The Driver's Site for the East Midlands

Welcome to Drivers' Union East Midlands.
Our Mission: Better road safety at lower cost. No unnecessary delay or slowing of road transport. No unnecessary or unjust prosecution of safe drivers.

Motorists & Drivers' Union is at www.driversunion.co


For specific topics click the appropriate label (above).

Search This Blog

Wednesday, 24 June 2015

God is a Brit.



Dear Vicar

Just to let you know, that I do enjoy expressing a different point of view from the all too heard left wing liberal elitist's views that seem to prevail and especially in the Church of England now. 

Yes I do tend to have a booming voice, God gave me that to spread his messages and it is particularly loud when being accused of being 'appalling' for standing up for my Country and its people.

For the record, the conversation was only about the logistics and options for handling all these people in France and how Australia is doing it which has reduced the attempts to zero; both issues of fact and not opinion. 

It was you who opened the debate up to the much wider issue of why it's happening and that we all sharing what we have will cure the problem. I hope it's OK in the Church of England to disagree with that and any notion that, we in Britain, should have any guilt whatsoever about our history and what God ordained.

He has intervened in our history too often for us not to claim to be God's own country now. The Armada, against all odds, the winds that wrecked Philip's massive combined fleet of France and Spain. The release from the terrible yoke of Catholicism, and the various other attempts to return us to that, Guy Fawkes, The Jacobite wars, Then two massive world wars where Britain stood against World tyranny and fascism, at one time alone, and God's intervention, The Angel of Mons & Dunkirk, (When God stayed a great army and held back the waves so his people could escape) ensured Britain survived with our own values.  The IRA, and I dare to say even Diana Princess of Wales who nearly destroyed our Monarchy but was courting Catholicism so much that, naively surrounding herself by Catholics, had become a Catholic Icon having superseded even Mother Teresa by the time of her death. Don't forget it was the republican Tony Blair (Later a convert) who dubbed her 'People's Princess' In reality, the country was forced to mourn and 'the whole country' wasn't in mourning either. There was of course Trafalgar and Waterloo also against all odds too.

Why did all this preservation of  Britain and its religious freedom happen? Can any Christian deny God's wish and hand in these events if it doesn't suit their mantras and ideology? That God only works when it suits their ideology and republican beliefs? 

 Betty didn't seem to know it was Britain that first illegalised slavery with Wilberforce and our men fought and died against it. That most slavery existed because people of those countries were and still are running slavery -the Americans were still doing it, up until Abe Lincoln - is something Britons should be aware of and proud of; not 'appalled' by the fact that we weren't . 

But your perception that we are all benefiting from oppression, servitude, slavery and exploitation needs to be challenged if you are to preach it as a minister..

You are wrong because long after the so called 'exploitation' of a far less enlightened age where you could be hung drawn and quartered, we did fight two massive and economically crippling world wars for humanity. The USA, the only country to make lots of money from both conflicts, our so called friends, bled us dry economically and thus used our debt to govern us politically too and we were paying them back until recently for it. Only five years ago an outgoing treasury minister left a note 'There's no money left'. So no, what we have now is nothing to do with the historic 'exploitation' of your view, or of mine, the advancement, improvement and education of world peoples, for the simple fact is we are broke. Do you really imagine that any politician would make swingeing cuts if he could give his people everything they wanted? So how much richer would we have been, if not giving our all? What have we gone without and given up already for others?

Most of the World's suffering is caused by despotism, corruption, dogmatic religion who exploit the poor and cause war, where even help, that we can ill afford, is diverted into armies and the corrupt bulging pocket. We have had our power taken from us by so called friends and are pretty helpless to stop all this now. But Britain has already done enough historically and is broke doing it. No we are not enjoying the fruits of a bygone age as you are postulating at all. Much has happened since The Empire.

