Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Amigo on 26 December 2010, 23:15:58
-
No ifs/buts, i know the stretch of road etc. just tick the box.
-
Since I hit middle age a couple of years ago (and got caught at serious speed ) I have developed the habit of driving quite sedately. In the car It is rare for me to hit 80mph these days.
On a bike is different though. I do still feel the need for speed on 2 wheels. I try hard to temper it though, and I do have a private road nearby which I have a little run on occasionally. The main straight is long enough for the boggers speedo to read just over twice the national limit. ;)
-
Of course.. ;) Depends what car I'm driving though - the Omega, like Miss Daisy, the turbocharged MR2? Like my life depended on it..
-
Although I ticked the 'there's no need for it' box I do understand the temptation if the road supports a blast of speed.
When I collect my pension next year (age 60) it will have been 34 years since I first put on a uniform and was taught to drive in earnest.
I've done and seen a lot since then but it never has ceased to amaze me how pointless speed is on the public roads (in the overall sense) when one considers the restricted extent of our road network, the number of other vehicles on the road and so on.
Now although many will attribute my remarks as being the ramblings of an old geezer out of touch with the technically able, switched on youth of today but I consider it a duty to pass on these experiences in the hope that other people will avoid the grief of unnecessary pain should excessive driving result in a collision.
Although many of us think that disaster will never happen as a result of what we do (especially when driving inappropriately fast) there is a fine dividing line between exhilaration and regret – and – when that collision eventually does occur there's little point in wishing that the outcome was different.
In such circumstances we not only potentially cause personal injury but are liable to injure others, cause inconvenience to other road users, tie up dwindling resources, load the NHS should injuries be involved and push up those insurance premiums we all complain about.
For the sake of our loved one’s we should be responsible as it is they who will invariably suffer the pain of loss if the worst happens.
I must be getting old, that was another bloody sermon. ::) ::)
-
Although I ticked the 'there's no need for it' box I do understand the temptation if the road supports a blast of speed.
When I collect my pension next year (age 60) it will have been 34 years since I first put on a uniform and was taught to drive in earnest.
I've done and seen a lot since then but it never has ceased to amaze me how pointless speed is on the public roads (in the overall sense) when one considers the restricted extent of our road network, the number of other vehicles on the road and so on.
Now although many will attribute my remarks as being the ramblings of an old geezer out of touch with the technically able, switched on youth of today but I consider it a duty to pass on these experiences in the hope that other people will avoid the grief of unnecessary pain should excessive driving result in a collision.
Although many of us think that disaster will never happen as a result of what we do (especially when driving inappropriately fast) there is a fine dividing line between exhilaration and regret – and – when that collision eventually does occur there's little point in wishing that the outcome was different.
In such circumstances we not only potentially cause personal injury but are liable to injure others, cause inconvenience to other road users, tie up dwindling resources, load the NHS should injuries be involved and push up those insurance premiums we all complain about.
For the sake of our loved one’s we should be responsible as it is they who will invariably suffer the pain of loss if the worst happens.
I must be getting old, that was another bloody sermon. ::) ::)
WOW! :o :o :o
where is that man with his red flag? ;) ;) ;)
Accidents always happen to someone else, and it's impossible to put an old head on young shoulders etc etc We all take a chance if we are really playing in a car that will do twice, a bit the & legal UK motorway limit, and if we think we can get away with it, I think most of us will. Not that i have ever done. ::) ::) ::) ::) ;)
-
What wise words of wisdom you speak Zulu! Although when I bought the Elite I stormed up the M1 at 130 past 2 police bikes going the opposite way who were quite angry! Having said that I completely agree with you after having learnt some valuable lessons myself when it comes to speed (nothing major just enough to make me think of possible consequences for me and other people).
Although I love speed and going fast I never speed in built up areas, especially in an auto when I'm lucky to get above 25 - crap roads and too much traffic! I never go above 80 now on the odd time I find myself on the mway. Im going to max out on the autobahn though on my European road trip that's planned!
-
Yes under certain circumstances, we have many roads around here that were perfectly safe to drive at national speed limit so THEY decide to lower the limits to 40 [revenue from future speeding fines perhaps]. Rarely through built up areas not even on the motor bicycle. I also feel they should reduce some speed limits through housing estates without sticking speed humps in though as these dreaded things really annoy me especially in 30 limits in my van.
-
There's not a driver alive that hasn't broken a speed limit illegally!
-
I guess we have all done so. For instance I usually cruise in the late 70's on Mways, but if I don't travel at at least that speed, I'm holding up the fast lane.
Cruise control is great for preventing unwanted speed exceedances. I think the most likely places to do so are urban dual carriageways with 40 or 50 limits, and this is where CC is so useful in preventing the likelihood of getting a ticket. 8-) 8-) 8-)
PS Can't vote as no option appears right for me.
-
i still drive fast but not as bad as i was a few yrs ago. ive wrote off too many cars through racing over the yrs and seem to be mellowing out in my middle age yrs. older and wiser now
-
I don't think speed is the issue, I would argue that in todays modern cars, you can safely sit a 100mph on a clear, dry stretch of motorway with good visibility.
Whats far more dangerous is sitting legally at 70mph in thick fog and sub zero temps as i've witnessed daily over the last 4 weeks. :o
-
I don't think speed is the issue, I would argue that in todays modern cars, you can safely sit a 100mph on a clear, dry stretch of motorway with good visibility.
Whats far more dangerous is sitting legally at 70mph in thick fog and sub zero temps as i've witnessed daily over the last 4 weeks. :o
exactly! driving conditions play a major role in our ability to control the car so speed should be calculated for this. i also find that being in a bad mood or running late plays a big part in how you drive as well
-
yep.. the only limit is the engine most of the times..
really sometimes I need a v12 ;D
most of the times I open the road for ambulance drivers but they are too slow ;D
-
Raising the speed limit on motorways wouldnt be a bad thing as far as I am converned, sadly the standard of motoring in britain today couldnt cope with it.
Too many selfish drivers on the motorway, lane hogging or rubbing bumpers trying to get past you.
If a secondry test had to be taken to be able to drive on the motorway then 60% of todays drivers would fail it.
