Thursday 29 October 2020

What one law would you change?



There used to be a very short BBC Radio programme with a title similar to mine.

It asked eminent people what law they would rescind, given the opportunity.

The edition that amused me the most was with a well-know top judge (I can't remember his name) who was so annoyed with motorcyclists tearing around with little regard for either themselves or others, that he wanted to ban the use of helmets. His logic being that without head protection they would ride their bikes much more carefully.

These days we see so many pictures like the above. Criminals wearing either crash helmets or hoodies whilst carrying-out their crimes. Personally I would take the judge's idea a bit further, and ban hoodies as well. Faces should be seen at all times. I would suggest that the only places where faces could be hidden are 'at home'. Anyone hiding their face in public would instantly be taken for a criminal, and arrested.

Of course, at the moment we all have face coverings, and it must be a nightmare for the police, but when things eventually get better, and we are allowed to breathe again in public, I would like Boris to enact this change immediately.

 

38 comments:

  1. I too think that helmets should be a matter for the individual. I would like to see all car drivers have to pass a bike test first.
    Mask wearing should be a voluntary thing. Trying to catch a virus with a mask is ridiculous, like trying to catch flies in a cargo net. If folk are really worried they ought to get a full Hazmat suit. I would promise to try my best not to laugh.
    I am sorry for not answering the question you posed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I presume you meant 'trying not to catch a virus'. Well, it's all we have at the moment. Maybe at some time in the future everyone will wear Hamzat Suits; this wretched virus isn't going away. No-one is yet talking of a third wave.... but it could be even worse than our current second one!

      Delete
  2. I live in the US. Here machine guns are legal. They shouldn't be. That law needs to be revoked. It would have saved 27 little lives in Sandy Hook elementary alone. No private citizen needs to own an assault weapon. It would certainly decrease mass shootings. If someone has to stop to reload a weapon, that gives potential victims time to react. It would certainly make the job of our police much easier as well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We, on this side of the pond, do see your gun laws as being bizarre, to say the least. Almost daily we see pictures of armed gangs wandering the streets with full combat gear and automatic weapons. I presume these people are prepared to use them, otherwise they wouldn't carry them. It's just a matter of time until we see a major shoot-out between blacks and whites.

      Delete
    2. Except of course a machine gun wasn't used in Sandy Hook and machine guns cannot be bought by US citizens without a special licence from the ATF which requires a deep background check, legal representation and ultimately will cost 20k. Nor was the AR15 an assault rifle. It is a semi automatic rifle just like 99 percent of those sold in the USA. Its key difference is that it has a black finish. Why do black things scare you? 🤔
      Interestingly as statistics show 3 times as many people are killed with knives in the USA than with rifles of ANY kind in 2016,2017,2018,2019. As found in the FBI statistics.
      Ironically if you remove the gun murder statistics from all the current Democrat cities that look like warzones the US has a murder rate marginally higher than that of most of the EU. Odd that.......

      Delete
    3. I don't understand where your figures came from Ro? It appears that guns kill many more people than knives (or did in 2017 and 2018 at least) -
      https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-11.xls
      https://www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used/

      Delete
    4. Ro specifically mentioned ‘rifles’ and he is, of course quite correct. Most fireman homicides are caused by handguns.

      Delete
    5. Sorry, did not mean to disparage fire fighters!

      Delete
    6. Ah, I see. I was reading late at night, apologies! I guess (also coming from a jurisdiction which regulates guns more strictly than the US) I lump them all together (as "dangerous and generally unnecessary except for specific hunting and agricultural pest control purposes"). I recognise that views on this topic vary.

      Delete
  3. I agree about hoodies. What use is CCTV when their heads and faces are covered by hoodies? I also like the judge's thinking about motorcyclists and the general public should be free to puncture the petrol tanks of noisy motorbikes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My own answer to my question above, would be for all 4 by 4's to have an inbuilt sensor that would make the vehicle veer to the side of the road when seeing a smaller vehicle approaching. Leave the road for road cars, and let the off-roaders go onto the verge!

