Enough is enough
 

We have a great road network, unfortunately it is infested with cars.
I suggest we stop issuing any more driving licences. New drivers can put their name on a waiting list until a current licence holder dies or surrenders their licence for medical reasons or gets disqualified for criminal activity such as speeding.

Enough is enough
 

On 15/09/2019 00:39, Simon Jester wrote:

We have a great road network, unfortunately it is infested with cars.

I suggest we stop issuing any more driving licences. New drivers can put their name on a waiting list until a current licence holder dies or surrenders their licence for medical reasons or gets disqualified for criminal activity such as speeding.

Nice troll attempt.

A much better and fairer system would be a requirement for all motor
vehicles to be kept off the road at night when at or near their
registered keeper's (or other daily user's) addresses.

This would mean that streets would not not filled with nose to tail
parked cars and that all cars were off the road unless in use away from
home (a minimum distance of at least, say, five miles would have to be
used as the arbiter of whether the vehicle was "at home" or not).

Anyone who could not or would not acquire and/or provide a private
parking (garage) space at their address could not keep a motor vehicle
there. End of story. And they would have to provide as much space as was
necessary for all the vehicles registered there - or reduce their
number, perhaps to zero.

Of course, since the system, like most administrative law, would have to
largely operate on trust, the penalty for breaching that trust (eg,
false declarations of address, etc) would have to be severe, up to and
including confiscation of the vehicle(s) and disqualification from
driving, as well as the more usual penalties for deception, for anyone
making, or being an accessory to the making of, a false declaration for
the purpose of circumventing the law.

Enough is enough
 

On 15/09/2019 00:39, Simon Jester wrote:

We have a great road network, unfortunately it is infested with cars.

I suggest we stop issuing any more driving licences. New drivers can
put their name on a waiting list until a current licence holder dies
or surrenders their licence for medical reasons or gets disqualified
for criminal activity such as speeding.


That would help to reduce the number of immigrants, but it would have an
adverse effect in that many more unlicenced, untrained and uninsured
drivers would be on the roads, rather like cyclists in fact, and of
course there would be many more hit and runs, so the death toll would go
up. So maybe not such a good plan.

Enough is enough
 

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 6:46:53 PM UTC+1, MrCheerful wrote:
On 15/09/2019 00:39, Simon Jester wrote:

We have a great road network, unfortunately it is infested with cars.

I suggest we stop issuing any more driving licences. New drivers can
put their name on a waiting list until a current licence holder dies
or surrenders their licence for medical reasons or gets disqualified
for criminal activity such as speeding.


That would help to reduce the number of immigrants, but it would have an
adverse effect in that many more unlicenced, untrained and uninsured
drivers would be on the roads, rather like cyclists in fact, and of
course there would be many more hit and runs, so the death toll would go
up. So maybe not such a good plan.

So, using your 'logic' the tax payers should provide free driving licences and insurance to anyone who asks. That way there would be no unlicensed or uninsured drivers. Also if we removed all border controls there would be no illegal immigrants.

Enough is enough
 

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 1:59:03 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 15/09/2019 00:39, Simon Jester wrote:

We have a great road network, unfortunately it is infested with cars.

I suggest we stop issuing any more driving licences. New drivers can put their name on a waiting list until a current licence holder dies or surrenders their licence for medical reasons or gets disqualified for criminal activity such as speeding.

Nice troll attempt.

A much better and fairer system would be a requirement for all motor
vehicles to be kept off the road at night when at or near their
registered keeper's (or other daily user's) addresses.

This would mean that streets would not not filled with nose to tail
parked cars and that all cars were off the road unless in use away from
home (a minimum distance of at least, say, five miles would have to be
used as the arbiter of whether the vehicle was "at home" or not).

Anyone who could not or would not acquire and/or provide a private
parking (garage) space at their address could not keep a motor vehicle
there. End of story. And they would have to provide as much space as was
necessary for all the vehicles registered there - or reduce their
number, perhaps to zero.

Of course, since the system, like most administrative law, would have to
largely operate on trust, the penalty for breaching that trust (eg,
false declarations of address, etc) would have to be severe, up to and
including confiscation of the vehicle(s) and disqualification from
driving, as well as the more usual penalties for deception, for anyone
making, or being an accessory to the making of, a false declaration for
the purpose of circumventing the law.

I like this idea in theory. The practical needs thinking about.

Enough is enough
 

On 15/09/2019 20:09, Simon Jester wrote:
On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 1:59:03 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 15/09/2019 00:39, Simon Jester wrote:

We have a great road network, unfortunately it is infested with cars.

I suggest we stop issuing any more driving licences. New drivers can put their name on a waiting list until a current licence holder dies or surrenders their licence for medical reasons or gets disqualified for criminal activity such as speeding.

Nice troll attempt.