-
dont drive so fast now as i used to. must be getting old or maybe its just that its slowly dawned on me that 1)you rarely get to your destination that faster anyway 2)I really cannot afford the fuel that is disappearing at such an alarming rate during those bursts of acceleration 3) its nice to see that i no longer have 9 points on my licence 4)maybe im not actually as good a driver as i once thought and 5)much as i love my omega she is a bit of a barge compared with my old 200bhp prelude and certainly doesnt accelerate or handle as well. Dont get me wrong, still "feel the need for speed" at times and still feel angered that the law focuses so much on speed when speed is only one (albeit the major ) factor in risk assessment of driving when there are so many other examples of bad driving out there like tailgating (but not actually overtaking when they could), driving without lights when the weather obviously dictates that they should be used, not indicating and driving too slowly for the conditions.
-
Too many artificially low limits now.
Most people ignore these.
Most people who speed tend to speed in 30s and 40s and I don't mean 35 (lots do 35 and are no problem).
That said I once nearly got hit by someone doing 50 to 60 in a 30 as I pulled out when clear but they came hurtling up behind me emergency braking and I just floored the car (pre VX days).
That person should have had a months ban >:( >:(
-
Increasing numbers of people are likely to exceed posted limits as they come inexorably down.
There is unquestionably a thing called excess speed and quite often it should be obvious to drivers before they have an "accident". This boundary between excess speed and "making good progress" has little in common with the arbitrary posted limits sadly.
As posted limits come down, drivers (understandably) adapt to interpreting them as the speed they should driving at, which is foolish. A lot of senses and interpretation, not to mention experience, goes into determining the best safe speed for good progress. Low posted limits demolish that skill.
Re Zulu's homily above; Do/did you have access/permission to exceed posted limits either off the public highway or on it? If so that can remove the desire to drive fast in "normal" mode.
I've entered into roadside discussions with police in the distant past about my speed but managed to curtail it enough to avoid any points, penalties or compulsory re-training fortunately.
There's always tomorrow. ;D
-
too many bloody cameras these days to catch you doing 34 yes a bloke i know got snapped for doing 34 in a 30 and he was done for it,some might agree with it but its just money orientated and not logical..best thing i did was buy this bighorn automatic and now i just plod around
-
too many bloody cameras these days to catch you doing 34 yes a bloke i know got snapped for doing 34 in a 30 and he was done for it,some might agree with it but its just money orientated and not logical..best thing i did was buy this bighorn automatic and now i just plod around
I was in the XR3i generation (current Avatar shows it). I replaced and XR3 with an XR3i which subsequently got a Piper cam, Janspeed exhaust and K&N air filter while the Missus had an XR2.
After 4 years of screaming around I bought a Granada 2.8i Ghia X Executive to slow myself down. It struggled to spin the back wheels in the wet!
-
Yes, I love speed, but in sensible places at sensible times - NOT in residential areas with speed limits of 20/30/40 mph !
It is in my blood, as is being high up, and enjoy anything that goes at ever higher speeds. Not ashamed of it ;D ;D ;D 8-) 8-)
As for the risk, well the closest I have been to death on the road, on a number of occasions, I have been stationary!! ::) ::) ::) ::)
-
IMO
Oh dear there does seem to be a lot of uninformed or unthinking or inexperienced opinion on this subject.
About 2,500 people a year a killed on Britain's roads. I have driven around 20,000 miles a year for 30+ years and I have never seen a fatal accident. I never saw the fatal accident on the A34 near here which caused the local authority to reduce it to 40mph. But, might it not be just a bit arrogant of me to think that because I don't see the accidents and I didn't see the person killed on the A34, that I know better than the LA as to what a suitable speed would be on that stretch of road?
K
-
IMO
Oh dear there does seem to be a lot of uninformed or unthinking or inexperienced opinion on this subject.
About 2,500 people a year a killed on Britain's roads. I have driven around 20,000 miles a year for 30+ years and I have never seen a fatal accident. I never saw the fatal accident on the A34 near here which caused the local authority to reduce it to 40mph. But, might it not be just a bit arrogant of me to think that because I don't see the accidents and I didn't see the person killed on the A34, that I know better than the LA as to what a suitable speed would be on that stretch of road?
K
I imagine that once someone has either been involved in one, or lost a family member, they mey take a different view.
-
I have seen the results of many collisions, with a large number of them fatalities. I have known people killed in road collisions.
What it does is remind you that living is a risk, always has been and always will be. We have all, no doubt, come very close to death as I know I certainly have on a number of very memorable occasions!
All it does is remind you that we are all mortal, and when our number comes up we will be gone. You value then the opportunity of enjoying life to the full, and sometimes right on the edge.
That is life, that is death, we live between the two until that final moment when the shit happens!! ::) ::) ::) ::)
-
IMO
Oh dear there does seem to be a lot of uninformed or unthinking or inexperienced opinion on this subject.
About 2,500 people a year a killed on Britain's roads. I have driven around 20,000 miles a year for 30+ years and I have never seen a fatal accident. I never saw the fatal accident on the A34 near here which caused the local authority to reduce it to 40mph. But, might it not be just a bit arrogant of me to think that because I don't see the accidents and I didn't see the person killed on the A34, that I know better than the LA as to what a suitable speed would be on that stretch of road?
K
Yep, but to put everything into propestive, 156,720 people died from all cancers in the UK in 2009. 1 in four people who die will do so due to cancer.
On the 1st July 1916 the first day of the First Battle of the Somme claimed 60,000 casulties, with another 60,000 the next day. When HMS Hood blew up on the 24th May 1941 1415 men were lost, with just 3 left bobbing around in the water wondering why they had survived.
I do not aim to trivalise the loss of 2,500 people a year in road collisions, but let us put it into prospective. Yes we should make the roads safe, but still recognise that no matter what, as I stated in my previous post, life is a risk from the second we are conceived. God has planned our life and it is meant to be lived. Live in a small room for life and your risks are very limited, but who wants that type of existence? No, live life to the full; take risks, have faith, and accept the inevitable when it happens! ;) ;)
-
Lizzie, my concern with your argument is that it appears to fail to disintinguish between those who "live life to the full" by taking risks with their own life, eg hang gliding; and those who for the sake of a few moments of excitement on the public road, take risks with other peoples' lives.
The comparisons of death through war and cancer or other illness do not have any relevance.
K
-
IMO
Oh dear there does seem to be a lot of uninformed or unthinking or inexperienced opinion on this subject.