      As for your suggestion about bike petrol tanks. I'd like to do something similar to all the fighter jets that pass overhead, nearly hitting our chimney.

      Delete
    2. The slight flaw on that one Cro is that that is where most pedestrians are.

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. I was thinking of out in the country.

      Delete
  4. Regarding masks, I have found that it is really comfortable for me to talk to people when they only see my eyes.No make-up needed and the use of lipstick has been eliminated. How convenient.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My wife was saying that she can stick her tongue out at surly shop assistants without the risk of being seen.

      Delete
  5. I would wish to rescind a section of the 1872 Licensing Act, which states: “It is illegal to be drunk in the pub.”

    The legislation adds: “Every person found drunk… on any licensed premises, shall be liable to a penalty”.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Okay, Ro. You've caught me. We shall turn the whole comment into a civil discourse on semantics, shall we? 'Machine gun' was absolutely the wrong term. I used it improperly as a catch-all expression for a weapon which holds large amounts of ammo, fires rapidly, and allows the shooter to walk from room to room killing people without the inconvenience of having to reload, which might allow children a chance to escape or someone to take the opportunity to take down the shooter. Yep. 'Machine gun' was such a wrong term. What I meant to say was 'weapon that transforms disturbed people into killing machines'. There. I fixed it. Thank you for calling it to my attention. Furthermore, your figures are complete bullshit. One last thing: I am delighted that you don't live in America. We have an election coming up and we do not need one more deluded person in the poll booth. I apologize for the fury of this comment, Cro, and know that you are certainly welcome to delete the comment. However if you delete only my comment whilst leaving Ro's comment intact, I will thing a whole lot less of you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You let yourself down and all your party Debby with the wording and tone of your reply. Anyone who agrees with such a comment place themselves in the same camp.

      Delete
  7. I don't believe you to be an expert on 'my party', actually.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh, so they're all like you are they? I stand corrected. Carry on lashing out on all and sundry and show yourself in your true colours.

      Delete
    2. You really are making no sense at all. I lashed out at one, and he certainly lashed out at me first. As did you. Have a good day in your world, and I will continue to have a good day in mine.

      Delete
    3. Sorry, didn't see you had made earlier comment, I was reading in reverse and read Ro as if he was responding to Cro. Ro was not not lashing out, intolerant or rude, he was just stating facts as he sees them.

      Delete
    4. Ro was replying to Debby; not to me!

      Delete
    5. Yes, I realised that later. As I explained to Debby I was reading upwards and didn't see her original comment. There was nothing offensive about Ro's response either way and Debby took umbrage.

      Delete
  8. I'd just like laws to be enforced, or at least logical consequences of not doing so (or changing them) considered. California is where I live. It's a sanctuary state for undocumented residents. Formerly illegal immigrants. Now a racist term. Also, bail reform, intended to be fairer to the poor, means catch and release; when arrested, most are released back out onto the streets within a day. Sometimes hours. Homelessness used to be considered vagrancy, which was against the law, but that's inhumane; LA now has a larger homeless population than the town I live in and statewide it nearly equals the total population of my county. It was decided not to prosecute shoplifting or other theft if the total value is under $600 per incident. SF no longer prosecutes prostitution; not sure how that helps with human trafficking that's on the rise? Gov. Newsom has announced that by 2022 he'll close all juvenile detention centers, half the adult prison population and close 2 prisons. It's all intended to be "more humane", yet thinking logically--not emotionally--where is it all likely to lead? When the message is one of compassion for those who break laws, should we be surprised when lawlessness becomes rampant in society? Like... say... in Sweden? Or a beheaded teacher in France? Or riots raging in U.S. cities? Portland, Oregon has had protests and riots every night for months. And when ordinary people fear for their safety, is it surprising that gun sales are up more than 100% year over year? Mostly to 1st time gun owners? So... I guess I'd just like laws to be enforceable without loud, angry cries of systemic racism, or whatever new term comes along. For the safety of all.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Just popping in here to lend some support to Debby. I'm not sure why commonsense gun law reform is such a controversial position. I also don't understand why people who don't live in the USA are so quick to jump into the fray and pick fights over things that don't concern them.

