On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 23:50:41 +0100, Alistair J Murray
Why on earth would I want to even consider the possibility of explaining something so obviously ridiculous?
No.
You can't "re-iterate" it, since it is NOT what you said.
Many will have.
But that is NOT what you said.
You said that if they make it round at all, then they have demonstrated "sufficient judgment to select a suitable speed".
This is simply rubbish.
They could well have just demonstrated an ability to be lucky there was nothing coming the other way, and nothing just around the bend for them to hit.
I don't know? How do they?
That wasn't the question though, was it?
Agreed.
But of course, nothing to do with your ridiculous statements above.
Actually yes.
"you just got bored" is no excuse. Many of the people in this thread (including me) will not remember having seen any of your posts before.
If the FIRST post in the thread where you actually mention speeded limits says --------------------------------------------------- "Speed limit are there for a reason that does not stand up to analysis.
They confer no benefit beyond some administrative convenience.
Speed limits serve neither safety nor justice."
You gave no impression whatsoever in the early part of this thread that you thought there was any place at all for speed limits. ---------------------------------------------
then I think it reasonable for readers to think you mean that without any qualification.
Actually, YES.
Which is fine, and I mostly agree with you, but it is nothing like what you have been arguing throughout this thread. -- Alex Heney, Global Villager Terminal glare: A look that kills... To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