About 2,500 people a year a killed on Britain's roads. I have driven around 20,000 miles a year for 30+ years and I have never seen a fatal accident. I never saw the fatal accident on the A34 near here which caused the local authority to reduce it to 40mph. But, might it not be just a bit arrogant of me to think that because I don't see the accidents and I didn't see the person killed on the A34, that I know better than the LA as to what a suitable speed would be on that stretch of road?
K
That actually comes across as a bit arrogant.
-
Two points
1 - it was prefixed IMO
2 - is this less arrogant than assuming I can break the law / take risks on the public road, and then excuse it on this forum?
K
-
Lizzie, my concern with your argument is that it appears to fail to disintinguish between those who "live life to the full" by taking risks with their own life, eg hang gliding; and those who for the sake of a few moments of excitement on the public road, take risks with other peoples' lives.
The comparisons of death through war and cancer or other illness do not have any relevance.
K
Oh yes they do as they all form the fabric of our lives, and the various means of our deaths as destined by the laws of fate. Personal actions whilst driving or doing anything else with our lives and the people around us is all down to those unwritten laws, and only they decide if it is time for anyone involved to die.
You see I am seeing the wider picture Kevin as that is what we all live within. The seconds of time can differentiate between a life or death, and whatever a person does do or not do is decided by a greater power than your judgement. That has dictated man's history and always will do. Speed for decades and (like me you "get away with it") whilst another person may do it once, and be killed or kill someone else. That result was decide well before the actual action. As in the cases of cancer or war that I mentioned, fate and God's will is the ruling power and out of humans hands.
My father-in-law lived on the edge fighting through both WW2 and the Korean War without a scratch, although losing mates all around him. My Grandfather on my mothers side fought on HMS Lion at Jutland, and came away without injury. My father fought throughout WW2 and did likewise. His father, my grandfather, went to work as a civilian on the morning of the 12th September, 1940 and was killed by a lone Luftwaffe bomber dropping high explosives on the factory were he worked. My mother, her 2 sisters, 1 brother and her parents lived through the Eastend of London Blitz and came through unscathed My Great Uncle Albert fought all through the African Wars, the Boar War of 1900, and WW1, without a scratch. His brother, my Great Uncle Wally only served in the Great War and was killed in his first major action on 30th July 1917.
What I am trying to say is what my father-in-law rightly believed; when your number is up it is up, with the bullet or bomb with your name on it either heading for you, or not at all. So stop worrying about "being safe" and live your life to the full. Only God will decide when it comes to an end!
Sorry Kevin for getting so deep with this, but it is the only way you can view what we do in life and remain sane (well I think I am!! ;D ;D ;D ;D) :y :y
-
Lizzie
Are you suggesting that (for example) the death of a cyclist is down to "unwritten laws" and the hand of fate, and nothing to do with the deliberate actions of some body driving too fast?
Kevin (not Ken :))
-
Lizzie
Are you suggesting that (for example) the death of a cyclist is down to "unwritten laws" and the hand of fate, and nothing to do with the deliberate actions of some body driving too fast?
Kevin (not Ken :))
Yes! :y :y Fate put the cyclist there, it made that person be at that particular place, at that time, on that date, just as the car was fated to be on the same spot, with the rest of the road perhaps clear, but the collision happened "as planned". The death of the cyclist would have a fated knock on effect, that can change history for those around that person; cause, effect, and consequence comes into the equation fully, with the motorists life also changed by the momentum of the "scheduled" event. Life, or death, decided by fate and God. ;)
Throughout mans history that pattern has been there, and gives rise to the if's, maybe's, could have beens, and should have been of counter factual history. One bullet, one action of man, one event, that on the face of it appears to be "man made", will become a situation where people will say "that was fated; it was meant to happen!" It is in fact God's will to ensure the destiny of his children and the world is fulfilled. :y
-
Lizzie
Then we have a fundamental disagreement here. I am completely unable to support your POV. Some may find it a potentially dangerous abdication of personal responsibility.
K
-
Lizzie
Then we have a fundamental disagreement here. I am completely unable to support your POV. Some may find it a potentially dangerous abdication of personal responsibility.
K
Fair enough Kevin, but there is no abdication of personal responsibility, but an acceptence that there are forces that decide the outcome of everything we do whether we like it or not! Our contract with life if you like! ;)
-
Such a contract would be void through uncertainty!
Life is given to us without asking (presumably accepted by conduct); taken away with no payment made. Void through lack of consideration?
:y
-
Lizzie
Then we have a fundamental disagreement here. I am completely unable to support your POV. Some may find it a potentially dangerous abdication of personal responsibility.
K
I agree actually, if everybody took a bit of care on the road instead of talking into their bloody phones and texting, then 'fate' would deal a whole lot more people a better hand.
I do understand what you're saying Lizzie, we'll all die eventually and life would be boring if we didn't take a few risks but don't involve the general public in your risk-taking :y
-
Lizzie
Then we have a fundamental disagreement here. I am completely unable to support your POV. Some may find it a potentially dangerous abdication of personal responsibility.
K
I agree actually, if everybody took a bit of care on the road instead of talking into their bloody phones and texting, then 'fate' would deal a whole lot more people a better hand.
I do understand what you're saying Lizzie, we'll all die eventually and life would be boring if we didn't take a few risks but don't involve the general public in your risk-taking :y
But I do not, no more than you and everyone who takes their car onto a road! ::) ::)
I am not saying you deliberately go out and do 100 mph through the local town centre. What I am saying is regardless of what you think you are doing, what actually happens is not under your overall control. Yes most times we go out in our cars, drive normally and nothing seems to happen. Then one day you do exactly the same, only to find on a bend someone who has lost control due to a heart attack and hits you head on, killing everyone in your car. What could you have done to avoid that? Nothing!! It was destined to happen, as your initial conception and birth was! ;) ;) ;)
That is our lives, and the death that will come no matter how "safe" you play it! No risk taking, no speeding, no careless driving, but you end up deceased as the Lord has decided before your birth. Never think all is under your control as it is not, but I will not add to the examples I have given previously in terms of personal experience and that of others around me, let alone in general history, but it is all there to read all too clearly. :)
-
Raising the speed limit on motorways wouldnt be a bad thing as far as I am converned, sadly the standard of motoring in britain today couldnt cope with it.
Too many selfish drivers on the motorway, lane hogging or rubbing bumpers trying to get past you.
