Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Tue Apr 28, 2026 20:08

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 107 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:20 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 21:17
Posts: 3734
Location: Dorset/Somerset border
safedriver wrote:
Now we have the smoking bans in the USA and Europe, not quite so draconian, but still pretty severe all the same. Where I live in Cheshire pubs are shutting in large numbers, and the same seems to be happening everywhere else, (I see them all boarded up as I drive around). Obviously more smokers than non-smokers went to pubs., so with them gone the pub goes bust.

A typical case of the Law of Unintended Consequences.



Does everyone here recall non-smokers saying they didn't go to pubs because they were so smoky, but they'd be able to once the smoking ban came in? Anyone seen any new faces in their local since? I haven't....


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:49 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 21:10
Posts: 1693
Johnnytheboy wrote:
safedriver wrote:
Now we have the smoking bans in the USA and Europe, not quite so draconian, but still pretty severe all the same. Where I live in Cheshire pubs are shutting in large numbers, and the same seems to be happening everywhere else, (I see them all boarded up as I drive around). Obviously more smokers than non-smokers went to pubs., so with them gone the pub goes bust.

A typical case of the Law of Unintended Consequences.



Does everyone here recall non-smokers saying they didn't go to pubs because they were so smoky, but they'd be able to once the smoking ban came in? Anyone seen any new faces in their local since? I haven't....


I suspect that beer at £3/pint may have more to do with it!

Our local Con club (Its technically a working mens club interestingly) is doing a roaring trade despite the smoking ban and the fact that many of the regulars are smokers. But then the booze is a good bit less expensive!


However I can see that the smoking ban may have been the last straw for pubs that were already struggling. Pubs are a bit like busses, all the proffit comes from 10% of the customers. a small fall in clientell (for whatever reason) can wipe the buisness out completly.

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 13:38 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 16:52
Posts: 290
Folks,

With reducing breathalyser limits we soon won't even be able to have one glass of lager with a meal at a country pub, never mind not being able to smoke.

Why go there? Surely not for the pleasure of a country drive.

God, I'm having a Victor Meldrew moment. :x

C.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vandalised Gatsos
PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 14:33 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 09:01
Posts: 1548
malcolmw wrote:
Gixxer wrote:
Put a camera outside my son's school and impose a strict 20mph limit by all means, and I'll be 100% behind the concept.

Can I just clarify if you think this should apply 24hrs per day?

Not in the slightest Malcolm, the increased risk is only present from 9am to 3pm (or whatever the school hours are).

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 18:29 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 15:00
Posts: 1109
Location: Can't see.
Dusty wrote:
Johnnytheboy wrote:
Does everyone here recall non-smokers saying they didn't go to pubs because they were so smoky, but they'd be able to once the smoking ban came in? Anyone seen any new faces in their local since? I haven't....


I suspect that beer at £3/pint may have more to do with it!


Probably more down to the fact that a non smoker, especially the kind that made an issue about smokey pubs, are far more likely to be the kind of people who consider more than 2 small glasses of white wine once a month as incompatible with their healthy living aspirations.

Meanwhile the non-smoking drinkers who kept the pub alive probably drop in for a couple, see that most of their mates aren't there, then go home or go round their mates houses to play playstation and breath smokey air

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 19:38 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6737
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
hairyben wrote:
Probably more down to the fact that a non smoker, especially the kind that made an issue about smokey pubs, are far more likely to be the kind of people who consider more than 2 small glasses of white wine once a month as incompatible with their healthy living aspirations.

Indeed, something I've often said before - the kind of people who were so concerned about smoke in pubs that they actively avoided visiting them are not those who are likely to spend much time or money drinking in pubs anyway.

Take the smoke away and they'll complain about the smell of farts or stale beer.

I see it's reported today that 57 pubs are closing each month :(

http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/news ... oryid=9001

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 02:25 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 19:58
Posts: 730
Johnnytheboy wrote:
safedriver wrote:
Now we have the smoking bans in the USA and Europe, not quite so draconian, but still pretty severe all the same. Where I live in Cheshire pubs are shutting in large numbers, and the same seems to be happening everywhere else, (I see them all boarded up as I drive around). Obviously more smokers than non-smokers went to pubs., so with them gone the pub goes bust.

A typical case of the Law of Unintended Consequences.



Does everyone here recall non-smokers saying they didn't go to pubs because they were so smoky, but they'd be able to once the smoking ban came in? Anyone seen any new faces in their local since? I haven't....


I have, as it happens. A mate owns a pub. He was worried the smoking ban would cost him trade.

What happened was that his lunchtime trade increased because more people went there to eat (his wife insisted on smoking wherever she wanted!) and the evening trade is up as well.

_________________
www.thatsnews.org.uk / www.thatsnews.blogspot.com / http://thatsmotoring.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 02:28 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 19:58
Posts: 730
The problem is that if someone reports a fire a fire engine is sent to deal with it.

So the firebomb protesters are tying up fire engines and wasting money. And as for people blowing them up? If they should hurt anyone else during such an operation or even kill them, that would really help the cause of sorting out road safety.

_________________
www.thatsnews.org.uk / www.thatsnews.blogspot.com / http://thatsmotoring.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 11:09 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 19:41
Posts: 201
Location: North East Wales
There will be some amongst us who are appalled at the destructiveness and lawlessness that the very large number of images present.

