Lootman wrote:I start with the premise that everyone breaks the law. Some do it more than others. And some have better reasons than others. But we all do it whether by "accident" as you suggest (which of course is no excuse) or for cause. And drivers probably break more laws than non-drivers - who here has never parked illegally "just for 5 minutes"? According to the original post, people routinely drive at 35 or 40 in the 20 zone near him.
So I do not see this as being a matter of "good" people versus "bad" people. Rather we all have criteria for making the decisions that we do. The law is certainly a factor to be taken into account, but is not the only one. For instance you might speed because you are taking your very pregnant wife to the hospital, or to escape a dangerous situation. Every law has valid exceptions.
So Swill is wrong to assert that I have a "breathtaking" disregard for the law. It is true that I do not mindlessly and slavishly follow every technical regulation just because it is a regulation. Rather I use my judgement to try and always make the best decision in any circumstance. I am no goody-two-shoes but nor I am a serial criminal. Decisions are carefully considered.
And in the 50 years I have been driving I have received just 2 non-parking tickets. Neither was for speeding. One minor "fender bender" accident. Some might call that a good driving record.
You're completely missing the point of the discussion. It was never about whether speeding, or breaking the law in general, was a good or bad thing.
It was the ridiculous notion that a driver who was observing the law by driving at the speed limit, should inconvenience themselves by pulling over so that drivers behind who wished to break the law could do so without inconvenience.