A much better and fairer system would be a requirement for all motor
vehicles to be kept off the road at night when at or near their
registered keeper's (or other daily user's) addresses.

This would mean that streets would not not filled with nose to tail
parked cars and that all cars were off the road unless in use away from
home (a minimum distance of at least, say, five miles would have to be
used as the arbiter of whether the vehicle was "at home" or not).

Anyone who could not or would not acquire and/or provide a private
parking (garage) space at their address could not keep a motor vehicle
there. End of story. And they would have to provide as much space as was
necessary for all the vehicles registered there - or reduce their
number, perhaps to zero.

Of course, since the system, like most administrative law, would have to
largely operate on trust, the penalty for breaching that trust (eg,
false declarations of address, etc) would have to be severe, up to and
including confiscation of the vehicle(s) and disqualification from
driving, as well as the more usual penalties for deception, for anyone
making, or being an accessory to the making of, a false declaration for
the purpose of circumventing the law.

I like this idea in theory. The practical needs thinking about.

Let me slightly re-word the first two sentences of my third paragraph:

"Anyone who could not or would not acquire and/or provide AND USE a
private parking (garage) space at OR NEAR their address could not keep a
motor vehicle there. End of story."

The important result would be no domestic garaging on the highway and an
end to concepts such as "residents-only parking". And a market might
develop in the renting out of defensible off-street parking in
residential areas where such things were either non-existent or
inadequate in number - garages in blocks, etc.

Enough is enough
 

On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 1:39:41 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 15/09/2019 20:09, Simon Jester wrote:
On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 1:59:03 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 15/09/2019 00:39, Simon Jester wrote:

We have a great road network, unfortunately it is infested with cars.

I suggest we stop issuing any more driving licences. New drivers can put their name on a waiting list until a current licence holder dies or surrenders their licence for medical reasons or gets disqualified for criminal activity such as speeding.

Nice troll attempt.

A much better and fairer system would be a requirement for all motor
vehicles to be kept off the road at night when at or near their
registered keeper's (or other daily user's) addresses.

This would mean that streets would not not filled with nose to tail
parked cars and that all cars were off the road unless in use away from
home (a minimum distance of at least, say, five miles would have to be
used as the arbiter of whether the vehicle was "at home" or not).

Anyone who could not or would not acquire and/or provide a private
parking (garage) space at their address could not keep a motor vehicle
there. End of story. And they would have to provide as much space as was
necessary for all the vehicles registered there - or reduce their
number, perhaps to zero.

Of course, since the system, like most administrative law, would have to
largely operate on trust, the penalty for breaching that trust (eg,
false declarations of address, etc) would have to be severe, up to and
including confiscation of the vehicle(s) and disqualification from
driving, as well as the more usual penalties for deception, for anyone
making, or being an accessory to the making of, a false declaration for
the purpose of circumventing the law.

I like this idea in theory. The practical needs thinking about.

Let me slightly re-word the first two sentences of my third paragraph:

"Anyone who could not or would not acquire and/or provide AND USE a
private parking (garage) space at OR NEAR their address could not keep a
motor vehicle there. End of story."

The important result would be no domestic garaging on the highway and an
end to concepts such as "residents-only parking". And a market might
develop in the renting out of defensible off-street parking in
residential areas where such things were either non-existent or
inadequate in number - garages in blocks, etc.

OK, I'll go along with that.

Enough is enough
 

On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 1:39:41 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 15/09/2019 20:09, Simon Jester wrote:
On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 1:59:03 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 15/09/2019 00:39, Simon Jester wrote:

We have a great road network, unfortunately it is infested with cars.

I suggest we stop issuing any more driving licences. New drivers can put their name on a waiting list until a current licence holder dies or surrenders their licence for medical reasons or gets disqualified for criminal activity such as speeding.

Nice troll attempt.

A much better and fairer system would be a requirement for all motor
vehicles to be kept off the road at night when at or near their
registered keeper's (or other daily user's) addresses.

This would mean that streets would not not filled with nose to tail
parked cars and that all cars were off the road unless in use away from
home (a minimum distance of at least, say, five miles would have to be
used as the arbiter of whether the vehicle was "at home" or not).

Anyone who could not or would not acquire and/or provide a private
parking (garage) space at their address could not keep a motor vehicle
there. End of story. And they would have to provide as much space as was
necessary for all the vehicles registered there - or reduce their
number, perhaps to zero.

Of course, since the system, like most administrative law, would have to
largely operate on trust, the penalty for breaching that trust (eg,
false declarations of address, etc) would have to be severe, up to and
including confiscation of the vehicle(s) and disqualification from
driving, as well as the more usual penalties for deception, for anyone
making, or being an accessory to the making of, a false declaration for
the purpose of circumventing the law.