I for one think it is a good counter to the incessant propaganda, much of it half truth and lies emanating from DfT, Brake, PACTS et al. Trouble is the average MoP has no real idea about the truth of this sort of thing.

I am sure the government has embargoed the media acknowledging that these devices really are almost universally unpopular.

_________________
Richard Ceen
We live in a time where emotions and feelings count far more than the truth, and there is a vast ignorance of science (James Lovelock 2005)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 12:29 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:30
Posts: 2053
Location: South Wales (Roving all UK)
The government have yet again mangaged to create a crime where none existed before.

Cameras are but in place, they don't improve road safety but they do cause anger and resentment. Instead of taking the hint and removing the offending articlesthe 'authorities', determined not to be beaten by yobbish elements, crack down. I've seen cameras watching cameras in Warks!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 13:26 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
civil engineer wrote:
I've seen cameras watching cameras in Warks!


Then they’ll need a third camera to watch the other two...

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 15:48 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 16:52
Posts: 290
Dixie wrote:
civil engineer wrote:
I've seen cameras watching cameras in Warks!


Then they’ll need a third camera to watch the other two...


Dixie,

Yes, this was the method of surveillance favoured by the now defunct East German 'Stasi' police.

e.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 16:48 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 20:06
Posts: 77
DieselMoment wrote:
And the 80mph bikers? Oh they still come down this road a couple of nights a week. I have a friend who lives within 50 yards of this road and he hears their engines.


Sorry but you can't hear someone speeding :x

Bike engines rev higher than car engines so Joe Public just assumes they must be speeding.

_________________
Re vera, cara mea, mea nil refert


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 18:29 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 16:52
Posts: 290
hampshireian wrote:
DieselMoment wrote:
And the 80mph bikers? Oh they still come down this road a couple of nights a week. I have a friend who lives within 50 yards of this road and he hears their engines.


Sorry but you can't hear someone speeding :x

Bike engines rev higher than car engines so Joe Public just assumes they must be speeding.


Hampshire,

When my Kwaki's on song it's not doing under 30mph in any gear!

e.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 18:39 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 13:41
Posts: 514
Location: Thames Valley
hampshireian wrote:
DieselMoment wrote:
And the 80mph bikers? Oh they still come down this road a couple of nights a week. I have a friend who lives within 50 yards of this road and he hears their engines.


Sorry but you can't hear someone speeding :x

Bike engines rev higher than car engines so Joe Public just assumes they must be speeding.

Erm... no. I've seen them myself. 80mph. One straggler was going faster still to catch up with the main pack. Besides, if one moment they're out of earshot and then they're passing by shortly afterwards with a deafening roar, it's clear that a very high speed has been attained. The rate of the crescendo of their engine noise gives that away.

Are you suggesting they have nights when they stick to 30? :lol:


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 20:18 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 20:06
Posts: 77
DieselMoment wrote:
Erm... no. I've seen them myself. 80mph.


You just proved my argument - you "saw" them speeding

I know am being very literal here - But You cannot prove the speed of something from it's sound alone.

The Doppler effect doesn't count because that's just relative motion. :twisted:

I am Just fed up with people saying things like "I heard them speeding around town"

_________________
Re vera, cara mea, mea nil refert


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 21:34 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 13:41
Posts: 514
Location: Thames Valley
Hampshire - I don't know what point you're trying to make. Yes, I SAW them speeding - at 80mph. With decades of driving experience, I know what 80mph looks like.

The same gang of bikers passes through my village once or twice a week. And, like I said, my friend hears their engines.

Happy now?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 22:26 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 00:54
Posts: 327
Location: Rural Somerset
Cooler wrote:
Dixie wrote:
civil engineer wrote:
I've seen cameras watching cameras in Warks!


Then they’ll need a third camera to watch the other two...


Dixie,

Yes, this was the method of surveillance favoured by the now defunct East German 'Stasi' police.

e.


In the old USSR they used to joke that Bulgarian secret policemen always went around in threes - one who could read, one who could write, and one to keep an eye on the two dangerous intellectuals!

_________________
Save a cow - eat a vegetarian


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 22:57 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 16:52
Posts: 290
Yokel wrote:
Cooler wrote:
Dixie wrote:
civil engineer wrote:
I've seen cameras watching cameras in Warks!


Then they’ll need a third camera to watch the other two...


Dixie,

Yes, this was the method of surveillance favoured by the now defunct East German 'Stasi' police.

e.


In the old USSR they used to joke that Bulgarian secret policemen always went around in threes - one who could read, one who could write, and one to keep an eye on the two dangerous intellectuals!


Haha - that one will be passed on. :)

C.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 23:45 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 21:10
Posts: 1693
Quote:
I know am being very literal here - But You cannot prove the speed of something from it's sound alone.



Hmmmn! :scratchchin:

Wearing my "Troll" hat! :stirthepot:

[ :bunker: ]

I might not be able to judge the "speed" but I can judge the "Urgency"!

Anybody winding an engine (Bike or car) up to "full chat" in a residential area is unlikly to be pooteling arround at 15MPH (or even 40 for that matter!)

Unless they are deliberatly doing 28 in first, (which is also damn antiscocial unless they have a damn good reason to do so!)

[/ :bunker: ]

:wink:

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 107 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 64 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.018s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]