[*BCM*] Laws (fixed subject just for Lee Peters)

[Jim Leonard]

On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 list at moz.geek.nz wrote:

> Jiml
> > Why is this too idealistic?  Why should the police not be writing
> > citations for cyclists running red lights or riding the wrong way down a
> > one way street?  Or for pedestrians crossing against the cross walk
> > signals?  Or for that matter automobiles running red lights and
> > flagrantly ignoring other signage or people crossing legally in sidewalks?
>
> It's one of those "in the real world" things. Put nicely, the voters
> regard speeding, jumping lights and bullying as "rights" and vote
> accordingly. The most blatant example is when motorists complain
> that speed cameras are a tax. Which says very clearly that they regard
> speeding as the default behaviour that "everyone" does. Asking them
> directly often leads to weasel words that amount to "everyone does it"
> (occasionally they just say that directly).
>
> So to enforce the laws as written would suck up a lot of Police time
> and the money for that has to come from somewhere. It would also have
> other bad effects - mostly increased surveillance and Police power...
> oh, duh, well, ok, one possible benefit of the increased surveillance
> and Police power that we're getting could be increased enforcement of
> useful laws.

I specifically want the laws to reflect reality.  This roughly translates
to I want fewer but more enforcable laws that are not an encumbrance upon
getting things done.  I want realistic speed limits that can be reasonably
enforced (rather than speed limits that are enforced at the whim of the
officer/police department/local official).


>
> More useful would be spending that money on making it less easy to
> break the laws - via both engineering and education. Ideally including
> the same sort of limits that are applied to some motorbikes, power
> assisted bikes, electronic equipment, firearms and aircraft. By which
> I mean limits on permitted power and speed enforced by the devices
> themselves and required by law.
>
> Because really, no-one expects to be allowed a huge radio transmitter
> on their roof, a howitzer in their back yard or to fly their private
> aircraft supersonically between cities. Those technical restrictions
> are accepted, why not similar ones on motor vehicles?

In most places I am allowed to possess such items (the howitzer is the
most contentious, in MA the permitting is a bitch), I'm just not allowed
to use them in illegal ways.

> If your car
> can only just get to 70mph and is speed limited to that anyway,
> you'll be less inclined to try to do 50mph in a 30 zone, and drag
> racing at the lights will be limited to bikes :)

Just because it's illegal to drive 70mph in this state, there are many
places that can be driven to for which it is legal to drive your car on
public roads much faster than that and on private roads one can drive as
fast as the property owner will let you.  Again, I should be able to
posess whatever I like.  I just shouldn't be unsociable with it.


--jim