If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
In article .com>,
"Furious George" > wrote: > Alan Baker wrote: > > In article .com>, > > "Furious George" > wrote: > > > > > Alan Baker wrote: > > > > In article >, > > > > "Thomas Avery" > wrote: > > > > > > > > > "Bob Flaminio" > wrote in message > > > > > ... > > > > > (the posted speed limit is 65). > > > > > > > > > > Nuff said! > > > > > > > > "Traffic is typically moderate, with ambient speeds of around > > > 75-80mph" > > > > > > > > The majority of people engaging in peaceable activity, hurting no > > > one. > > > > > > > > Under what principle should this be against the law? Or don't you > > > > understand that all of our laws have to obey certain fundamental > > > > principles? > > > > > > If you don't like the terms and conditions of road use (including > the > > > posted speed limit) then feel free to not use the road. Maybe you > want > > > to build your own road. Then you could set the speed limit to > whatever > > > you want. > > > > We all have the right to use the roads. > > Says you. When the government closes the road for repaving, are they > violating the rights of everyone. Don't be dense. A road closed for improvement is a reasonable limitation on our freedom to travel it, because traveling it while there are workers on it would be impractical. > > > We have a duty to do so in a > > manner that "keeps the peace"; i.e. to be competent to perform in a > > manner consistent with the greater damage that driving a motor > vehicle > > can cause. > > > > Beyond a system to show that competence, common law requires there to > > > have been a *victim* for there to have been an offense at law. A > victim > > can be one who was only endangered by sufficiently reckless > behaviour, > > and not actually injured in any way -- this adheres even when one is > > *not* driving, BTW, but a victim there must be. > > > > > > Since the vast majority of people navigate the roads at the speeds in > > > question every day without the slightest incident (and since what > > incidents that do occur are more likely to be caused by other factors > > > than they are likely to be caused by exceeding the posted limit), > there > > is no prima facie basis for declaring "speeding" (exceeding the > posted > > limit) as a form of endangerment. > > Tell that to the cinema manager: "There is no prima facie basis for > declaring outside food a form of endangerment." It's the same thing. > If you don't like the facility rules, then feel free to not use the > facility. A government is not a private facility, is it? -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia "If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard." |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
LIDAR Trial this Week | [email protected] | Driving | 17 | April 9th 06 02:44 AM |
Where to get Official Speed Limit Info | [email protected] | Driving | 40 | January 3rd 05 07:10 AM |
PATROL CAR CRASHES AFTER CHP PURSUIT IN PALO ALTO | Garth Almgren | Driving | 2 | December 24th 04 08:39 PM |