Jump to content
The Christmas Logo Competition is back. See thread in Sheffield Discussions for details ×

Justin Smith

Closed
  • Content Count

    3,894
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Justin Smith


  1. 5 hours ago, Penistone999 said:

    So , best of three then if Remoan won any second referendum. 

    No, you`ve misunderstood me entirely. It`s best  of any number, that`s Democracy, it doesn`t just stop at a result one group of electors want. Even if there was a People`s Vote and Remain won bey a larger margin than 52/48 (and, more significantly, on facts not fantasy) that does not preclude UKIP from standing in elections on a platform of leaving the EU.


  2. 17 hours ago, RiffRaff said:

    Only heard today that an old pal of mine, Bernie Tormé, died last month. 

    He'd been suffering from double pneumonia.

    We'd lost touch too many years ago, so the news has come as a complete surprise.
    A brilliant guitarist and a lovely bloke to boot.

    RIP, mate...

    Was he the one who played with Ozzy Osbourne ? I can remember seeing them at the City Hall with some big bald bassist with a moustache, in a different lifetime.....


  3. 14 hours ago, Cyclone said:

    I don't particularly care about the new ASL as it will be possible and easy to disable it according to the proposal.

    And why would any reasonable person want to disable it ? I certainly hope that, if vehicles concerned had their speed limiters disabled, and were involved in an accident, it would be possible to check that the drivers had done that. And the appropriate conclusions drawn.

    One things for sure, anyone wanting to disable it cannot logically dislike speed cameras. Not if they`re being consistent anyway.


  4. On ‎04‎/‎04‎/‎2019 at 13:40, Penistone999 said:

    So , lets say we have a second referendum and the Remoaners win . Leavers will be unhappy, so do we have best of three ? best of five ? or maybe first to ten would be a good idea ? 

     

     

    I think you're forgetting a load of stuff here.

    In a Democracy people can vote to change things all the time, that`s the definition of democracy. It`s not a best of two or three or whatever. Voters have the right, at every General Election to vote to leave the EU, they do so by voting UKIP, which, truth be told, was always going to be the only way this country would have a hard Brexit because our democratic system is not set up for a simplistic question (which raised more questions than it answered) to force Parliament to adopt something which was never closely defined anyway.

    To recap, since 1993 (or whenever UKIP was formed) people had the opportunity to vote to leave the EU, but they didn`t because until Cameron embarked on his ill considered gamble to reunite the Tory party (and Leave got going with its lies), the VAST majority of people in this country weren`t bothered about the EU one way or the other.

     

    Brexit, a solution looking for a problem :

     

    wp64a4945c_01_1a.jpg


  5. 17 hours ago, Fudbeer said:

    To be fair am not saying I disagree the new restrictions are a good thing.Although I do occasionally break the speed limit its only by a small amount I see more people driving at ridiculous speeds these days than ever before usually young and with those ridiculous sounding exhaust pipes.The bottom line is am sure it would save many lives and that has to be the most important consideration.

    And on that few people could disagree.


  6. 18 hours ago, Fudbeer said:

    Thats exactly what I meant.Many years ago I was stopped for speeding on Bochum Parkway and the Policeman  said he  accepts that the speed limit is low and in good conditions many people travel a little over the limit and he does not stop them for it but doing 50 was not acceptable, he gave me a warning.I have commuted for over 30 years by car and car shared many times and the majority of people I have shared with have gone a little over the limit at some point. not suggesting its right to do so but they  do.

    I`ve never had a speeding ticket, in fact I can`t actually remember ever having been caught for speeding. When I was a younger immature driver I did speed, though only marginally, but as I`ve grown up, particularly since I have got married and even more so since I became a father, I never deliberately break the speed limit. In fact if I have my lad in the car I make it a  policy to drive under the limit if the latter is over 40mph. If I drive a bit slower the car is a bit quieter, does a bit more MPG and, all other things being equal, means the consequences of any accident will be less severe. On the negative side the journey might take 5% longer, though often it won`tactually take any longer at all. It`s a no brainer really


  7. 2 hours ago, Fudbeer said:

    In the real world away from the "I never do anything wrong" world of the forum I think the vast majority of people break the speed limit at some point.Particularly when they consider its safe to do so.

    You`re very wrong to imply that "the vast majority of people break the speed limit", certainly if you mean deliberately break the speed limit as opposed to by accident. I suspect very strongly that most people DO NOT break the speed limit, unless by accident, and therefore would be very happy for a system to be introduced that prevented their errors.

    But, whether a certain %age of drivers want to be able to break the speed limit or not is totally beside the point. It increases the risk to other road users (and pedestrians) and is illegal anyway, therefore anything which stops them doing that can only be a good thing.


