Speeding drivers at ‘children’s court’

TrickyWicky

pendulum wrote: »

Own up. You're one of the 8 year olds from the judging panel, aren't you?

Lol, i wish... i'd get to relive my youth!

No seriously though fella if you know your speedo a quick glance isn't more than a split second and as long as you're aware of whats already going on around you then its safe.

thelawnet

vax2002 wrote: »

Something very Nazi about this...

Spot the odd one out:

* racicst/eugenicist genocide
* human experimentation
* global warfare
* being told off by a 10-year old.

Knackered

thelawnet wrote: »

Are you smarter than a [STRIKE]10[/STRIKE] 11-year old?

Clearly not.

That's playground wit there so you're clearly the expert on children's savvy.

thelawnet wrote: »

Not only that, but if I cross a 30mph road that is clear that is safe, but not if you come speeding along at 60mph.

I don't quite understand this but if a car is going 30mph or 60mph it'll still be visible. If you can see a car coming, wait. Stop crossing the roads on blind corners and you'll be ok.

thelawnet wrote: »

Blaming the victim is absolutely disgusting.

According to your stats it could well be the victims fault in 91% of cases.

thelawnet wrote: »

I'd take a jury of 11-year-olds over the likes of you any day.

What's that supposed to mean?

thelawnet wrote: »

I don't have any sympathy for people caught speeding, it's one thing to speed but to get caught shows an extra level of inattention and foolishness. How is it that people manage to drive for decades with no points but some 'unfortunate' people get totted up within a couple of years? They are BAD drivers, totally inattentive, a menance to society, and we want them OFF the road.

Well you are THE LAW (net) so get cracking.

thelawnet

Knackered wrote: »

That's playground wit there so you're clearly the expert on children's savvy.

As I said, I'd take their savvy over yours any day of the week.

I don't quite understand this but if a car is going 30mph or 60mph it'll still be visible. If you can see a car coming, wait. Stop crossing the roads on blind corners and you'll be ok.

Why don't you stop driving like a maniac instead? People are not going to walk half-a-mile out of their way to find somewhere with sufficient visibility to give them time to see someone doing 60mph in a 30mph zone.

According to your stats it could well be the victims fault in 91% of cases.

Alternatively it might not. People do have to cross the road you know, and I don't think suicide by motor vehicle is terribly viable, so they are at least trying to do so safely.

What's that supposed to mean?

You don't seem to have a great deal of empathy or consideration.

HO87

thelawnet wrote: »

Spot the odd one out:

* racicst/eugenicist genocide
* human experimentation
* global warfare
* being told off by a 10-year old.

When comparing the above list with the most obvious source of Nazi policies - the National Socialist Party's Program:
1. Yes, there's a reference to racism - only Germans could be citizen, for example but there is no reference to eugenics. So I suppose that counts as half a point.
2. No, no mention of human experimentation
3. No, nor any mention of global warfare
4. Yes - the right to determine administrative and legal matters is vested in the citizen.

So, when pendulum suggests that using a young citizen's jury to interview errant motorists has Nazi overtones, it would appear that he's actually correct.

My only interest, for the record, is historical. I hold no Nazi torch.

pendulum

HO87 wrote: »

So, when pendulum suggests that using a young citizen's jury to interview errant motorists has Nazi overtones,

That was vax2002 who suggested that, not me! I'm the one who called the 8-year-old a moron.

mattyprice4004

Keeping to the limits within towns and villages is common sense, especially around schools and busy town centres.

However the lowering of speed limits on the completely barren country A roads in West Lancashire is daft, a number in a circle doesn't automatically make a road safe or unsafe.

thelawnet

mattyprice4004 wrote: »

Keeping to the limits within towns and villages is common sense, especially around schools and busy town centres.

However the lowering of speed limits on the completely barren country A roads in West Lancashire is daft, a number in a circle doesn't automatically make a road safe or unsafe.

What's that got to do with people being given the CHOICE to appear before some school children having been caught speeding outside that same school?

TrickyWicky

Personally I think anyone who claims they can't use the speedo AND drive a car isn't safe to be on the road. Sorry but thats just my take on it. Its like not being able to drive more than 20mph (like some older folks) they're dangerous to others. If you're honestly incapable of controlling your speed then you are a danger to other road users.

As for the kids.. theres two points. 1) It's good to make them part of the world and let them experience some responsibility but on the other hand 2) says we should let them be kids and grow up at their own pace. For many years we've been putting the nations kids under a lot of pressure and look at how a lot of them have turned out: Unable to read/write properly, pregnant before they're out of school, rioters, drug dealers etc. Maybe we should just ease off and let them grow up in their own way.

Bronnie

vaio wrote: »

Humm, tricky one, take the points & fine or take part in an entirely pointless (in both senses of the word) 30 min session of pretend self flagellation in front of the most pompous & self-righteous 11 year olds Liverpool can muster?

Think my decision would rest on how much headroom I had left on my licence

Yes, my thoughts too!