Stop, In the Name of Big Government.

[Bob Fechter]

Once again, how can a true car enthusiast be a liberal when the agenda he supports is destroying freedom on the roads? From taxing gasoline higher and higher, mandating endless safety and pollution laws to make a sub compact a deal at $25,000, to making everyone pay for extra lanes that only certain behaviors allow you to use those lanes, and now this, a black box that will scan the speed limit and force your vehicle to slow down to that limit.


EU plans to fit all cars with speed limiters - Telegraph

Yes this is a political subject. It is very real. And, in reference to the lanes that only can be used for vehicles with more than one person in them, in Los Angeles those lanes are now restricted to people who have more than one person PLUS a monthly toll for the privilege to use the roads you pay for.

 

[Pete McCluskey.]

I agree, many freedoms the motorist used to enjoy, are being removed by climate change lies.

 

[Keith]

Doesn't go far enough. Cars are dangerous and people have far too much freedom and fun in them. Crime also travels on four wheels.

People who drive cars also hurt themselves and others and this cannot and should not be permitted.

Your Government has sworn to protect the people from themselves.

Therefore private cars should be BANNED and only official Government Agencies such as Law Enforcement, EPA, Immigration & Customs, Internal Revenue Services & the Military should be allowed motor vehicles in the future.

 

[Pete McCluskey.]

Not a bad idea, I used to enjoy riding a horse. Of course horses fart and therefore are also pollutants, as are humans. It follows that there should be a tax on farting and breathing. :idea:

 

[Keith]

Totally agree with that Pete - I would be tax exempt!

WTF are you doing posting here on vacation?

Nice day, a bit breezy and cooler on the coast.

BTW, If you look up at the sky Pete, we're seeing the same clouds mate. Scary or what?

 

[Mark]

I worry about this part of the article from a legal stand point, that says, "Patrick McLoughlin, the Transport Secretary, is said to be opposed to the plans, which could also mean existing cars are sent to garages to be fitted with the speed limiters, preventing them from going over 70mph."

I have absolutely no belief that this clap-trap nonsesce would get through to reality, it's just another subject for Polititians to waffle over and grab headlines. Howver, noone has the right to touch my car, let alone fit some after-market piece of shit technology to it. PERIOD.

If the government ever want to alter my car physically, to prevent it from exceeding some pre-determined speed, they must buy it from me first, at full market value. Then and only then, may they do to it what they will.

Thankyou Mr. Transport Secretary forblocking this EU communism. Time to pull up the rug and fook off out of the European Union. Lets face it folks, most European Countries are basically communist at heart.

"Power to the People"? Sod off, that slogan really means, Power to those that control the People!

 

[Mark]

Therefore private cars should be BANNED and only official Government Agencies such as Law Enforcement, EPA, Immigration & Customs, Internal Revenue Services & the Military should be allowed motor vehicles in the future.

Wasn't the former USSR set up much akin to that Keith? OK, so some fools were allowed private cars, but only those slow, cardboard things.

So, are we saying that the USSR had it right all along? Oh, woe is me.

 

[Keith]

Wasn't the former USSR set up much akin to that Keith? OK, so some fools were allowed private cars, but only those slow, cardboard things.

So, are we saying that the USSR had it right all along? Oh, woe is me.

Look, our Government (same for the Russians and Americans) are Big Picture people and understand FAR more than we can possibly know.

We must trust our Governments to know what's best for us.

All these years of fighting the obvious has cost us some very nice high rise retirement flats on Hackney Marshes. It's time to give our Governments our absolute and unequivocal backing.

Embrace Craikism today. Save Our Society...

 

[Larry L.]

Once again, how can a true car enthusiast be a liberal when the agenda he supports is destroying freedom on the roads? From taxing gasoline higher and higher, mandating endless safety and pollution laws to make a sub compact a deal at $25,000, to making everyone pay for extra lanes that only certain behaviors allow you to use those lanes, and now this, a black box that will scan the speed limit and force your vehicle to slow down to that limit.


EU plans to fit all cars with speed limiters - Telegraph

Yes this is a political subject. It is very real. And, in reference to the lanes that only can be used for vehicles with more than one person in them, in Los Angeles those lanes are now restricted to people who have more than one person PLUS a monthly toll for the privilege to use the roads you pay for.

But, Bob - haven't you realized yet that govt ALWAYS knows what's best for us all????? Haven't you figured out yet that THE GREATER GOOD should always trump an individual's personal liberty and freedom - and that only GOVT is qualified to determine what that "greater good" IS?????

Boy, you are one 'sick-o' individual, pal...:stunned:

 

[Keith]

But, Bob - haven't you realized yet that govt ALWAYS knows what's best for us all????? Haven't you figured out yet that THE GREATER GOOD should always trump an individual's personal liberty and freedom - and that only GOVT is qualified to determine what that "greater good" IS?????

Boy, you are one 'sick-o' individual, pal...:stunned:

Once again, Larry Leaps in with ultimate common sense.