If a secondry test had to be taken to be able to drive on the motorway then 60% of todays drivers would fail it.
on most of our urban roads speed limit is 70 km/hr where there is 4 lanes and 50 km/hr where there is 2-3 lanes.. No way I could obey this.. :-? if I try that some truck or tanker will pass over me.. ;D
so my life is more important than some ***** 5 points and money >:(
-
No.....!!!!
When I was nowt but a 'teen'; riding my Seeley-Honda 750.....I ran-over and killed a young dog.
I was going far-too fast and the dog bolted away from it`s young owners, right over the road and I hit it square in the back (nearly cutting the poor mite in`two)........the sight, sounds and manner of that little one`s violent and agonising death has stayed with me and I doubt if the regret, sadness and guilt will ever go away (yes, even all these years later).....it might so easily have been a person or child that I killed as the result of selfishness.
I know for sure that, had I been attending to the (perfectly reasonable) speed limit in force at the time, I might`ve easily stopped/avoided the dog.
So, no!....I don`t speed, show-off, use the phone (or eat) whilst driving and abhor, such selfish and impatient driving as seems common these days.
Please, save the speed, bravado and adrenaline for track days and motor-sport/rally events.....or you too, may live to regret it. :'(
-
Lizzie, my concern with your argument is that it appears to fail to disintinguish between those who "live life to the full" by taking risks with their own life, eg hang gliding; and those who for the sake of a few moments of excitement on the public road, take risks with other peoples' lives.
The comparisons of death through war and cancer or other illness do not have any relevance.
K
Hear Hear. :y :y :y
-
Lizzie
Are you suggesting that (for example) the death of a cyclist is down to "unwritten laws" and the hand of fate, and nothing to do with the deliberate actions of some body driving too fast?
Kevin (not Ken :))
Yes! :y :y Fate put the cyclist there, it made that person be at that particular place, at that time, on that date, just as the car was fated to be on the same spot, with the rest of the road perhaps clear, but the collision happened "as planned". The death of the cyclist would have a fated knock on effect, that can change history for those around that person; cause, effect, and consequence comes into the equation fully, with the motorists life also changed by the momentum of the "scheduled" event. Life, or death, decided by fate and God. ;)
Throughout mans history that pattern has been there, and gives rise to the if's, maybe's, could have beens, and should have been of counter factual history. One bullet, one action of man, one event, that on the face of it appears to be "man made", will become a situation where people will say "that was fated; it was meant to happen!" It is in fact God's will to ensure the destiny of his children and the world is fulfilled. :y
I hope you are not serious Lizzie, if so, then I suggest that you take some tablets. :-? :-? :-?
-
from what im reading here if some numpty is screaming down the road and loses control mounts the pavement and kills a mother two kids and a baby in a pram its gods work...im sorry l z but i do believe in a slight bit of fate and destiny but there is far more self infliction out there by human error
-
No. . . speeding is for people making up for the loss in their pants. . :P
-
No.....!!!!
When I was nowt but a 'teen'; riding my Seeley-Honda 750.....I ran-over and killed a young dog.
I was going far-too fast and the dog bolted away from it`s young owners, right over the road and I hit it square in the back (nearly cutting the poor mite in`two)........the sight, sounds and manner of that little one`s violent and agonising death has stayed with me and I doubt if the regret, sadness and guilt will ever go away (yes, even all these years later).....it might so easily have been a person or child that I killed as the result of selfishness.
I know for sure that, had I been attending to the (perfectly reasonable) speed limit in force at the time, I might`ve easily stopped/avoided the dog.
So, no!....I don`t speed, show-off, use the phone (or eat) whilst driving and abhor, such selfish and impatient driving as seems common these days.
Please, save the speed, bravado and adrenaline for track days and motor-sport/rally events.....or you too, may live to regret it. :'(
I know a bloke who has had one of those sat in his garage in bits for the last 15 years. ::)
-
Lizzie
Then we have a fundamental disagreement here. I am completely unable to support your POV. Some may find it a potentially dangerous abdication of personal responsibility.
K
I agree actually, if everybody took a bit of care on the road instead of talking into their bloody phones and texting, then 'fate' would deal a whole lot more people a better hand.
I do understand what you're saying Lizzie, we'll all die eventually and life would be boring if we didn't take a few risks but don't involve the general public in your risk-taking :y
But I do not, no more than you and everyone who takes their car onto a road! ::) ::)
I am not saying you deliberately go out and do 100 mph through the local town centre. What I am saying is regardless of what you think you are doing, what actually happens is not under your overall control. Yes most times we go out in our cars, drive normally and nothing seems to happen. Then one day you do exactly the same, only to find on a bend someone who has lost control due to a heart attack and hits you head on, killing everyone in your car. What could you have done to avoid that? Nothing!! It was destined to happen, as your initial conception and birth was! ;) ;) ;)
That is our lives, and the death that will come no matter how "safe" you play it! No risk taking, no speeding, no careless driving, but you end up deceased as the Lord has decided before your birth. Never think all is under your control as it is not, but I will not add to the examples I have given previously in terms of personal experience and that of others around me, let alone in general history, but it is all there to read all too clearly. :)
I bet the vast majority of the people killed on the roads lost their lives due to human error and carelessness, and only a few due to unavoidable circumstances. This is the point I was making, and as you rightly said, we risk our lives from the moment we're born.
If I was to die in a genuine accident, then so be it, but if I die due to some idiot texting, I'll come back and haunt them for the rest of their stupid lives
-
Can you not text with your left hand then if you have an auto?
-
yer know something..saying its gods work and so on that someone dies as a result of somebodies actions if thats supposed to be christian(i dont know what faith you follow lz)but it tallies up with these foreign friends of ours that think its normal to strap bombs to your chest and set them off in a busy public place...religion has so much to answer for
-
yer know something..saying its gods work and so on that someone dies as a result of somebodies actions if thats supposed to be christian(i dont know what faith you follow lz)but it tallies up with these foreign friends of ours that think its normal to strap bombs to your chest and set them off in a busy public place...religion has so much to answer for
Sorry H, but you are well wide of what I am actually saying throughout my postings. ;) ;)
-
without some control (speed limits in this case) there is no free will.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/uk/05/london_blasts/victims/default.stm
without free will , and a belief in "fate", non of the said victims would have bothered to get up that very morning. :(
-
good grief,i never thought i would see the day when i would agree with lizzie zoom :y
-
No. . . speeding is for people making up for the loss in their pants. . :P
350 Elsie??? ;D
-
good grief,i never thought i would see the day when i would agree with lizzie zoom :y
We should do it more often! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)
-
without some control (speed limits in this case) there is no free will.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/uk/05/london_blasts/victims/default.stm
without free will , and a belief in "fate", non of the said victims would have bothered to get up that very morning. :(
Indeed, and they did not expect to die, but just have another day safely in their offices being back at home that evening! :'( :'( :'(
-
Lizzie
Are you suggesting that (for example) the death of a cyclist is down to "unwritten laws" and the hand of fate, and nothing to do with the deliberate actions of some body driving too fast?