  8. 10 hours ago, Penistone999 said:

    Im ENGLISH , not european .

    You are, of course, free to think of yourself as whatever you want, but that doesn`t alter the fact that :

     

    1 - The referendum was only won 52/48 and, provably, on a load of lies.

     

    2 - There is no longer a majority in this country for leaving the EU.

     

    Therefore, no matter what happens now, there will be a democratic deficit, in this country.


  9. I`ve just read this statement by Theresa May, which just shows she has no idea about how the country is thinking :

     

    "I've just come from chairing seven hours of Cabinet meetings focused on finding a route out of the current impasse, one that will deliver the Brexit the British people voted for and allow us to move on and begin bringing our divided country back together.

    "I know there are some who are so fed up with delay and endless arguments that they would like to leave with no deal next week. I've always been clear that we could make a success of no deal in the long term."

     

    Two things spring to mind :

     

    1 - Bearing in mind it looks like my European Citizenship is going get stolen from me, on a 52/48 result by a load of lies, I cannot see any way this country is going to be "brought back together". It`ll; take at least a generation in my opinion.

     

    2 - The bit in bold sums up TM`s blinkered view. There are just as many people who are fed up with the delays, the lies and the endless arguments, that they`d like the whole thing called off, or, at the very least, subject to a people`s vote. But she never said that or even alluded to it. And she`s the one claiming she wants to reunite the country ?

    I don`t think so.

     


  10. On ‎30‎/‎03‎/‎2019 at 02:50, Lex Luthor said:

    Both sides lied but one side got to use millions of public money in the process too.  

    You are correct if course.  The EU has made itself a liar with it's 'we must respect the outcome of the referendum', along with the main parties. 

    It is impossible "to respect the outcome of the referendum" because Brexit, as advertised by Leave, does not exist. Do you really think that if MPs could vote for a Brexit of the type Leave promised (basically a cake and eat it Brexit with all positives and no negatives) that they wouldn`t have voted for it months ago ? Might I suggest that if you really think they still wouldn`t have voted for that your mind must be closed. 


  11. 9 hours ago, Dardandec said:

    Just buy a new car a few months before this comes in. Look after it and service it instead of driving it to destruction like most car owners do, Then bingo, another 15 years+ with a normal car win win. :)

    How fantastic, you`ve got a car which car exceed the speed limit for 15 years more than all the others, not sure why that`s a win win.

    One hopes that if your car can exceed the speed limit you`ll be trying extra hard not to break it, and, even more importantly, not kill or maim anyone else on the roads.

    Lastly, one assumes you never complain about speed cameras, because that would be hypocritical in the extreme.


  12. 2 hours ago, ANGELFIRE1 said:

    29/03/2019 the day Democracy was put to death. RIP.

     

    Angel1.

    I thought that was the 19th of Jan 2019, or thereabouts, which was the day that Britain became a pro Remain country (due to the age profile of Leaver and Remain voters), see the Independent article.

     

    "These calculations assume that not one person who voted in the last referendum has changed their mind – and that those whom abstained then would stay at home again. In fact, YouGov’s research shows that a fair number of today’s under 25s who were old enough last time but did not do so, would vote in a new referendum; and these people would divide 82-18 per cent for Remain. (This compares with a 75-25 per cent preference for Remain among the under 25s who DID vote last time.)
    I have NOT counted any rise in turnout among the under-25s in my prediction that Crossover Day will be January 19. Were I to do so, this would, again, bring the day forward; indeed, it might already have happened".


  13. 50 minutes ago, woodview said:

    What I mean is it is constant legal monitoring.

    Just ploughing in to it needs discussion. That has happened with dna storage, snoopers charter etc. I see them as all on a theme. I guess speeding is your bug bear subject, so perhaps find it more acceptable?

    Aggressive drivers who kill innocent people are my bugbear subject. TBH I cannot understand why they aren`t everyone`s bugbear subject (excluding selfish immature [under 25 ? ] Petrolheads).

    By any reasonable definition speeding is aggressive driving.


  14. 5 hours ago, Lex Luthor said:

    You are extremely naive and under-estimate the feelings of more than half of the country who feel betrayed by the traditional parties and will neither trust nor vote for them ever again. 

    What REALLY annoys me about Brexiteers banging on about "voters losing respect for democracy" is that it forgets that whatever happens a significant %age of the population will lose respect for democracy. I have already lost faith in British democracy because (if Brexit goes ahead) permanent political power has been achieved by lying. But that`s only the start of it, a high %age of young voters have lost faith in democracy because they were too young to vote at the referendum and are having to put up with something for which there is no longer a majority in this country. Basically they`re being dragged out of the EU on the votes of people who aren`t even here any more.

