An Irrational Anger Rant

[F-Stop Junkie]

Health and safety is a joke

Polititcal correctness is a joke

this 'Nanny State' stuff is a joke.

How are these things a joke?

As far as pay per mile road charging and stuff like that go, Top Gear had it right. We already have a system where we pay tax based on the distance we drive, and we're penalised for having thirstier cars. It's called petrol tax. And once a month, all the oil companies send HM Treasury a big cheque, and everyone's happy. Apart from the bloke at Watford Gap who's just realised he's paid four quid for a Ginsters sandwich.

Charge individuals and you have to have offices, and people chasing payment, and systems to check that other systems are working. This is assuming the monitoring does not include - or can be manipulated to disclose - speed or location of the driver. If this happens, and it's an if, then yes it would be a travesty for public freedoms. Bear in mind though:

• We already have adaptive cruise control
• We already have sat-nav telling us where to go
• We already have cars that can spot lane markings

The only thing stopping the fully automatic car is the european legislation saying there must be a mechanical link between the steering wheel of a car, and the wheels. You cannot yet have drive by wire. However, when all cars are being tracked and monitored, won't you just let the car do the driving and wait to arrive?

Me, I'll be back at the Nurburgring, terrorising Germans.

[Fixed Pants™]

Is it bollocks.

Yes.

The examples you gave were just people being plain idiotic, speeding kills, drink driving kills, NOT f**king hot cross buns, not people saying happy christmas and being offended. That's my view of PC, dunno if PC is deeper than that but i thought PC was actions that offend other people's beliefs, religions, sex, race etc.

I wouldn't be offended if you ran starkers past me or what ever, i'd quite enjoy it () but seriously, i wouldn't bitch about it, and nor would anyone else that's rational and isn't a moany bitch. And if they're a moany bitch, they don't deserve an opinion.

[nmt_oli]

Pay-as-you-go road tax and ID cards would have to have a pretty significant change of fortune for either to get implemented, and if either of them did, I can imagine that the already waning public support for the government could finally go over the tipping point and really come back to bite Gordon Brown and his Labour Party.

True, but what will things be like in 10, 20, even 30 years. Weve been told these are "long term plans".

In fairness with the speeding thing, you're saying it's restricting freedom, but that's only because they aren't as effective now at catching people breaking the law. You've still got a law in place, it's up to you to decide whether you think you can get away with it. As a result, it's not like you really have a state-given freedom to do it anyway, so from their point of view they aren't restricting any sort of freedom. Being tracked constantly is a f**ker though, and the spy satellite they wanted to install to monitor London's streets would be a downer for those of a BMX/trials persuasion. The amount of CCTV cameras at the mo' is a joke, and so having one massive over-looking one would be a full-on pisstake.

ok, maybe it would just be 'enforcing' current laws. I should rephrase that whole argument into a "the speed limits are old and out of date, roads are in better condition, cars are more advanced, so higher speeds can be achieved safely" argument.

Im glad you agree on the tracking though, you just loose all privacy- surely thats some fundamental human right.

There was that promo on Myspace for the film "Taking Liberties" which goes into quite a lot of detail about all this sorta shit, just going through all the stuff we've lost since the Labour government came in, e.g. the right to protest, whereas now you have to ask the police for permission to protest, which is a pretty massive change which has sorta slipped under the majority's radar. Hopefully more films like that one delivered in a more realist manner instead of a Michael Moore sensationalist way might turn a few more heads and make a positive impact.

Indeed, i like films that deal with subject liek that, even if they may not be 100% unbiased Your also right about all the small things that most people havnet noticed. lots is changing, but is it changing for the better?

[F-Stop Junkie]

The examples you gave were just people being plain idiotic, speeding kills, drink driving kills, NOT f**king hot cross buns, not people saying happy christmas and being offended. That's my view of PC, dunno if PC is deeper than that but i thought PC was actions that offend other people's beliefs, religions, sex, race etc.

If someone is a bit worried about saying Merry Christmas in a multi-ethinic environment, then isn't that better than lots of people being openly racist, telling paki jokes and homophobic because it's socially ok? Isn't it better that we live in a world where we err on the side of caution instead of bullying and belittling people for who they worship or who they sleep with?

I should rephrase that whole argument into a "the speed limits are old and out of date, roads are in better condition, cars are more advanced, so higher speeds can be achieved safely" argument.

But the speed required to kill someone is the same as ever, plus cars are larger - hence have more momentum - than ever before. I say keep speed limits as they are in any area with people, raise them on the motorway, introduce wet weather speed limits on the motorway to stop people bombing along at 70mph when they can't see past the end of their own bonnets.

