The Age printed another letter of mine

[catsidhe]

In the letters of The Age yesterday was an impassioned plea for the government to please think of the children finally get around to making guns illegal.

I replied, and The Age printed it:

THE Government has anticipated your concerns, Mr Tsironis (Letters, 18/6), and made the possession and transport of handguns, semi-auto rifles and knives illegal several years ago.

Perhaps they read your letter, went back in time, and informed a previous government who had never thought of that. Well done: we are now all retrospectively safe from violence on the streets. Heaven forfend that violent criminals might consider breaking the law, after all.

I wonder if this one will also find its way into Hansard? Somehow I doubt it.

Comments

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

Congratulations on slapping people with the wet fish of common sense.

[catsidhe.livejournal.com]

I like it best when they fall into the canal.

[enrobso.livejournal.com]

I read it and was most amused. Well said.

[tau-iota-mu-c.livejournal.com]

Yes, I noticed a familiar name had taken the spot that was reserved for me, dagnamit!

Subject: Jail threat for cyclists

By the police's own admission, 2 cyclists have killed a 3rd party in the
past decade in Australia (both being pedestrians).

Meanwhile, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau say that about 85% of
all cyclist deaths in Australia had been recorded as being due to
collision with a car in that time (although there's probably hit and runs
in there where vehicular involvement was not correctly found), resulting
in about 400 cyclist deaths (the proportion of cyclists at fault has been
unreliably determined to be about 50%, but given that it is hard to ask a
dead person's version of events to compare against those of a
self-interested person who had just killed someone and is now defending
their own hide, I would not be surprised if cyclists were breaking the law
and at fault much less often than recorded). And motorists have killed
roughly 17000 people all up.

Tell me again why we are spending so much effort cracking down upon
cyclists and giving them the same punishment for offenses that in practice
are /far/ less serious than similar offenses in cars? It couldn't be a
reaction to a media beatup earlier this year, could it, and they have to
be seen doing something? Given my own experience with police
investigative abilities, I'd hate to be fined $284 for leaving a small
dent in someone's vehicle if they changed lanes into me without looking,
but later claimed that I pulled out in front of them. Something that
leaves a small dent in someone's car is far more likely to lead to the
cyclist lying on the floor, but good luck getting the police to prosecute
that (last time I was hit by someone when the police did actually act upon
the driver's admission, they got away with a $110 fine, and not a scratch
to their headlight, and I got away with an ankle injury).

[(Anonymous)]

What I don't understand is demerit points for cyclists. I don't understand how they would work, if introducted. The result of too many demerit points is that it only applies to driving a motorvehicle. You don't need a licence to ride a bicycle on the road.

-- mpp

[tau-iota-mu-c.livejournal.com]

The more you break the law on your bicycle, the more points you lose, leading to the loss of the car driving license, leading you to have to ride the bike more, leading to you getting more practice in riding properly without breaking the law? Sounds good to me!