     

    permanent political power has been achieved by lying :

     

    wpb492454e_01_1a.jpg


  15. 16 hours ago, woodview said:

    Ok, lets look at that handy graph. Osborne said growth would be between 3% and 6% lower immediately following a Leave vote. The vertical line shows the date of the referendum. Growth stayed stwady for about 9 months, then fell by 1% over the course of the whole following year.

    That is nothing like what he said.

    Also, what happened to his emergency budget, the housing market slump?

    Amazing how many tory apologists suddenly materialise and can defend clear misrepresentation.

    Nearly everybody knows they both lied. If you want to defend them, then that's your call. Maybe you'll begin to defend everything else they say and be complete tory boys before too long.

    I knew you wouldn't. You should stop wearing your Osborne t-shirt though. Maybe just keep it in a drawer, safe.

    The general thrust of Remain`s argument, as you know full well, was that there would be an economic impact. Leave, on the other hand, dismissed it all as "Project Fear". AFAIK nobody now, even Brexiteers, are suggesting there would be no economic impact, particularly in the case of a no deal, or relatively hard, Brexit.


  16. 13 hours ago, woodview said:

    I agree in making roads as safe as possible and cracking down on dangerous driving.

    But a gps enabled vehicle vould also automatically issue you speeding fines, quite simply. So the safety principle is great, I agree totally, but I struggle to differentiate that and snooping, dna storage etc etc that have all been hotly disputed.

    I don`t think anyone is suggesting that the system would not prevent you speeding but only prosecute you for doing so. Is that what you seem to be thinking ?


  17. 3 hours ago, woodview said:

    I don't know how they quantity ' speed related' , but I do believe they are reporting it from an impartial perspective.

    As I said in the post, 2000 is a tragic figure. I also said, i believe in hammering speeders, particularly in built up areas where pedestrian s are present. At the same time this is a very intrusive method, and I mentioned snoopers charter, cctv, but could also talk about fimgerprint and dna storage. How do you think the topics overlap?

    I think stuff about mentioning "snoopers charter" and stuff as a means of arguing against speed limiters is the kind of poor argument usually advanced by Petrolheads because, let`s face it, they don`t have any other argument. As far as I`m concerned a car is a lethal weapon and driving one is a privilege in which everything should be subsumed to minimising risk for other road users (including pedestrians). TBH I`m not that bothered about the driver himself (aggressive drivers usually are men) putting themselves at risk, it`s others they put at risk (who have no choice in the matter) who I have sympathy for.


  18. 42 minutes ago, woodview said:

    Osborne article from BBC news at the time:

    Publishing Treasury analysis , he said a Leave vote would cause an "immediate and profound" economic shock, with growth between 3% and 6% lower.

     

    Did that happen? No.

    I think it's simply unbelievable that so many so called left wingers can claim a Tory run Remain campaign contained no lies. It simply is not credible.

    That report is entitled "the immediate economic impact of leaving the EU. We haven`t actually left yet, but what we have done is enough.

     

    Project Fear, does not exist, apparently :

     

    wp3c96980f_01_1a.jpg


  19. 2 hours ago, woodview said:

    I know 100% there were Leave lies, there were Remain one too. I'm not, and wasn't part of either campaign and have no allegiance to any party, so not much pointing the obvious out to me.

    What I'm saying is, both Labour and Tories stood in 2017 GE on Leave manifestos. So, between them, they have control parliament and can come to a solution that they can both live with.

    Could you quote me a Remain lie ?

    TBH, Leave saying the EU would be falling over themselves to give us what we want wasn`t technically a lie, it was just irresponsibly  optimistic and highly unlikely.

    However, "Turkey is joining the EU" and "the NHS will get £350 million a week", they were lies. Some Brexiteers try to defend the Turkey lie but only succeed in losing respect. The point is, even if there was some very faint glimmer of truth in their argument, the fact is Turkey are not joining the EU now, and therefore things have changed. But Brexiteers will never accept the latter....


  20. 1 hour ago, woodview said:

    In the 1960s about 8,000 people were year were killed on the roads. It's now down to about 2,000 , still a tragic number. About 1/4 of that is speed related.

    I would be interested what definition they use for "not speed related". Particularly in view of the fact I`m certain that if no vehicle was able to break the speed limit it would hugely reduce aggression on the roads, and it`s aggressive driving which causes most deaths.

     

    The death figures my have dropped significantly since the 60s, but it`s still far too high. I`m pretty certain any family members of anyone killed on the roads would not be comforted in the least that death rates had dropped by a 3/4 or whatever.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.