Expanded ULEZ

[Odds]

So, the right wing press and the Tory boys cheer on the vandals smashing cameras but complain about protestors...it seems Law and Order depends on which side of the road you're sitting, i suppose.

When is a vandal not a vandal?

A line is crossed when democratically elected politicians rouse people to disobey democratically made laws. That’s something the left has not always understood when raging at Labour MPs failing to join protests that might tip into illegality. So it is breathtaking to find Duncan Smith, law-and-order tough guy, punisher of any benefit claimant who misses an appointment, openly calling for protesters to commit criminal damage, after voting through ferocious new anti-protester laws designed to frighten off demonstrators. Remember, two Just Stop Oil protesters are in jail – for three years and two years seven months – for climbing on to a bridge and disrupting traffic. Yet now, some Conservative MPs are saying that police resources are being used to investigate “attacks on Ulez cameras rather than more serious crimes”. I don’t recall them saying the police wasted time prosecuting climate protesters.

 

[ellal]

I remember no so long back when one use supermarket bags were banned and replaced with a 5p levy or bring your own re-useable bags. There was uproar.

And yet since plastic 'bags for life' were touted as a solution, the use of plastic from supermarkets has increased...

That's because the reusable bags contain many times more plastic.
(the hint is in the fact that to make them more durable they have to be thicker )

And in addition single use bags were in actual fact often used as bin liners and rubbish bags...

Thus sales of bespoke bin liners have also gone up...

Why no 'uproar' about the increased plastic use in reality?

Especially given that in Ireland they introduced these measures earlier and the results were already available to be seen!

 

[IT Minion]

*looks at 8 year old bags for life in regular use*

Yeah, sure.

 

[fillyboy]

Woman on the checkout in Asda asked me if I wanted a bag for life, I told her I was already married thank-you.

 

[blup]

So, the right wing press and the Tory boys cheer on the vandals smashing cameras but complain about protestors...it seems Law and Order depends on which side of the road you're sitting, i suppose.

The core tory vote here is law abiding (small) businesses, so there is a logic, its just a logic that jettisons law and order. A bit like the govt trying to push through brexhit without a parliamentary vote.

Blup

 

[fillyboy]

A bit like the govt trying to push through brexhit without a parliamentary vote.

There was a parliamentary vote on the brexit deal. It was carried by 521 votes against 73 votes.

 

[blup]

There was a parliamentary vote on the brexit deal. It was carried by 521 votes against 73 votes.

Only after a nudge from the court aka the enemies of the people made it happen

Blup

 

[motorbiking]

this does not appear to be just a few cameras being damaged. According various sources a 1/3rd of all cameras are currently missing and over 70% have been attacked.

 

[Brigadier]

this does not appear to be just a few cameras being damaged. According various sources a 1/3rd of all cameras are currently missing and over 70% have been attacked.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it only needs "the one" to be working - and "snap!" the number plate - to be pursuable for the charge?

 

[motorbiking]

I don’t think that is the goal of the camera smashers.

most people won’t chance it even if 95% of the cameras are busted. The scheme fails if it cannot raise the revenue expected due to rising “maintenance” costs. This is the clear goal of the vigilantes.

I would guess it’s going to cost 2k a pop to fix the cameras with maintenance demand much higher than expected. That’s easily £2-3m costs already and likely to keep going.

If they attack the signs too then the charge is unenforceable and TfL probably won’t know if the signs are up or broken.

So people will just appeal and say the signage was covered up.

Of course the big cost is all the small businesses on the edge of the scheme who will instantly lose the out of London customers.

 

[Roy Bloom]

There was a parliamentary vote on the brexit deal. It was carried by 521 votes against 73 votes.

Good job there's people like Gina Miller about.

 

[Roy Bloom]

I would guess it’s going to cost 2k a pop to fix the cameras

That's going to be a hefty bill for damage for anyone caught.

The defence used at the Bristol Colston statue removal was:

whether conviction for the damage done to the statue was a disproportionate interference with the defendants' right to protest.

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/AG-Ref-Colston-Four-judgment-280922.pdf

How do you think any defence along those lines would succeed?

 

[blup]

I don’t think that is the goal of the camera smashers.

most people won’t chance it even if 95% of the cameras are busted. The scheme fails if it cannot raise the revenue expected due to rising “maintenance” costs. This is the clear goal of the vigilantes.

I would guess it’s going to cost 2k a pop to fix the cameras with maintenance demand much higher than expected. That’s easily £2-3m costs already and likely to keep going.

If they attack the signs too then the charge is unenforceable and TfL probably won’t know if the signs are up or broken.

So people will just appeal and say the signage was covered up.

Of course the big cost is all the small businesses on the edge of the scheme who will instantly lose the out of London customers.

Much more effective to attack the signs

Blup

 

[Brigadier]

If they want to raise money, just fine / charge the bellends:

- anyone driving while wearing a baseball cap
- anyone with their front number plate on their dashboard, rather than where it is supposed to be

For starters

 

[transam]

Fine any one playing rap music
In there car ?