I like this idea in theory. The practical needs thinking about.

Let me slightly re-word the first two sentences of my third paragraph:

"Anyone who could not or would not acquire and/or provide AND USE a
private parking (garage) space at OR NEAR their address could not keep a
motor vehicle there. End of story."

The important result would be no domestic garaging on the highway and an
end to concepts such as "residents-only parking". And a market might
develop in the renting out of defensible off-street parking in
residential areas where such things were either non-existent or
inadequate in number - garages in blocks, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqS9tS3MpvM

Entitled Liverpool resident thinks he owns the public road.

Enough is enough
 

Simon Jester wrote:
On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 1:39:41 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 15/09/2019 20:09, Simon Jester wrote:
On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 1:59:03 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 15/09/2019 00:39, Simon Jester wrote:

We have a great road network, unfortunately it is infested with
cars.

I suggest we stop issuing any more driving licences. New drivers
can put their name on a waiting list until a current licence
holder dies or surrenders their licence for medical reasons or
gets disqualified for criminal activity such as speeding.

Nice troll attempt.

A much better and fairer system would be a requirement for all
motor vehicles to be kept off the road at night when at or near
their registered keeper's (or other daily user's) addresses.

This would mean that streets would not not filled with nose to tail
parked cars and that all cars were off the road unless in use away
from home (a minimum distance of at least, say, five miles would
have to be used as the arbiter of whether the vehicle was "at
home" or not).

Anyone who could not or would not acquire and/or provide a private
parking (garage) space at their address could not keep a motor
vehicle there. End of story. And they would have to provide as
much space as was necessary for all the vehicles registered there
- or reduce their number, perhaps to zero.

Of course, since the system, like most administrative law, would
have to largely operate on trust, the penalty for breaching that
trust (eg, false declarations of address, etc) would have to be
severe, up to and including confiscation of the vehicle(s) and
disqualification from driving, as well as the more usual penalties
for deception, for anyone making, or being an accessory to the
making of, a false declaration for the purpose of circumventing
the law.

I like this idea in theory. The practical needs thinking about.

Let me slightly re-word the first two sentences of my third
paragraph:

"Anyone who could not or would not acquire and/or provide AND USE a
private parking (garage) space at OR NEAR their address could not
keep a motor vehicle there. End of story."

The important result would be no domestic garaging on the highway
and an end to concepts such as "residents-only parking". And a
market might develop in the renting out of defensible off-street
parking in residential areas where such things were either
non-existent or inadequate in number - garages in blocks, etc.

OK, I'll go along with that.

You are and always will be a ******.

Enough is enough
 

On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 6:46:12 PM UTC+1, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
Simon Jester wrote:
On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 1:39:41 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 15/09/2019 20:09, Simon Jester wrote:
On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 1:59:03 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 15/09/2019 00:39, Simon Jester wrote:

We have a great road network, unfortunately it is infested with
cars.

I suggest we stop issuing any more driving licences. New drivers
can put their name on a waiting list until a current licence
holder dies or surrenders their licence for medical reasons or
gets disqualified for criminal activity such as speeding.

Nice troll attempt.

A much better and fairer system would be a requirement for all
motor vehicles to be kept off the road at night when at or near
their registered keeper's (or other daily user's) addresses.

This would mean that streets would not not filled with nose to tail
parked cars and that all cars were off the road unless in use away
from home (a minimum distance of at least, say, five miles would
have to be used as the arbiter of whether the vehicle was "at
home" or not).

Anyone who could not or would not acquire and/or provide a private
parking (garage) space at their address could not keep a motor
vehicle there. End of story. And they would have to provide as
much space as was necessary for all the vehicles registered there
- or reduce their number, perhaps to zero.

Of course, since the system, like most administrative law, would
have to largely operate on trust, the penalty for breaching that
trust (eg, false declarations of address, etc) would have to be
severe, up to and including confiscation of the vehicle(s) and
disqualification from driving, as well as the more usual penalties
for deception, for anyone making, or being an accessory to the
making of, a false declaration for the purpose of circumventing
the law.

I like this idea in theory. The practical needs thinking about.

Let me slightly re-word the first two sentences of my third
paragraph:

"Anyone who could not or would not acquire and/or provide AND USE a
private parking (garage) space at OR NEAR their address could not
keep a motor vehicle there. End of story."

The important result would be no domestic garaging on the highway
and an end to concepts such as "residents-only parking". And a
market might develop in the renting out of defensible off-street
parking in residential areas where such things were either
non-existent or inadequate in number - garages in blocks, etc.

OK, I'll go along with that.

You are and always will be a ******.

Is there some point you are failing to make?
Nugent suggested this yet you are not calling him a ******.

Feel free to join the discussion.

How do feel about the apes parking their bicycles outside your Little Dog's circus tent?