Kevin (not Ken :))
Yes! :y :y Fate put the cyclist there, it made that person be at that particular place, at that time, on that date, just as the car was fated to be on the same spot, with the rest of the road perhaps clear, but the collision happened "as planned". The death of the cyclist would have a fated knock on effect, that can change history for those around that person; cause, effect, and consequence comes into the equation fully, with the motorists life also changed by the momentum of the "scheduled" event. Life, or death, decided by fate and God. ;)
Throughout mans history that pattern has been there, and gives rise to the if's, maybe's, could have beens, and should have been of counter factual history. One bullet, one action of man, one event, that on the face of it appears to be "man made", will become a situation where people will say "that was fated; it was meant to happen!" It is in fact God's will to ensure the destiny of his children and the world is fulfilled. :y
I hope you are not serious Lizzie, if so, then I suggest that you take some tablets. :-? :-? :-?
It is not a question of tablets S, but a strong belief in my faith built over 57 years and a shed warehouse full, including much in the way of near death, experience.
Anyway just because my views are different than yours does not mean I need to take tablets! ::) ::) ::)
-
In a car........rarely.
On a bike............................thats another story.
YES, do frequently, would like to say safely, but have to confess sometimes, I'm a "tarmac terrorist" and ride like I stole it.
Mostly, I ride carefully, but on an open road, on a quiet day, in good weather.......................Hmm. :-X
-
No. . . speeding is for people making up for the loss in their pants. . :P
Has your nose grown a few inches today ? :o ::) :P
-
No. . . speeding is for people making up for the loss in their pants. . :P
Has your nose grown a few inches today ? :o ::) :P
;D
-
without some control (speed limits in this case) there is no free will.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/uk/05/london_blasts/victims/default.stm
without free will , and a belief in "fate", non of the said victims would have bothered to get up that very morning. :(
Indeed, and they did not expect to die, but just have another day safely in their offices being back at home that evening! :'( :'( :'(
would a loving god , who as some say at this time of year gave his only son to cover the sins of mankind, really want to have any influence on the day to day goings on in such a macabre way?
unfortunate set of circumstances maybe.
the only "fate" or "predetermination" is death, in the end.
i think most people have had a "close shave" with no real consequence and after thought "that was a stupid thing to do"
as said by a few, with age comes experience, the only trouble is that the inexperienced dont always appreciate the reason for some laws, the lessons have to be learn the hard way.
i dont think many would happy to contribute to anothers demise .
a group of teenagers wrapping the motor around a tree= inexperience. not fate by some devine intervention.
-
No. . . speeding is for people making up for the loss in their pants. . :P
you must do some serious speeding then. Rumour has it yours is like a bookies biro. :P ;D ;D
-
Lizzie
Are you suggesting that (for example) the death of a cyclist is down to "unwritten laws" and the hand of fate, and nothing to do with the deliberate actions of some body driving too fast?
Kevin (not Ken :))
Yes! :y :y Fate put the cyclist there, it made that person be at that particular place, at that time, on that date, just as the car was fated to be on the same spot, with the rest of the road perhaps clear, but the collision happened "as planned". The death of the cyclist would have a fated knock on effect, that can change history for those around that person; cause, effect, and consequence comes into the equation fully, with the motorists life also changed by the momentum of the "scheduled" event. Life, or death, decided by fate and God. ;)
Throughout mans history that pattern has been there, and gives rise to the if's, maybe's, could have beens, and should have been of counter factual history. One bullet, one action of man, one event, that on the face of it appears to be "man made", will become a situation where people will say "that was fated; it was meant to happen!" It is in fact God's will to ensure the destiny of his children and the world is fulfilled. :y
I hope you are not serious Lizzie, if so, then I suggest that you take some tablets. :-? :-? :-?
It is not a question of tablets S, but a strong belief in my faith built over 57 years and a shed warehouse full, including much in the way of near death, experience.
Anyway just because my views are different than yours does not mean I need to take tablets! ::) ::) ::)
It's not the difference in views I argue with, it is your implication that its OK to kill someone in an accident caused by your speeding, because its 'God's will'. I remember an air crash caused by a pilot uttering almost exact phrase (in his own language) in which he killed all on board. I assume, according to you, that was acceptable. Would you feel the same if a child of yours was killed by a speeding driver, and still believe it was God's will? If so, your God does not impress me. ::) ::) ::) ::)
-
i take it nows not a good time to admit i ignore speed limits quite a lot :-X on boxing day i hammered it from london to portsmouth to watch the football cant be late for the match ;D
-
i take it nows not a good time to admit i ignore speed limits quite a lot :-X on boxing day i hammered it from london to portsmouth to watch the football cant be late for the match ;D
It's your licence, and if you get caught up doing a ton up then it's an instant ban. :-X
-
i take it nows not a good time to admit i ignore speed limits quite a lot :-X on boxing day i hammered it from london to portsmouth to watch the football cant be late for the match ;D
It's your licence, and if you get caught up doing a ton up then it's an instant ban. :-X
which team do you support then? you've never made it clear :o
-
Lizzie
Are you suggesting that (for example) the death of a cyclist is down to "unwritten laws" and the hand of fate, and nothing to do with the deliberate actions of some body driving too fast?
Kevin (not Ken :))
Yes! :y :y Fate put the cyclist there, it made that person be at that particular place, at that time, on that date, just as the car was fated to be on the same spot, with the rest of the road perhaps clear, but the collision happened "as planned". The death of the cyclist would have a fated knock on effect, that can change history for those around that person; cause, effect, and consequence comes into the equation fully, with the motorists life also changed by the momentum of the "scheduled" event. Life, or death, decided by fate and God. ;)
Throughout mans history that pattern has been there, and gives rise to the if's, maybe's, could have beens, and should have been of counter factual history. One bullet, one action of man, one event, that on the face of it appears to be "man made", will become a situation where people will say "that was fated; it was meant to happen!" It is in fact God's will to ensure the destiny of his children and the world is fulfilled. :y
I hope you are not serious Lizzie, if so, then I suggest that you take some tablets. :-? :-? :-?
