When is it safe to break the speed limit?

I had a Sunday wedding this week which means that Sunday and Monday have both been busy days. It is now 10pm and I have just finished working on the photos and they are now ready to go for printing, so apologies for the late posting.

The topic for this blog is not from a Sunday newspaper as I have not had time to read one but the wedding was in Clapham and I have driven along roads where I am not used to driving. I can't remember exactly where this was but one roadsign gave me alternate smiley faces and then my speed. Well that's nice and I presume it reminds others who are speeding with a face that frowns. I wonder if the frown increases as speed increases!

Another sign told me to slow down but I was one mile per hour under the speed limit. I found this really irritating. A piece of machinery is telling me that I am driving too fast but not telling me how much below the speed limit my speed should be. Another sign tells me that I am entering a village (Halton) and then an electronic sign next to me tells me my speed if I am ove 30mph. This is not speeding as I am slowing to 30mph. Again this is irritating although it makes sure that drivers get to 30mph when they reach the sign.

The problem with this is that the people who drive badly will not be affected. It's the same with speed cameras. Just spend a few minutes near one and you will see the worst drivers brake going into them and then accelerate away. I even saw two motorbike riders pass me at what may have been double the speed limit. Almost immediately I saw perhaps 30 parked riders (it is a popular route for bikers) and there was one police motor bike rider. I didn't see him rushing to his bike or to a phone. Speed may be thrilling (I have just heard one engine outside my house that sounded like 60mph - the limit is 4omph) but have a look at the local papers. Many bikers get killed. They will say that they are safe and any errors are the fault of the car drivers, but try saying that to the funeral director.

Change the world.

Professionalism is not always good

Warrington Wolves were playing Huddersfield Giants in the final of the Challenge Cup and while they were playing I was asked about the differences between rugby union and rugby league. I started by explaining that there were 13 players in a rugby league team and 15 in rugby union. There are two players less in the forwards which means that the scrum in rugby union has 16 players, 8 from each side and in rugby league it is 12.

I was then asked if one was professional and one was amateur. Well the answer is both are both. A few years ago rugby league was professional and rugby union was amateur, but professionalism has spread in sport and probably a big thanks (if thanks is the right word) must go to satellite TV. The recent 'bloodgate' farce may be enough to put you off professionalism or you may be able to persuade yourself that most players remain honourable. The trouble with professionalism is that winning becomes more important to the point where cheating may be accepted. It sends the wrong messages to the viewers and is not good for society in general.

I fear that it is too late to turn the clock back, but at least I have registered one small protest in reply to James Murdoch's recent criticism of the BBC. Now there's a subject for another blog.

Change the world

Arsene Wenger supports referees?

Arsene Wenger feels that one of football's oldest principles, that the referee is always right is being called into question because video evidence is being used against the footballer Eduardo. After looking at the video evidence (watching the news) I have to say that it looks like Eduardo was diving. Now referees do not always get it right and I don't think the referee made the right decision this time, but nobody is saying that the result should not stand or even that the referee should be reprimanded. I know that referees can be criticised from the terraces and from the media and critics even include football managers. It is not a question of whether the referee was right or not. This is a question of football's public image. If everyone in the world thinks that a footballer cheated and got away with it then he probably cheated.

Arsene finds it a complete disgrace the way Eduardo has been treated. I have asked a few people and they thought he dived. That doesn't make me and my friends experts and there is room for a difference of opinion. What is not in doubt is that everyone can have an opinion and some footballers cheat. It is very naive if Arsene doesn't recognise that footballers cheat. The only "complete disgrace" that I can see is that Arsene has made his "complete disgrace" comments.

Change the world

Disabled badges

Have you ever seen abuse of the disabled parking badge? If you are struggling to think of an example then just watch a disabled parking space for a few minutes. You will probably see some very fit looking individuals who march away from their car. Another method may be to watch people park their cars on double yellow lines and then walk round the park with their dog. It may be that these people are disabled but have temporarily improved. It may be that these people are not disabled.