There was that promo on Myspace for the film "Taking Liberties" which goes into quite a lot of detail about all this sorta shit, just going through all the stuff we've lost since the Labour government came in, e.g. the right to protest, whereas now you have to ask the police for permission to protest, which is a pretty massive change which has sorta slipped under the majority's radar.

Permission to protest in one area of London, containing what Police might call 'sensitive targets'. There's no desire to reduce the right to free speech or protest, but to ensure in that area that the Police are aware of the activity and won't arrest people exercising that legal right.Mark Thomas did a great show about it. PM me Mark...

[nmt_oli]

How are these things a joke?

Battle of trafalgar, 2007 version.

Nelson: "Order the signal, Hardy."

Hardy: "Aye, aye sir."

Nelson: "Hold on, that's not what I dictated to Flags. What's the meaning of this?"

Hardy: "Sorry sir?"

Nelson (reading aloud): "'England expects every person to do his or her duty, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious persuasion or disability.' - What gobbledegook is this?"

Hardy: "Admiralty policy, I'm afraid, sir. We're an equal opportunities employer now. We had the devil's own job getting 'England' past the censors, lest it be considered racist."

Nelson: "Gadzooks, Hardy. Hand me my pipe and tobacco."

Hardy: "Sorry sir. All naval vessels have now been designated smoke-free working environments."

Nelson: "In that case, break open the rum ration. Let us splice the mainbrace to steel the men before battle."

Hardy: "The rum ration has been abolished, Admiral. Its part of the Government's policy on binge drinking."

Nelson: "Good heavens, Hardy. I suppose we'd better get on with it ............. full speed ahead."

Hardy: "I think you'll find that there's a 4 knot speed limit in this stretch of water."

Nelson: "Damn it man! We are on the eve of the greatest sea battle in history. We must advance with all dispatch. Report from the crow's nest please."

Hardy: "That won't be possible, sir."

Nelson: "What?"

Hardy: "Health and Safety have closed the crow's nest, sir. No harness, and they said that rope ladders don't meet regulations. They won't let anyone up there until a proper scaffolding can be erected."

Nelson: "Then get me the ship's carpenter without delay, Hardy."

Hardy: "He's busy knocking up a wheelchair access to the fo'c'sle Admiral."

Nelson: "Wheelchair access? I've never heard anything so absurd."

Hardy: "Health and safety again, sir. We have to provide a barrier-free environment for the differently abled."

Nelson: "Differently abled? I've only one arm and one eye and I refuse even to hear mention of the word. I didn't rise to the rank of admiral by playing the disability card."

Hardy: "Actually, sir, you did. The Royal Navy is under represented in the areas of visual impairment and limb deficiency."

Nelson: "Whatever next? Give me full sail. The salt spray beckons."

Hardy: "A couple of problems there too, sir. Health and safety won't let the crew up the rigging without hard hats. And they don't want anyone breathing in too much salt - haven't you seen the adverts?"

Nelson: "I've never heard such infamy. Break out the cannon and tell the men to stand by to engage the enemy."

Hardy: "The men are a bit worried about shooting at anyone, Admiral."

Nelson: "What? This is mutiny!"

Hardy: "It's not that, sir. It's just that they're afraid of being charged with murder if they actually kill anyone. There's a couple of legal-aid lawyers on board, watching everyone like hawks."

Nelson: "Then how are we to sink the Frenchies and the Spanish?"

Hardy: "Actually, sir, we're not."

Nelson: "We're not?"

Hardy: "No, sir. The French and the Spanish are our European partners now. According to the Common Fisheries Policy, we shouldn't even be in this stretch of water. We could get hit with a claim for compensation."

Nelson: "But you must hate a Frenchman as you hate the devil."

Hardy: "I wouldn't let the ship's diversity co-ordinator hear you saying that sir. You'll be up on disciplinary report."

Nelson: "You must consider every man an enemy, who speaks ill of your King."

Hardy: "Not any more, sir. We must be inclusive in this multicultural age. Now put on your Kevlar vest; it's the rules. It could save your life"

Nelson: "Don't tell me - health and safety. Whatever happened to rum, sodomy and the lash?"

Hardy: As I explained, sir, rum is off the menu! And there's a ban on corporal punishment."

Nelson: "What about sodomy?"

Hardy: "I believe that is now legal, sir."

Nelson: "In that case... kiss me, Hardy."