It is not a question of tablets S, but a strong belief in my faith built over 57 years and a shed warehouse full, including much in the way of near death, experience.
Anyway just because my views are different than yours does not mean I need to take tablets! ::) ::) ::)
It's not the difference in views I argue with, it is your implication that its OK to kill someone in an accident caused by your speeding, because its 'God's will'. I remember an air crash caused by a pilot uttering almost exact phrase (in his own language) in which he killed all on board. I assume, according to you, that was acceptable. Would you feel the same if a child of yours was killed by a speeding driver, and still believe it was God's will? If so, your God does not impress me. ::) ::) ::) ::)
I know S that I will never convince you, or Tapper, no matter what I say beyond what I have said already. You are "localising" the theory and not looking at the much wider picture.
All I will add is that God giveth life and he takes it away within the fabric of overall life where everything is interlocked, nothing is operating independently, across not just the world, but throughout the universe. One event in one place can effect what happens elsewhere, as everything we do has a knock on effect. Even the loss of a child, although no one wishes for that to happen, has its reasons that we as mortals can not possibly understand. How I often wish that cute baby Adolf Schicklgraber had died at birth, or had been killed during WW1, but no, destiny and fate had other ideas for reasons we, well me at least, will never understand or explain. But I certainly go along with the results, of even losing a grandfather in 1940, due to my faith that all will be revealed in a distant time. Jesus came to us to prove that life after death exists and all the tribulations of today are insignificant within the whole scheme of things ;) ;)
But S, and Tapper, you either have belief and faith, or you do not. That is a personal thing, and whatever suits you I will not argue with. ;)
-
I'm really beginning to like you, Lizzie.
Faith is a personnal thing, and do not be swayed if that is what you sincerely believe.
May your God be with you. xx
-
I'm really beginning to like you, Lizzie.
Faith is a personnal thing, and do not be swayed if that is what you sincerely believe.
May your God be with you. xx
Thank you SS! :-* :-* :-* :-* :-*
May God and peace be with you, and us all! :) :)
-
ooh Lizzie, how this thread has changed since your comments!For my part I think that you have to make a distinction between faith and religion to start with.I also feel that "faith"-and indeed "fate"- is used to help us try and explain to ourselves how terrible things can happen (eg atrocities /casualties of war) as well as seeming miracles (eg escapes from seemingly certain death). Faith and superstition are bedfellows in this context. Think how superstitions grow amongst soldiers in times of prolonged crisis or of the growth of spiritualism amongst the families of those who died in the carnage of WW1. They are just ways of trying to make sense of what has happened. Those who may not sucumb to faith/superstition may simply state "when your time is up ".But drill down a bit. Dont get me wrong , Im not a total empiricist and I have a degree of sympathy for karma etc (call me a genuine agnostic rather than an atheist) but much of what happens can be attributed to the actions of others. Bit like the laws of physics. So, if you want to take risks with your own life (whether it be driving fast/extreme sports or unprotected sex or drugs or smoking ) thats up to you. You do your own risk assssment. You reason that your gonna die at somepoint anyway, you know the statistics about death from cancer or hang-gliding whatever. You make a sort of informed choice (or maybe not, you just do it)and you take a risk.Thats all an integral part of being human and, I guess, if nonone took any risks humanity would not progress too far. But surely we all have to be responsible and accountable for our actions. Aside from cases of coercian we have that degree of "free will". It might be ok to risk our own lives/health but is it right that we do so without any thought for the lives/halth of others?
-
jerry, please define religeon for me please.
I believe my brother to be religeous in the fact he religeouus;y gets a lift to the club on a thursday night at 7pm to save seats for all his mates to that turn up at 8pm.
Plus Millwall is religeous in the fact he never misses a match. :-/
-
Wise words Jerry. :y I dont believe in religions or their god (although I dont direspect those who do) but If I did I dont see how God can possibly choose the moment when each human being dies. Drive down the motorway at 130mph, turn sharp left into a concrete bridge parapet - you will die, because you chose to. How can a god of love choose to allow the most pure and innocent of little children suffer a disease in agony, and have a long slow demise. Or allow young kids to be murdered etc by paedos......the list is almost endless. It just doesnt add up imo.
I can see the attraction though of believing in the "if your times up" theory. It can allow someone to live a life free from fretting and worrying about their own mortality, which is a nice state of mind to inhabit. But really it comes down to whatever works for each individual I suppose, and that thankfully is different for each of us.
Any way, on the original topic.......we concentrate to much on speed imo, it isnt a major factor in most road deaths. I believe the official statistics say around 9%. whatr we need to concentrate on imo, is training drivers to much higher standards. This could have several advantages - those who are on the roads would be safer road users, those who are brain dead dicks and should never have had a licence in the first place could be taken off the roads for good.
I have always believed that there should be a seperate very stringent test for motorway driving (which many people would fail) and there should be no speed limit on most motorways.
I was thinking about why bikers tend to possibly speed more than car drivers, and I think in my case its partially that I believe that if I am going fast on a road which is away from built up areas then any accident I have will almost certainly hurt no-one but myself.
Afaik its very rare for someone to be hurt in a motorcycle accident -outside of built up areas - who wasnt on the bike.
-
ooh Lizzie, how this thread has changed since your comments!For my part I think that you have to make a distinction between faith and religionto start with.I also feel that "faith"-and indeed "fate"- is used to help us try and explain to ourselves how terrible things can happen (eg atrocities /casualties of war) as well as seeming miracles (eg escapes from seemingly certain death). Faith and superstition are bedfellows in this context. Think how superstitions grow amongst soldiers in times of prolonged crisis or of the growth of spiritualism amongst the families of those who died in the carnage of WW1. They are just ways of trying to make sense of what has happened. Those who may not sucumb to faith/superstition may simply state "when your time is up ".But drill down a bit. Dont get me wrong , Im not a total empiricist and I have a degree of sympathy for karma etc (call me a genuine agnostic rather than an atheist) but much of what happens can be attributed to the actions of others. Bit like the laws of physics. So, if you want to take risks with your own life (whether it be driving fast/extreme sports or unprotected sex or drugs or smoking ) thats up to you. You do your own risk assssment. You reason that your gonna die at somepoint anyway, you know the statistics about death from cancer or hang-gliding whatever. You make a sort of informed choice (or maybe not, you just do it)and you take a risk.Thats all an integral part of being human and, I guess, if nonone took any risks humanity would not progress too far. But surely we all have to be responsible and accountable for our actions. Aside from cases of coercian we have that degree of "free will". It might be ok to risk our own lives/health but is it right that we do so without any thought for the lives/halth of others?
