If you read this in a Department for Transport consultative
document, what would your conclusions be?
"benefits include
levelling the playing field between cyclists so that those who obey the law are
not penalised. A significant proportion of cyclists currently disobey traffic
signals and ride through red lights. DfT statistics on monitored free-flow
roads estimate that around 70% of cyclists run red lights, meaning that those that currently travel above
the maximum speed limit have a competitive advantage”.
Would your answer be
a)
This is bullshit, someone is taking the mickey,
or
b)
This is an extract from a document advocating
the legalisation of cyclists ignoring red traffic signals?
Answer? It’s (b),
except that the real document read (Introducion, para 3) as follows:
"benefits include
levelling the playing field between hauliers so that those who obey the law are
not penalised. A significant proportion of larger HGVs currently disobey the
current speed limit and drive faster than 40 mph on these roads. DfT statistics
on monitored free-flow roads estimate that around 70% of HGVs travel over 40
mph, meaning that those that currently travel above the maximum speed limit
have a competitive advantage”.
Or, to you and me, most of them are already breaking the law
so why don’t we just change the law so they can break it without breaking it,
so to speak?
No comments:
Post a Comment