As far as pay per mile road charging and stuff like that go, Top Gear had it right. We already have a system where we pay tax based on the distance we drive, and we're penalised for having thirstier cars. It's called petrol tax. And once a month, all the oil companies send HM Treasury a big cheque, and everyone's happy. Apart from the bloke at Watford Gap who's just realised he's paid four quid for a Ginsters sandwich.

Indeed, BUT there is road tax on top of petrol tax, and there thinking of this new road tax. if they scrapped road tax, and just put up petrol tax, i would be fine with that, it makes sense- the fairest way of doing it.

Charge individuals and you have to have offices, and people chasing payment, and systems to check that other systems are working. This is assuming the monitoring does not include - or can be manipulated to disclose - speed or location of the driver. If this happens, and it's an if, then yes it would be a travesty for public freedoms. Bear in mind though:

• We already have adaptive cruise control
• We already have sat-nav telling us where to go
• We already have cars that can spot lane markings

The only thing stopping the fully automatic car is the european legislation saying there must be a mechanical link between the steering wheel of a car, and the wheels. You cannot yet have drive by wire. However, when all cars are being tracked and monitored, won't you just let the car do the driving and wait to arrive?

Me, I'll be back at the Nurburgring, terrorising Germans.

Cars mean different thigns to different people. Yes, fully atuomatic cars are possible with todays technology- the latest Merc S-Class is almost there! - but i like to be involved im my driving. if i wanted to be driven, id get a train or a taxi. probably be cheaper than owning a car!

The EU will have to allow drive by wire soon to allow manufactueres to implement the next generation of vehicles. GM already have a fully working drive by wire hydrogen fuel cell car.

[Fixed Pants™]

I'm not saying PC should be ritten off completely, just it needs to stop being so f**king petty.

And the speed limit thing is rational, a long with the smoking ban, it's for the better. 'Paki' jokes and gay jokes don't kill people directly (one or two might decide to finish themselves over it, but that's a small minority, i hope) smoking and speeding does.

The joke/dig at PC type censorship sums it up nicely.

Edited July 2, 2007 by Fat Pants

[nmt_oli]

But the speed required to kill someone is the same as ever, plus cars are larger - hence have more momentum - than ever before. I say keep speed limits as they are in any area with people, raise them on the motorway, introduce wet weather speed limits on the motorway to stop people bombing along at 70mph when they can't see past the end of their own bonnets.

I will agree with that, im not stupid enough to campaign for higher speed limits in urban areas. I was refering to motorways and open roads. the varible limit dependant on weather is also sensible, works on the continent.

[F-Stop Junkie]

Battle of trafalgar, 2007 version.

Ah, exaggeration for comic effect. So what is wrong exactly with allowing every person the same access and opportunities? Should some be discriminated against?

Indeed, BUT there is road tax on top of petrol tax, and there thinking of this new road tax. if they scrapped road tax, and just put up petrol tax, i would be fine with that, it makes sense- the fairest way of doing it.

There is no such thing as road tax. The disc on your windscreen is Vehicle Excise Duty - or simply a tax for having a car. A standing charge if you will. Roads are paid for by local councils, not money from tax discs. Scrap the tax and put up petrol tax more? Nah, the Government would always end up making more money that way...

i like to be involved im my driving. if i wanted to be driven, id get a train or a taxi. probably be cheaper than owning a car!

You're preaching to the choir. I've just come back from the Nurburgring, and it's petrolhead heaven. Proof that there's nothing more glorious than internal combustion. But then if you can't drive quickly, why drive at all? If we get to a point of automatic cars, then I'm sure you and I will have Caterhams in our garages ready for an open track.

I'm not saying PC should be ritten off completely, just it needs to stop being so f**king petty.And the speed limit thing is rational, a long with the smoking ban, it's for the better. 'Paki' jokes and gay jokes don't kill people directly (one or two might decide to finish themselves over it, but that's a small minority, i hope) smoking and speeding does.The joke/dig at PC type censorship sums it up nicely.

Isn't 'one or two' still one or two too many? Is it okay for a couple of people to kill themselves because society believes it's okay to have a go at them?The petty examples you're thinking of are small things blown up by the media. Yes, people are trying to be careful and occasionally getting it wrong on both sides of the line. Seems that people - by which I really mean the shit-stirring media - are just as keen to jump on both, weather you're "PC Boss Bans Christmas" or "BB Jade in Racist Slur".