I have already said enough on this subject during the many words of my postings, and covered the specific point about personal responsibility when deciding to "speed" which the thread was originally about. Some of us though have a God based interpretation of events that maybe cannot be explained at the time, but in my weak mortal heart my faith tries explain the why in a world and universe that we as humans cannot and do not fathom in merely the 21st century.
However it may interest you to know that I do not practice "religion", a set belief in line with any formal "teaching". I believe in direct worship with God, without any political middle men i.e. church, that have corrupted and manipulated the true meaning of God's intention, with his love, as communicated by Jesus without corruption by later living mortal men! I am a COG - Children of God - as I believe we all are and anything else is a lie and falsehood. That is my faith, nothing more, nothing less! ;) ;)
Now that may start another interesting discussion I know, but that is what I believe. Can anyone prove me wrong? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Only God knows the full truth, and we are all blind men and woman struggling to know that truth in Plato's Cave! ;) ;)
-
Wise words Jerry. :y I dont believe in religions or their god (although I dont direspect those who do) but If I did I dont see how God can possibly choose the moment when each human being dies. Drive down the motorway at 130mph, turn sharp left into a concrete bridge parapet - you will die, because you chose to. How can a god of love choose to allow the most pure and innocent of little children suffer a disease in agony, and have a long slow demise. Or allow young kids to be murdered etc by paedos......the list is almost endless. It just doesnt add up imo.
I can see the attraction though of believing in the "if your times up" theory. It can allow someone to live a life free from fretting and worrying about their own mortality, which is a nice state of mind to inhabit. But really it comes down to whatever works for each individual I suppose, and that thankfully is different for each of us.
Any way, on the original topic.......we concentrate to much on speed imo, it isnt a major factor in most road deaths. I believe the official statistics say around 9%. whatr we need to concentrate on imo, is training drivers to much higher standards. This could have several advantages - those who are on the roads would be safer road users, those who are brain dead dicks and should never have had a licence in the first place could be taken off the roads for good.
I have always believed that there should be a seperate very stringent test for motorway driving (which many people would fail) and there should be no speed limit on most motorways.
I was thinking about why bikers tend to possibly speed more than car drivers, and I think in my case its partially that I believe that if I am going fast on a road which is away from built up areas then any accident I have will almost certainly hurt no-one but myself.
Afaik its very rare for someone to be hurt in a motorcycle accident -outside of built up areas - who wasnt on the bike.
I respect your views Albs, I really do. But God chooses the moment of your end as he did of the moment of your conception and birth. You may think that you can chose your moment to die, but I know that is not always the case by a long way. We call them "miraculous escapes", "divine intervention", when in fact it is part of God's regular 'business' in deciding who lives, and when they die, as he does for every part of the universe. Just think how many cases there are of people who "should have died" - "I should be dead", but are not. Then there are the cases of people being killed "by a fluke", by "being in the wrong place at the wrong time". Ask yourself why, and then try and apply answers that fit, then wait 25 years and see what that "survivor" achieved. That is when you will see the wonder of God. BUT, none of us can possibly explain all that transpires. We are human, and the answers are not readily accessible. ;) ;) We just will never know them in this life, or possibly the next!! ::) ::) ::)
-
I have been in those "I should have died" situations so many times that I could honestly write a book about it Lizzie. I am so "accident prone" you wouldnt believe it, but I dont believe in god ( or not in any conventional sense at least) so to me its just chance, lifes rich tapestry etc. Life is what we make it - to a large extent - not what some man in the sky decides to make it for us imo.
Oh dear, I just read that back and I sound a little bit like Banjax. :o ::) ;D
My way of dealing with my own mortality has always been to try not to care about it too much. I could die today or die when Im 100 years old, I dont really care tbh. The only problem with that is that it is very selfish. There are a handful of people who would be more than a lttle upset if it happened tbh.
-
There are a handful of people who would be more than a lttle upset if it happened tbh.
;)Your life-insurers would surely be suicidally upset! :P
-
I have been in those "I should have died" situations so many times that I could honestly write a book about it Lizzie. I am so "accident prone" you wouldnt believe it, but I dont believe in god ( or not in any conventional sense at least) so to me its just chance, lifes rich tapestry etc. Life is what we make it - to a large extent - not what some man in the sky decides to make it for us imo.
Oh dear, I just read that back and I sound a little bit like Banjax. :o ::) ;D
My way of dealing with my own mortality has always been to try not to care about it too much. I could die today or die when Im 100 years old, I dont really care tbh. The only problem with that is that it is very selfish. There are a handful of people who would be more than a lttle upset if it happened tbh.
Absolutely agree with that view Albs, as love for each other is the vitally important factor, and we would all be missed if the worst happened :y :y :y
-
Wise words Jerry. :y I dont believe in religions or their god (although I dont direspect those who do) but If I did I dont see how God can possibly choose the moment when each human being dies. Drive down the motorway at 130mph, turn sharp left into a concrete bridge parapet - you will die, because you chose to. How can a god of love choose to allow the most pure and innocent of little children suffer a disease in agony, and have a long slow demise. Or allow young kids to be murdered etc by paedos......the list is almost endless. It just doesnt add up imo.
I can see the attraction though of believing in the "if your times up" theory. It can allow someone to live a life free from fretting and worrying about their own mortality, which is a nice state of mind to inhabit. But really it comes down to whatever works for each individual I suppose, and that thankfully is different for each of us.
Any way, on the original topic.......we concentrate to much on speed imo, it isnt a major factor in most road deaths. I believe the official statistics say around 9%. whatr we need to concentrate on imo, is training drivers to much higher standards. This could have several advantages - those who are on the roads would be safer road users, those who are brain dead dicks and should never have had a licence in the first place could be taken off the roads for good.
I have always believed that there should be a seperate very stringent test for motorway driving (which many people would fail) and there should be no speed limit on most motorways.