Larry is clearly a Big Picture kind of Guy and is looking out for us all.

I would sure feel safe if Larry was in Government...

 

[Larry L.]

Larry wouldn't...! (Me thinks I'd likely be shot by someone on the "tolerant" left!)


(Edit: I just read your post #8! 'Guess I didn't need to make post #9, did I...? That's what I get for posting B4 reading alllllllllll the posts all way down...)

(Sue me.)

 

[Steve]

Atlas has an itch.....

 

[Bob Fechter]

"Where is John Galt?" I'm ready to go exile somewhere in the Rocky Mountains.

 

[Pete McCluskey.]

I'll just shrug it off.

 

[Jeff Young]

Once again, how can a true car enthusiast be a liberal when the agenda he supports is destroying freedom on the roads? From taxing gasoline higher and higher, mandating endless safety and pollution laws to make a sub compact a deal at $25,000, to making everyone pay for extra lanes that only certain behaviors allow you to use those lanes, and now this, a black box that will scan the speed limit and force your vehicle to slow down to that limit.


EU plans to fit all cars with speed limiters - Telegraph

Yes this is a political subject. It is very real. And, in reference to the lanes that only can be used for vehicles with more than one person in them, in Los Angeles those lanes are now restricted to people who have more than one person PLUS a monthly toll for the privilege to use the roads you pay for.

Because being a "liberal" or a "conservative" doesn't mean that you embrace every single idea that particular political viewpoint encompasses.

Jeebus you are a divisive broken record.

 

[Bob Fechter]

Because being a "liberal" or a "conservative" doesn't mean that you embrace every single idea that particular political viewpoint encompasses.

Jeebus you are a divisive broken record.

And what are you? Control is the heart of Liberalism. Do you want these black boxes? Who do you imagine is pushing them and all the other intrusions into our freedoms?

 

[Jeff Young]

I'm not some one who constantly comes on an internet forum and complains that all conservatives believe in every kooky thing a conservative has said, or thinks that people who don't agree with me politically are ruining the country.

"Control" is the heart of liberalism IN YOUR MIND. Liberals and conservatives have often pushed for greater individual liberty with freedom of the press/speech, of religion, from state religion, from search and seizure, Civil Rights, etc.

In fact, in the areas of freedom of the press/speech, religion, and individual liberties vis a vis the police, liberals and the Warren Court led the way (with support from socially progressive conservatives) in expanding your civil liberties.

Same with women's rights, reproductive rights (not just talking about abortion, states until the 60s could and did ban contraception), gay rights, and so on.

So to say that liberals are behind all of the "intrusions into our freedoms" is inaccurate, and just plain stupid. And also divisive, which again is par for the course with you. Nice job.

 

[Terry Oxandale]

Once again, how can a true car enthusiast be a liberal when the agenda he supports is destroying freedom on the roads?

Jeez, give it a break. Do you really see all those that do not agree 100% with your philosphy in such "black and white" imagery? Do you hold any importance to the term, idea, or concept of diversity? That there are always two sides to an argument, both of which carry some portions of ligitimate and rational thought? Do you ever step across your boundary of safe thought, turn around, look back, and evaluate your own thoughts within the context of the real world (even once in a while)?

My personal beliefs, and I know this may be a shocking contradiction to my "liberal" side (not my liberal whole side), is that safety is in the eye of the beholder. If 70mph is safe, and 65 is even safer, then all speed limits should be reduced to 65. And if 60 is even safer, then...on and on to until we decide to "stay off the road". I should be directly accountable for my own driving style, not to the least capable driver that becomes the common factor in setting criteria for traffic laws. As you can see, I don't appeal to the socialization of safety...oops, did I say that? Slap me down!

 

[Mark]

Nice post Terry. I am going to use the ever decreasing speed/safety statement next time the topic comes up in conversation. I never thought of it like that.

 

[Bob Fechter]

Terry, you can intellectualize this all you want, but the, what I call, "exaggeration of the absurd" is just a parlor trick to show how you understand the problem (and "look how open minded I am to have the flexibility to see beyond "black and white"), but what does it accomplish?

I'm glad you feel this way about accountability, I'm sure it gets a knowing nod from those to whom you espouse it, but it isn't going to stop it. All this heavy handed control is coming. Degree by degree we frogs are slowly allowing ourselves to get boiled smile and say, "yeah, saw that coming, not much we could do about it."

My personal beliefs, and I know this may be a shocking contradiction to my "liberal" side (not my liberal whole side), is that safety is in the eye of the beholder. If 70mph is safe, and 65 is even safer, then all speed limits should be reduced to 65. And if 60 is even safer, then...on and on to until we decide to "stay off the road". I should be directly accountable for my own driving style, not to the least capable driver that becomes the common factor in setting criteria for traffic laws. As you can see, I don't appeal to the socialization of safety...oops, did I say that? Slap me down!