| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 97075 | 2009-02-03 13:38:00 | Discussing stuff... | rob_on_guitar (4196) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 744630 | 2009-02-05 07:20:00 | Thinking about growing a moustache, joining the club and all. Anyone here know how long it would take for 2cm growth? Thinking I will just go freestyle to start, then maybe look into a handlebar. Some good reading here: www.mustachesummer.com |
Rob99 (151) | ||
| 744631 | 2009-02-05 08:57:00 | I use English because that is the language I use to communicate. Tautological statement there, Sweep. Back to the Justice system that does not deliver Justice. I agree - the justice system is just a system as it stands. But then, the only completely just system would be a system that contained no injustice. |
Deane F (8204) | ||
| 744632 | 2009-02-05 10:02:00 | Tautological statement there, Sweep. I agree - the justice system is just a system as it stands. But then, the only completely just system would be a system that contained no injustice. This time I agree with you 100%. There is no system that delivers comlete Justice in my view. The Westminster system seems to be what we have and what we should live by. But some Parliaments have introduced laws and amendments etc but we should all know that doing 51 Kph in an area that has 50Kph signs up is wrong. But there again I could argue or debate that the speed measuring device had not been calibrated in a court. Much like the law used to be for a handbrake. So let us assume that you are stopped on the side of the road and being an enforcement officer I can push the vehicle along the road by hand. I would think that the handbrake does not work very well so you get a ticket. The law said then that the vehicle had to stop in 20 feet at 20MPH OR hold on a grade of 1 in 5. So in the event I wrote the ticket and this matter is defended I can just see a lawyer asking me in court a few questions. For example, "Sweep did you drive the vehicle." My answer would have to be no. In the event I was stupid enough to drive the vehicle at 20MPH the next question may be how do you know the vehicle was at 20MPH when you applied the handbrake The speedometer was calibrated when? Then I have to find a grade of 1 in 5. So the lawyer may then ask, "Sweep did you survey the said road?" to which I would have to answer NO. Case dismissed I would think. This because the court should find the defendant not guilty due to the fact that I did not prove my case. There are technical issues from time to time as I almost certain you may be aware of. Should I now start on laws that are plainly after an event? Take a certain person that said she did not notice while in a vehicle being transported with a Police escort. |
Sweep (90) | ||
| 744633 | 2009-02-06 00:32:00 | This time I agree with you 100%. There is no system that delivers comlete Justice in my view. The Westminster system seems to be what we have and what we should live by. But some Parliaments have introduced laws and amendments etc but we should all know that doing 51 Kph in an area that has 50Kph signs up is wrong. But there again I could argue or debate that the speed measuring device had not been calibrated in a court. Much like the law used to be for a handbrake. So let us assume that you are stopped on the side of the road and being an enforcement officer I can push the vehicle along the road by hand. I would think that the handbrake does not work very well so you get a ticket. The law said then that the vehicle had to stop in 20 feet at 20MPH OR hold on a grade of 1 in 5. So in the event I wrote the ticket and this matter is defended I can just see a lawyer asking me in court a few questions. For example, "Sweep did you drive the vehicle." My answer would have to be no. In the event I was stupid enough to drive the vehicle at 20MPH the next question may be how do you know the vehicle was at 20MPH when you applied the handbrake The speedometer was calibrated when? Then I have to find a grade of 1 in 5. So the lawyer may then ask, "Sweep did you survey the said road?" to which I would have to answer NO. Case dismissed I would think. This because the court should find the defendant not guilty due to the fact that I did not prove my case. There are technical issues from time to time as I almost certain you may be aware of. Should I now start on laws that are plainly after an event? Take a certain person that said she did not notice while in a vehicle being transported with a Police escort. Your writing is as clear as your thinking, Sweep, and just as well informed. Keep it up. |
Deane F (8204) | ||
| 744634 | 2009-02-06 01:27:00 | Antidisestablishmentarianism and Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysilio gogogoch and Taumatawhakatangihangakoauauotamateapokaiwhenuakit anatahu Just don't ask me to prononce the last two! [don't know why the forum seems to be splitting off the last few letters of the Welsh place name and also the Maori place name - ironic...] Mind explaining the irony for me? |
roddy_boy (4115) | ||
| 744635 | 2009-02-06 02:24:00 | Maori word, splitting = Maoridom, wanting sovereignty (separate government - split). Geddit? | johcar (6283) | ||
| 744636 | 2009-02-06 13:39:00 | No. | roddy_boy (4115) | ||
| 744637 | 2009-02-06 19:53:00 | Yes. | rob_on_guitar (4196) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 | |||||