[Caleb]

the thing is equal opportunities are far from equal as said earlier, equal to everyone but the white man, just last night i was in a club, more than half full of latvians/polish lithuanians etc and as a majority they had terrible manners and are pretty ignorant, not leaving doors open, shouting for drinks etc, smoking regardless of the ban.

i've been in many situations where people think its acceptable to laugh at the white man, or get away with calling themselves "niggers" etc and its not on.

theres so many arguments for and against its barely worth even trying to discuss but they should be employing these pc tactics to the immigrants that consider it acceptable to bomb and cause havoc to the country that pays there welfare !

[Dan6061]

I've read all of the first post, and browsed some commentss afterwards on the first page. Nothing else.

To contribute:

Soon enought, non-smokers will moan that they cannot walk down the street without being surrounded by smokers. To enter a pub/restaraunt, they'd have to weave there way through smokers. Politicians will then take note of this and completely ban smokers in all public places. Be it in a pub or outside in a street.

The only place they'd be able to smoke is in their cars/vans, and inside houses.

This is how I see it.

As you said, everyone's too focused on creating this 'perfect world' and it's justy turning to shit.

We've already done the damage. Infact we're still doing it, all we can do now is cut back and kill our planet a bit slower. We can only blame ourselves. Not as individuals, but as a race.

Back to the smoking ban.

Haven't been down to the pub yet since the ban has been in force, so I can't put forward my views on what it's like as a non-smoker.

I can see how much of a pain in the arse it must be for smokers to have to go outside for a fag. I'd like to say it gets them some fresh air, but it wouldn't be that would it...

I'm a non-smoker myself, my step-dad sadly died last June from throat cancer, so i'm strogly against smoking. I can't stand being around smokers. It's the smell of it, it gives me a headache. The way it just 'hangs around' in rooms is irritating.

It makes my eyes feel strange after being around it.

I'm used to it now, my Dad smokes, and smoked in the house when he lives here, as did my step-dad until Mum made him smoke outside. When I go to see my Dad he'll have a fag or two whilst we're there. I don't like it though.

I can say i've tried it before, I was young and curious, was one of those 'everyone else is' things, not thinking about the concequences. One drag and I hated it. I didn't cough or choke, I just hated the taste and feeling of the smoke in my mouth and lungs.

As a non-smoker, i'm all for the ban.

[Fixed Pants™]

Isn't 'one or two' still one or two too many? Is it okay for a couple of people to kill themselves because society believes it's okay to have a go at them?The petty examples you're thinking of are small things blown up by the media. Yes, people are trying to be careful and occasionally getting it wrong on both sides of the line. Seems that people - by which I really mean the shit-stirring media - are just as keen to jump on both, weather you're "PC Boss Bans Christmas" or "BB Jade in Racist Slur".

But, i people kill themselves over hot cross buns, they don't deserve to live anyway.

[GuyJames]

It's 2.24, my eyes are closed but I've been applauding in my head throughout reading your work. Good to know there are people forming there own opinions and writing them down nicely. Thank you for creating.

[Matt_Tupman]

To tired to write a decent response to your post Rich but I agree with 99% of it.

GOOD FILM FOR EVERYONE TO WATCH V FOR VENDETTA it's quite a new film 05 i think and basically shows what happens when a goverment trys to control a nation. Great film and something I feel will happen in places like the UK and US in the future.

One point that shocks me is all the people who are adopting the 'f**k it' atitude and feal that they don't need to worry about the next generation. All I can say is how selfish and I hope you are never given the joy of having a child becuase if thats your veiw then you don't deserve to bring life into this world.

Love the sig (but not that cable reel!)

Edited July 3, 2007 by Matt_Tupman

[ben_travis]

your blether

get over it, its for the benefit of everyones health, why should us non-smokers have to sit in your smoke........we shouldn't!!! Argue that one and your daft!

They could have made a full ban of it, but didnt,

the people laughing at you thing will go away, it gets boring after a while,

[Ash-Kennard]

HAHA rich has to smoke outside hahaha.

now thats out my system, rich that was a shithot essay, i can't believe how you wandered off into how the earth is doomed. i kinda like the smoke in pubs, it gives them a good atmosphere. but as oli said people taking the piss and doing it right next to me would piss me off a treat.

im kinda undecided on the matter to be honest. i guess now the law is inplace you will HAVE to get over it.

[Tony Harrison]

I don't think a smoking ban can be compared to removal of civil liberties or a 'nanny state'. The smoking ban was primarily intended to reduce the health risks to non smokers, not those who choose to smoke. This ban isn't saying 'Oh, you can't smoke anymore', it's saying 'Allow those who choose not to smoke to enjoy enclosed spaces without having to put up with it'.