Just be aware of patriotic British people in the congregation, unfairly labelled extremist or right wing. Expect to be challenged when postulating why Britons should feel a duty to impoverish themselves to the aid of today's corruption, despotism, exploitation and wickedness or have any guilt about it.. In any case, make your mind up. If you are against austerity here, something that isn't real by the way, how does giving everything to everyone else going to help that? It does seem to me that woolly thinking has always been the failing of the left.  

We can continue to agree or disagree but your role, and that of the church, is to welcome all views and stick to the Gospel. Let God sit inside people and responsibly apply the Gospel as God charges them to do without subjective interference and condemnation. 

Would God want that? Is God a left wing liberal elitist?

You have the advantage of preaching unchallenged from a pulpit. At all other times just sit and listen to your flock. You may learn something. 

 Historically though God has clearly shown he's a Brit. :-))

Wishes

Friday, 19 June 2015

Police Chiefs in support of aggressive self appointed head cam vigilantes?


Our post on aggressive head cam vigilantes today, See it here has caused a flurry of tweets from no less than the replacement to ACPO Ltd, The National Police Chief's Council (NPCC)

You will see that there is ample evidence now that anyone videoing others with a view to ill will, and accosting and rebuking other road users, threateningly with a camera, would cause confrontation and rage and could be words and behavior likely to cause a breach of the peace.

I also raised the very valid observation that, without rigorous screening, anyone can point their camera at women and children and so head cams could also be a perverts dream too. People are pointing these cameras into the space of others. They are filming young women and kids in cars too.

Is this something UK's 35 million drivers should just accept? Well the Daily Express gave this writer some prominence & is using the term 'vigilante' too. 


The Home Office and ACPO Ltd, ignored me but now it is happening and what is the reaction from someone at NPCC to a straightforward question? See the following series of tweets.





Note: Much of this confrontation is not about any offence but mere subjective perception of cyclists. Clearly the police are seeing drivers as criminals. 


Now at this point, for some reason, the ani driver Rod King of 20s Plenty supports the police:


On this last point we are not talking about the right to film in a public place, but directing the camera at an individual without their consent, with the express intent to publish the video and to use it against them. It seems NPCC cannot see the difference. 

So drivers it seems that The NPCC is all for aggressive videoing without your consent, even when confronting you with a camera and having instigated the confrontation with some gesture, rebuke or comment. That this is bound to cause rage and reaction and road etiquette and harmony is the victim, seems less important to the police than keeping an unwelcome minority of vigilantes and camera sales people happy.

I will enquire if this is official policy and the rank of the Tweeter.  Clearly a cycling fan it seems. 

Resident's Parking Bays are anti driver & anti rate payer too.



Resident's Parking Bays: 

In this story over 7500 fines have been dished out to desperate drivers on behalf of people who wouldn't buy their own garage so expect to park on public roads. 

I paid a capital sum for my garage and frontage and pay far more than £25 per year in rates for not parking in the road.

Resident's parking bays are depriving other road users, who pay for all the roads, from using certain sections of them reserved for people who chose a property without a parking area.

The ownership of a property ends at the fence and does not include the street beyond it. There is no right to park a vehicle outside one's house and to do so for a period, not ancillary to a journey, is an offence of causing unnecessary obstruction.

Somewhere to park is always a deal breaker when selling a property, so the Council is failing its ratepayers in only charging £25 a year for this privilege for a start. 

Then what about the difference in value on sale of the property? Who gets to keep that? The council should assess the additional value of parking bays to a property and contract that such a sum will be returned to the council on the sale of these houses. 

The problem is caused by too many and unnecessary yellow lines around towns which could be turned into metered bays earning further revenue for the council and encouraging commerce.

Sir Peter
Unfortunately, because our councils are being run by anti driver ideologists who think their towns are islands that can run on pushbikes and public transport, drivers, tax payers, residents and businesses are the sufferers while these favoured residents are laughing all the way to the bank.

The Mayor Sir Peter Soulsby is polling the wrong people.

