain

This is a gross misunderstanding of my point.

Then what was your point?

 

[Tony]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Big Brother in Britain

Do I really have to drege up references to convince you that reckless driving is a bad thing and kills and maims thousands of people every year?

No, thats not my concern.

So lets say that many many people all adopted this practice of wildly swinging baseball bats in crowded public places while blindfolded.

Thats absurd.

 

[Tony]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Big Brother in Britain

Then what was your point?

My point is that, legally, we still have presumption of innocence. By painting everyone with the same guilty brush, we betray that.

 

[Jon_in_london]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Big Brother in Britain

No, thats not my concern.

Thats absurd.

1. Yes it is your concern. Stop dodging other peoples arguments.

2. Its a hypothetical question, humour me.