    I'm sure that Cro won't delete you, Debby. He's not that kind of blogger. I have faith on his good will and sense of fairness.

    ReplyDelete
  10. You are very quick with your predictable response Jennifer. I was waiting for it. One thing that does very much concern us in Europe is the fallout we receive from failed American foreign policies the likes of which in the Middle East and North Africa have changed our lives here forever.

    I have no desire to pick a fight with Debby but I thought the tone of her first response let her down.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The issue that I was commenting on was about American gun laws, not foreign policy that of course effects the whole world. You'll get no argument from me about that.

    I still don't understand why Ro felt the need to pick a fight with Debby over something that doesn't concern him at all.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Guns are not the only problem. I believe how we've allowed our society to deteriorate via commercialism greed is a huge problem.

    Change a law, not read well enough to chose. Have a law...No holiday merchandising until 30 to 60 days, depending on the holiday, before the actual olhiday. People talk about environmental changes. But, not the pollution of the human psyche via one mass holiday shopping season after another, interfering with our ability to enjoy Earth's seasons naturally.

    ReplyDelete
  13. So, Salty Pumpkin Studio, the government gets to decide when we can buy holiday goods? Will they also decide how much we can buy? What we can buy? I believe that happened before in some parts of the world in the mid 1930s through the mid 1940s. It didn't work out very well in the end.

    ReplyDelete
  14. EM, Merchandising regulations aren't about buying. There are roads closed so frogs can get across without being killed. The impact on mental health environments, not having a major holiday pushed on us months in advance, I feel, deserves as much compassion and consideration as frogs.

    ReplyDelete
  15. First, I would like to see automatic weapons (machine guns) banned. I can not see any reason for a private citizen to require an automatic weapon. My relatives have gun licenses. They are hunters and skeet shooters. I am not anti-gun. That said, in my opinion, automatic weapons are weapons of war. Second, I would like stronger background checks for gun licenses and gun purchases. Every time someone walks in to a school or church (or anyplace for that matter) and randomly starts shooting it is heartbreaking and a reminder that something is wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Good for you Cro. Hotly debated issues, opinions, predictability, hoodies, machine guns, frogs and other sundries too numerous to mention, all crammed into the comment boxes.
    Entertaining reading all round. As for changing laws, I can't imagine anyone reading here would be remotely interested in what law I might consider worth changing.
    Alphie.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Sorry I haven't replied to all the comments (some of them didn't require any reply). My internet connection has been down all day yesterday and last night. No-one seemed to agree with my crash helmet ban, but the fight will continue.

    ReplyDelete
  18. {INSTEAD OF GETTING A LOAN,,  I GOT SOMETHING NEW
    Get $5,500 USD every day, for six months!

    See how it works
    Do you know you can hack into any ATM machine with a hacked ATM card??
    Make up you mind before applying, straight deal...

    Order for a blank ATM card now and get millions within a week!: contact us
    via email address::{Automatedhackedcards@gmail.com)

    We have specially programmed ATM cards that  can be use to hack ATM
    machines, the ATM cards can be used to withdraw at the ATM or swipe, at
    stores and POS. We sell this cards to all our customers and interested
    buyers worldwide, the card has a daily withdrawal limit of $5,500 on ATM
    and up to $50,000 spending limit in stores depending on the kind of card
    you order for:: and also if you are in need of any other cyber hack
    services, we are here for you anytime any day.

    Here is our price lists for the ATM CARDS:

    Cards that withdraw $5,500 per day costs $200 USD
    Cards that withdraw $10,000 per day costs $850 USD
    Cards that withdraw $35,000 per day costs $2,200 USD
    Cards that withdraw $50,000 per day costs $5,500 USD
    Cards that withdraw $100,000 per day costs $8,500 USD

    make up your mind before applying, straight deal!!!

    The price include shipping fees and charges, order now: contact us via
    email address:: {Automatedhackedcards@gmail.com}

    WhatsApp via ::: +3168350481}

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...