Here is the real objective: The scheme improves the parking situation for residents and the amenity of the area in general and encourages commuters to investigate alternatives to the motor car as a means of travelling to work.  This may or may not have an effect of property prices. So there it is. More anti driver anti car ideology in our Town Halls.

Roads, are all national and all used by any UK or foreign national. His parochial attitude is a classic example of a local official thinking too small. See an example of It here in the Mablethorpe story. 

Is your council giving away your land too cheaply? You are paying for all this so raise it with them.


Tuesday, 16 June 2015

Where was the 'deliberate ram' in this video Daily Mail


See this video. Why two abreast?



So why are these cyclists two abreast where the road has a central no overtaking area marking? Do cyclists have to ride two abreast and impose their speed on others? As for deliberate? Where on earth is that in this video? Yes the overtake was deliberate and far too close.

Was there a collision that the driver was aware of? The noise of the cyclists coming off happened after the pass.

The problem is that cyclists are officially advised to use their bodies to stop anyone trying to pass them. See more here Whoever dreamed that up clearly didn't realise he's talking about vulnerable humans using their bodies to obstruct other humans in big machinery and here is the result.

Will the Mail demand a cancellation of this dangerous instruction and a new rule that cyclists must not ride two abreast? If not, then don't piously promote these videos and support the scenario that caused it.

Saturday, 6 June 2015

Let Mablethorpe be a warning to you.

Life since Pickles.
How cheating councils can misuse regulations to get around government's (Eric Pickles') 10 Minutes Grace Rule.



Welcome to Mablethorpe
All round the town of Mablethorpe, even in side streets, kerb stripes have appeared.
 This is a misuse of a regulation which is intended only for locations, where roads have narrowed, there are central reservations, or on bends and corners. 


These kerb stripes are not discretionary, no time is allowed and it's an absolute offence to be on them. No loading and unloading whatsoever is legal and customers cannot stop for short periods as allowed on yellow lines. Unlike even the one above, the Mablethorpe ban is every day throughout the year and in some cases 24 hours too.  In effect, Mablethorpe is in commercial lock down. So the private company dishing out tickets can do so 24/7.
I have tried, to no avail, to get the councillors behind this, to get them removed as they are an abuse of the system.
The history of the issue is that because yellow lines were very labour intensive to police- the precedent was 20 minutes allowed to be on them- police just lost control and councils thought they could take the job on. How they imagined that they could police Lincolnshire with just 30 wardens when the whole police force, with their massive resources couldn't, just indicates how uninformed councils could be. So councils have had to cheat. Give instant tickets on yellow lines contrary to regulations and purpose. The Government stepped in and told them, 'no more instant tickets you must give 10 minutes on yellow lines.' So I don't think it's a coincidence that the misuse of the kerb stripe system, another manifestation of cheating, is being used. But to lock down a town is not in anyone's interest.

The excuse being given to me is that it is as a result of complaint from a few anonymous whingers. But what was wrong? Were accidents being caused by yellow lines? Was Mablethorpe, High Street, Victoria Road in regular grid lock? What about the side streets? Were they grid locked? Of course the yellow lines were always occupied by people going about their business; so long as they moved on that was the idea of them. To give an idea of the enormity of this change: Blue Badge holders had previously been allowed to safely park for up to three hours on these very same roads and now they are banned.
The county councillors, who we vote in to do these jobs for us and who have instigated and  fallen for this kerb stripe stunt, are now saying that it is for me to get a massive petition to reverse it. Yet how come just a few anonymous people were enough to cause it in the first place? But what of the Town Councillors? 'Not us guv. It's not our concern what goes on in our town' So why did they stand for council if anyone else can impose this on them? It's for them to get an action going. It's their town being screwed.


I have informed the councillors that these stripes are a misuse of a regulation and not in the interests of Mablethorpe at all. They are in the interests of the firm that the LCC have contracted to issue parking tickets though. 