This week in the local newspaper, the Morecambe Visitor, the headline on the front page is about a man who has months to live and has been given a parking ticket for displaying his badge upside down. The headline gives away the mood of the article - "How could they do this?" Well the answer is fairly simple, because they have left their badge upside down. My first thoughts were that it is petty bureaucracy. Why can't they produce a badge so it doesn't matter which way up you place it? I can only think that they make it this way so that fines can be given out to people who place it the wrong way up.

However the system is such that fines are given out for upside down badges. So on what grounds can appeals be justified. Is receiving a serious diagnosis good grounds for appeal? I presume that it is not petty bureaucracy and there is a valid reason to fine people like this. In which case it would be interesting to know where they draw the appeals line. Terminal cancer - upside down is fine. PMT, that's fine too.

How many times have we seen this kind of headline? Until the badges are produced so that either side is fine, I can't help thinking that the authorities want to make money out of disabled people, and I can't help thinking that non-disabled people want to abuse the system.

Change the world

How to upset Catholics and politicians

Annie Lennox has informed us that politicians are "useless". She is deeply cynical of our politicians so it is not surprising that she has ruled herself out of becoming a politician. She has done politics a favour and encouraged people to become more involved but this rallying cry looks hollow to me. If you become a politician then you immediately fall into the useless category. If she is so passionate about her political causes then she should think about what she is saying.

One of her causes is the rise of HIV in Africa. She feels that HIV would decrease with an increasing use of condoms which goes against the teaching of the Catholic Church. Annie "wasn't having a go at the Pope" even though it looks like it. There is an argument that says the use of condoms promotes sex. As there is a failure rate for preventing pregnancy there must certainly be a failure rate for preventing HIV. If you promote protected sex you actually promote the spread of HIV. This is not a religious argument it is a logical one but there are additional religious arguments to support the Pope.

Change the world.

The best form of compassion

Gordon Brown does seem reluctant to comment on world events. He said that the release of the Lockerbie bomber was nothing to do with him. Well the British public do look to him for an opinion especially when many other world leaders including President Obama express an opinion. However he has given his opinion about the reception of bomber in Tripoli. This opinion is obviously secondary to an opinion about the release because if there was no release there would be no welcome.

When I hear of calls for capital punishment my first thoughts are that errors may be made and the state executes (murders) an innocent man. The state descends to the level of a criminal but defends itself with "due process". In the case of the Lockerbie bomber there are those who say there is the possibility of wrongful conviction. I don't know whether the conviction was just, but what I do know is that in this case "due process" has placed the state on the moral high ground.

There was no compassion shown to the victims of Lockerbie but this does not mean that we cannot show compassion. I wrote on Sunday about giving and expecting nothing in return. This is genuine giving. If we only show compassion to those who show it to us then it is not true compassion. It is you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Let's hope no deals were done with the Libyan government but let us also hope that we are compassionate people. Compassion is a good attribute which is best shown to those who have not shown it to us.

Change the world

Attack is the best form of defence

I am afraid that I have to admit that I haven't heard of The Equality and Human Rights Commission. I don't know where they are based. I don't know who is in charge. I am guessing but I think they are involved with issues of equality and human rights. They are taking legal action against the BNP for their membership restrictions for those with an ethnic background.

I have heard about the race relations act and I have found it surprising that nobody has questioned the BNP's policy before. So now this commission have started proceedings against the BNP leader. The reason why I have owned up to my ignorance is because the BNP described this as a "pathetic attempt" to divert attention from the commission's own problems. Now they may have problems but I don't know about them. If they really wanted to divert attention from their own problems, whatever they may be, their best method would not be to irritate an opponent. Even if you support the BNP please see this response as nothing more than a PR diversion tactic itself. They have not defended themselves but it looks like they will now get a chance to do so.

This is a very professional attempt by the BNP to divert attention from its own problems. It reminds me of the day after the European elections. Nick Griffin went to Westminster (why?) to get eggs thrown at him. Before the organised confontation began Nick got out of his car and waved to a crowd. Well when I say crowd I mean a crowd of cameramen. It is a slick image but no substance. How are we to believe that the BNP's policy is legitimate. Well it will be tested but before we get any answers why not divert attention from the problem itself.

Change the world