Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 54,803
Thanks Brendan. Interestingly biased headline from the Irish Times. I guess something like "Successful German Online Service for Reporting Dangerous Parking" wouldn't generate the same hits for them.
I particularly like this description of the service developer's motivation, which is I think is applicable in Ireland too:
“In Germany, I think we have a problem with motorists and their exaggerated notion of freedom, which they like to act out at the expense of others,” he said.
Other factors include fines as low as €10 and what he calls a brand-specific “asshole factor”, with statistics indicating BMWs and Audis most often parked illegally.
You're right - let's not look at fixing one problem - let's raise a separate issue instead...whataboutery at its best...I look forward to a similar service for reporting dangerous cyclist behaviour.
I'm fine with an exciting headline - I'm just suggesting non-biased. Words matter. I don't think people trying to improve roads and paths for the benefit of society should be described as squealers. Should we also describe people who blow the whistle on Garda/army/financial issues as "squealing"?Would you prefer a boring headline and fewer people reading the (sympathetic) article?
Arguing for consistency of treatment, and a uniform approach to road traffic lawbreaking, is far removed from whataboutery. But, hey, if you think demonizing one section of road users - and that section only - is conducive to developing a society wide appreciation for the need to have sensible enforcement of road traffic law, sure why not?You're right - let's not look at fixing one problem - let's raise a separate issue instead...whataboutery at its best...
I'm fine with an exciting headline - I'm just suggesting non-biased. Words matter. I don't think people trying to improve roads and paths for the benefit of society should be described as squealers. Should we also describe people who blow the whistle on Garda/army/financial issues as "squealing"?
The recent craze for moving cyclists onto footpaths instead of roads is of very dubious or arguable "benefit to society."I'm fine with an exciting headline - I'm just suggesting non-biased. Words matter. I don't think people trying to improve roads and paths for the benefit of society should be described as squealers. Should we also describe people who blow the whistle on Garda/army/financial issues as "squealing"?
Haven't seen that much of that. (There is a weird painting of a pedestrian footpath on Nassau Street in Dublin so pedestrians walk on the road. I would say many think it's a cycle lane.)The recent craze for moving cyclists onto footpaths instead of roads is of very dubious or arguable "benefit to society."
Are you suggesting that the German authorities are abandoning all other forms of traffic crime detection and will from now on only prosecute motorists who park illegally?Arguing for consistency of treatment, and a uniform approach to road traffic lawbreaking, is far removed from whataboutery. But, hey, if you think demonizing one section of road users - and that section only - is conducive to developing a society wide appreciation for the need to have sensible enforcement of road traffic law, sure why not?
Selective enforcement of law is the surest route to discrediting and losing respect for it.
I'm pretty sure 15 minute cites are still just a concept and far from a reality in Germany or here.Not everyone is an able-bodied youngster who can whizz around so-called 15 minute cities. Some people need the ability to drive and park in order to participate in normal everyday activities.
Not everyone is able-bodied enough to drive. Some people needs footpaths free from motor vehicles in order to participate in normal everyday activities.Not everyone is an able-bodied youngster who can whizz around so-called 15 minute cities. Some people need the ability to drive and park in order to participate in normal everyday activities.
Not in the slightest, and I don't even see how my words could be construed as such. In fact, if the article is to be believed the German authorities appear decidedly lukewarm on what is, after all, a private non-governmental initiative. Perhaps the Germans have had enough of denunciations to the authorities?Are you suggesting that the German authorities are abandoning all other forms of traffic crime detection and will from now on only prosecute motorists who park illegally?
A preference for law enforcement to be conducted by an impartial police force, a professional prosecution service and an independent judiciary is hardly the mark of a regular lawbreaker! These are the elements that mark out democracies from dictatorships. It is in dictatorships that you get denunciations of unfavoured enemies of the people. Like drivers, especially BMV and Audi drivers, according to the guy who was scatologically quoted in the article.If you consider yourself a law-abiding road user, why get so worked up about a proposal that will only punish illegal parking? My working theory on that is that many who do get worked up around better enforcement of the law know they break them on a regular basis and are really only concerned about increased chances of being punished for doing so.
I would hope you're correct, but many cities, London, Paris and Oxford to name but a few, are sadly rushing headlong into this particular cul-de-sac and putting their eco-ideological coercive measures in place.I'm pretty sure 15 minute cites are still just a concept and far from a reality in Germany or here.
Agreed, and drivers who block footpaths to such people are inconsiderate fools.Not everyone is able-bodied enough to drive. Some people needs footpaths free from motor vehicles in order to participate in normal everyday activities.
drivers who block footpaths to such people are inconsiderate fools.
Indeed. I agree entirely. (Mind you clamping in situ is hardly a clever option!) However, that's block as in seriously obstruct to the point that a wheelchair, buggy or pram can't get by. A wheel or two up on a 12 foot wide footpath reducing it to 11 usable feet isn't really the same thing.No. Drivers who block footpaths or cycle paths for anyone, are inconsiderate and should be towed or clamped.
Brendan
Why a cul-de-sac?I would hope you're correct, but many cities, London, Paris and Oxford to name but a few, are sadly rushing headlong into this particular cul-de-sac and putting their eco-ideological coercive measures in place.
You suggested there was a demonetisation of only one section of road users, 'and that section only'.Not in the slightest, and I don't even see how my words could be construed as such.
What policing or prosecution role will the organisation running this service hold?A preference for law enforcement to be conducted by an impartial police force, a professional prosecution service and an independent judiciary is hardly the mark of a regular lawbreaker!
You seem to be getting your take on these initiatives from the ranks of the conspiracy theorists.I would hope you're correct, but many cities, London, Paris and Oxford to name but a few, are sadly rushing headlong into this particular cul-de-sac and putting their eco-ideological coercive measures in place.
It wouldn’t be a separate issue if an accident occurred due to a cyclists behaviour. Would you include scooters in cycle lanes? Motorbikes?You're right - let's not look at fixing one problem - let's raise a separate issue instead...whataboutery at its best...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?