No loading at anytime sign. Even Sundays
Now have a look at your town and see if the same ruse is being used there. It's easy. Kerb stripes should only be where the road is narrow, a corner, or opposite a central reservation otherwise we may as well save millions in time and paint and not bother with yellow lines at all and replace them with stripes. If they are like these pictures too, then start having a go about it for goodness sake. Councillors must learn that all voters depend on drivers as do their towns. And don't let councillors pass the buck. They stood for election to serve the community and should be protecting us from such abuse. 

And here is a total contradiction. If a street can sustain any sort of bay, then clearly there is no question of danger or a traffic flow issue there. Here are kerb stripes with bays among them! 



Wednesday, 3 June 2015

Road rage video explained. Latest in Chippy Cyclist news

Beware. 


Ok so this video of anger and rage has gone viral. Predictably the driver is deemed to be to blame even though the whole incident was precipitated by the cyclist. Let's face it, it was all just handbags. No-one was assaulted and no one was injured.

What precipitated this? Well if you see the un-clipped version of the video, shown here, it starts with several cyclists dominating the carriageway, passing each other, and dictating their speed on other road users. Isn't it interesting that when cyclists pass each other fairly fast and close, they're not being 'impatient' but when a driver does it because his potential speed loss is even greater, he's impatient? Part of the reason for all this are two stupid and subjective rules. The first is that cyclists are officially told by the DfT to use their own person to prevent motor vehicles from passing them. A principle clearly being applied here. See the rule here. See more on that here.   The other is an absolutely nonsensical subjective HighWay Code rule 163 See I explain why it's nonsense here.  

So basically cyclists are being told that they have supremacy over anyone else and clearly the results of that position is that other road users will get frustrated and annoyed at the resulting cycling conduct.. Then to add insult and injury, to abuse, accost or chide a driver who has executed a pass, 'dangerous' to the perception of the naturally insecure cyclist, is bound to provoke a reaction. 



It is just as unnerving when another cyclist passes close at speed too but that seems to be OK. Why? At least you can hear the car there but cyclists are silent and do cause a start when they pass. 

Let's get it clear. The passing speed of the car in this was very slow. He was not passing at 50 MPH. So had the cyclist come off, it would mostly be his own speed, and height from the ground that would cause the injury not any direct impact with the passing vehicle. So fast passing cyclists will cause the same reaction and accident injury too.  

But if this is so unnerving for cyclists, why keep cycling? Why come up alongside the already aggrieved driver to remonstrate as in this case? (It was during this manouvre that the cyclist struck the mirror by the way) Just let them go. Cycle or don't cycle but don't moan at others because, by definition it is dangerous. 2015 fatals so far 

It's not the job of any road user to rebuke others who may well have done nothing wrong. It seems the bravado and even the intent is encouraged by selective, one aspect, head cams. Well I did warn they would cause breach of the peace and so they are. See Head cam vigilantes

The unpalatable fact for cyclists is that they are a road hazard and one that society has no need for. Perhaps if they understood that it's their choice to do it, no-one needs them to, they can pack in and no-one would miss them, their attitude would be more acceptable on the road. 

Now see these edited versions by the Daily Telegraph, bleeping out the cyclists, showing them initiating confrontation by rebuke and in one case, even riding like a madman to do so. So Telegraph why do you encourage this? Are cyclists self appointed policemen now?

Monday, 1 June 2015

Cyclist rides into back of car.

The cyclist who was so intent on a gadget he was using, failed to notice a parked car some distance ahead and rode at speed into the back of it See the video  

He was very lucky. He could easily have broken his neck but was able to continue his journey.

But let's reverse the role. A driver fails to notice a stationary cyclist, and at the same speed, crashes into the cyclist killing or at least seriously injuring him. The driver would be looking at a potential 14 years in prison.

What are the common factors in both cases?


  • Both didn't intend it.



  • In both cases it was from a very dangerous scenario, where humans on two flimsy wheels are mingling with big machines.



  • In both cases, having exposed humans in the road wasn't crucial for society.



  • The biggest difference?......................14 years inside.



.