The government is happy for people to smoke, and happy to take the revenue, but there's just been too much pressure from campaigns to stop it in enclosed spaces. I entirely agree. Although I don't like the way the willy that you (Richard) mentioned was being a snidey interfering twat, I don't see the ban as a defeat for civil liberties or freedom.

Edited July 3, 2007 by snappel

[Rich Pearson]

I applaud you Trials Forum. The amount of shitty, badly thought out, politically incorrect and often offensive subject matter of posts on TF in the last few months has gone from bad to worse, but even if some of you hate what I've written, DAMMIT I have made you all use your collective grey matters and think out some increadibly thought provoking responses to my post and others opposing arguments, and that has at least given me some hope in the youthful minds of today. I havn't seen such good debating since... well... EVER! Well Done!

personally i like being able to walk out my house in saftey and in comfort. I think all the stuff you said on interest rates and stuff is all misguided infomation. We all live very privilaged lives now, we all have money to "waste" on bikes, we proably have of least 1 square meal a day and have good job opportunitys for everyone. You know. I dont think anochism (sp) or anything can solve anything...... it would demolish the comforts that we all just take for granted....

this is just a kinda post for nothing i guess......

I guess if anything my point is that we have those things becasue a rather significant population of the world DON'T, and its those people who are paying, ultimately, for our way of life. Ask any Inuits (can't call them Eskimo's anymore...) how many of their freedoms have been taken away, like anual hunting seasons and age old practices of Tundra survival, becasue of what WE, the central belt and predominally the west, have done to the planet, in persuit of OUR freedoms.

I believe the environment is pretty screwed but that people will sort it out and salvage most of it after they see some bigger consequences. All the floods happening right now, I wonder if that will make some people think?

Thats my point though; People keep banging on about it and talking about signing Kyoto agreements and reducing emmissions, but no one, either at the top of the collective heap or the bottom, is actually doing anything about it. What about STOPPING carbon emissions? No, we don't want to do that, that would be sacrificing too much... And will the floods in the north make people think? I don't know, people will just say, 'its not outside my door' (unless for me and many others its suddenly outside Tarty Bikes door, then at the rate I'm trashing parts at the moment I'm gonna be screwed...)

One point that shocks me is all the people who are adopting the 'f**k it' atitude and feal that they don't need to worry about the next generation. All I can say is how selfish and I hope you are never given the joy of having a child becuase if thats your veiw then you don't deserve to bring life into this world.

I think my point was Matt that in one sense so many poeple are being inconsiderate and not thinking about future generations, generations where be people like Andy and Jonty are going to grow into (now theres a pair of natural disasters as if the world hadn't got enough already) and try and sort out our mistakes. Or have these people simply realised that there is nothing we can do, and that trying to sort it out is just pointless? Guess we'll never know.

Cheers for being so responsive everyone.

Rich

[Fixed Pants™]

get over it, its for the benefit of everyones health, why should us non-smokers have to sit in your smoke........we shouldn't!!! Argue that one and your daft!

That's one of the things i wanted to mention but was too tired... Having a smoking section is like having a pissing section in a swimming pool.

[Tony Harrison]

Except that swimming in a swimming pool with piss in it isn't hazardous to health.

[Ash-Kennard]

ok, a cyanide pouring area of a pool

[Fixed Pants™]

Principals though.

It's gonna go everywhere because it's a gas, it will move, it's not like you can contain it really. Same with a swimming pool, if it's in the same pool, it's gonna get to other people.

[future orange 660]

shouldnt be a total ban. thats just daft.

i think if some places were none smoking and other were smoking...business wouldnt be lost as the customers would just go to either or ?

wouldnt work so well for small pubs though but night clubs, restraunts etc.

[Tony Harrison]

It's not daft at all, it's perfectly logical. Why should people anywhere be unecessarily exposed to hazardous fumes?! It's only because smoking has become ingrained in society that it's ever been considered to be 'acceptible'. Now it seems the powers that be are finally making moves to deal with it, as it isn't acceptible at all.

When you think about it, it should be every person's basic right to not be put in a situation that could potentially damage their health just for somebody else's 'enjoyment'. I think the ban should cover all public spaces, not just enclosed ones. The problem now is that I leave work, etc and walk through a cloud of smoke on the steps where the smokers hang around.

It's antisocial, it's disgusting and I want nothing to do with it.

[Caleb]

that last line reminded me of Chris morris for some reason

[Tony Harrison]

Maybe my avatar was influencing you? Chris Morris is the man though, especially in Brass Eye and The Day Today...