No.... I am NOT saying that! I am saying that, just like there are times when using your gun to shoot a deranged axeman IS and SHOULD BE legal... there are times when speeding TO SAVE LIVES should be allowed. For examples:
* an ambulance on the way to hospital * the police on the way to a robbery * the firebrigade rushing to a fire a * Me when rushing a (truly) sick relative to hospital * Me chasing ram raiders attempting to steal a cash point (and that HAS happened!)
Blanket, outright bans rarely seem to cover ALL the situations; in my experience!
If it WAS a revenue raiser, why the **** would the A14 example be being used to CHANGE the use of camreas? It has CUT speeds and deaths and it has SLASHED the 'reveneue' to 17% of that of the previous YEAR while costing MILLIONS to install.
You are trying to make the argument fit into TOO tight a straight jacket, expressed as: allowed to speed versus NEVER being allowed to speed!
I'll try to make the speed example FIT into that straight-jacket the MOMENT that YOU will similarly 'straight-jacket' YOUR views on homeoenwers NEVER being allowed to use force to defend theoir family or property! There SHOULD be SOME leeway in these things.
However, if you forced me (at gun point, tee hee!) to jump one way of the other on this..... I'd go for the speed limiters! However, if you allowed me make a SENSIBLE judgement, I'd not be SO restrictive!
Ian
|
|