I was thinking about why bikers tend to possibly speed more than car drivers, and I think in my case its partially that I believe that if I am going fast on a road which is away from built up areas then any accident I have will almost certainly hurt no-one but myself.
Afaik its very rare for someone to be hurt in a motorcycle accident -outside of built up areas - who wasnt on the bike.
:y
on our roads , more accidents happen because some drivers choose to stop (nearly) in the middle of the road .. say you are coming from behind 60-70-80 mph and the donkey in front of you goes with 20-30 mph .. what will happen >:(
-
IMO
Oh dear there does seem to be a lot of uninformed or unthinking or inexperienced opinion on this subject.
About 2,500 people a year a killed on Britain's roads. I have driven around 20,000 miles a year for 30+ years and I have never seen a fatal accident. I never saw the fatal accident on the A34 near here which caused the local authority to reduce it to 40mph. But, might it not be just a bit arrogant of me to think that because I don't see the accidents and I didn't see the person killed on the A34, that I know better than the LA as to what a suitable speed would be on that stretch of road?
K
Yep, but to put everything into propestive, 156,720 people died from all cancers in the UK in 2009. 1 in four people who die will do so due to cancer.
On the 1st July 1916 the first day of the First Battle of the Somme claimed 60,000 casulties, with another 60,000 the next day. When HMS Hood blew up on the 24th May 1941 1415 men were lost, with just 3 left bobbing around in the water wondering why they had survived.
I do not aim to trivalise the loss of 2,500 people a year in road collisions, but let us put it into prospective. Yes we should make the roads safe, but still recognise that no matter what, as I stated in my previous post, life is a risk from the second we are conceived. God has planned our life and it is meant to be lived. Live in a small room for life and your risks are very limited, but who wants that type of existence? No, live life to the full; take risks, have faith, and accept the inevitable when it happens! ;) ;)
Sorry about the delay in this reply, had a keyboard failure which required some effort to rectify.
Lizzie, my life and my career have been about taking calculated risks, including rallying with co-drivers, flying, motor cycle scrambling (now known as motocross), but to the best of my knowledge, I have never deliberately, unless it was a 'joint risk' enterprise, put other people at risk OF THEIR LIVES, because I enjoyed risking mine.
I have no problem with your beliefs, as we are all entitled to our own, but we should also remember that if God created us, he also created our free will, and that we should use this free will to deliberately put innocent people in harms way is not acceptable to my beliefs. :y
-
IMO
Oh dear there does seem to be a lot of uninformed or unthinking or inexperienced opinion on this subject.
About 2,500 people a year a killed on Britain's roads. I have driven around 20,000 miles a year for 30+ years and I have never seen a fatal accident. I never saw the fatal accident on the A34 near here which caused the local authority to reduce it to 40mph. But, might it not be just a bit arrogant of me to think that because I don't see the accidents and I didn't see the person killed on the A34, that I know better than the LA as to what a suitable speed would be on that stretch of road?
K
Yep, but to put everything into propestive, 156,720 people died from all cancers in the UK in 2009. 1 in four people who die will do so due to cancer.
On the 1st July 1916 the first day of the First Battle of the Somme claimed 60,000 casulties, with another 60,000 the next day. When HMS Hood blew up on the 24th May 1941 1415 men were lost, with just 3 left bobbing around in the water wondering why they had survived.
I do not aim to trivalise the loss of 2,500 people a year in road collisions, but let us put it into prospective. Yes we should make the roads safe, but still recognise that no matter what, as I stated in my previous post, life is a risk from the second we are conceived. God has planned our life and it is meant to be lived. Live in a small room for life and your risks are very limited, but who wants that type of existence? No, live life to the full; take risks, have faith, and accept the inevitable when it happens! ;) ;)
Sorry about the delay in this reply, had a keyboard failure which required some effort to rectify.
Lizzie, my life and my career have been about taking calculated risks, including rallying with co-drivers, flying, motor cycle scrambling (now known as motocross), but to the best of my knowledge, I have never deliberately, unless it was a 'joint risk' enterprise, put other people at risk OF THEIR LIVES, because I enjoyed risking mine.
I have no problem with your beliefs, as we are all entitled to our own, but we should also remember that if God created us, he also created our free will, and that we should use this free will to deliberately put innocent people in harms way is not acceptable to my beliefs. :y
But I never stated the opposite to that S! When I said take risks in that one sentence I meant that we cannot be wrapped up in cotton wool, and we must all live life to the full not in a state of constant protection. Life is a risk, and as a trained risk assessor I know exactly what that means in both the domestic and commercial world. I would never deliberately go out and put others at risk, and that it why I never fit cheap brakes or tyres to my cars, or cut corners in their maintenence as I know some do on this forum!!
But, as I repeatedly state in my previous posts, we live a life full of risks from beginning to end regardless of what we think or do.
As I have also previously stated in my "philosphy" posts, I strongly support the teachings of John Locke. He made it clear that we all have a natural, God given, right to our freedom, but we have a duty to ensure that freedom hurts no one else, and we support the general 'social contract' when we live within our societies.
All that does not change my belief that shit in life happens, and for a reason only known to God who is orchestrating the whole universe! We have no control on that 'fate' ;) ;)
-
IMO
Oh dear there does seem to be a lot of uninformed or unthinking or inexperienced opinion on this subject.
About 2,500 people a year a killed on Britain's roads. I have driven around 20,000 miles a year for 30+ years and I have never seen a fatal accident. I never saw the fatal accident on the A34 near here which caused the local authority to reduce it to 40mph. But, might it not be just a bit arrogant of me to think that because I don't see the accidents and I didn't see the person killed on the A34, that I know better than the LA as to what a suitable speed would be on that stretch of road?
K
Yep, but to put everything into propestive, 156,720 people died from all cancers in the UK in 2009. 1 in four people who die will do so due to cancer.
On the 1st July 1916 the first day of the First Battle of the Somme claimed 60,000 casulties, with another 60,000 the next day. When HMS Hood blew up on the 24th May 1941 1415 men were lost, with just 3 left bobbing around in the water wondering why they had survived.
I do not aim to trivalise the loss of 2,500 people a year in road collisions, but let us put it into prospective. Yes we should make the roads safe, but still recognise that no matter what, as I stated in my previous post, life is a risk from the second we are conceived. God has planned our life and it is meant to be lived. Live in a small room for life and your risks are very limited, but who wants that type of existence? No, live life to the full; take risks, have faith, and accept the inevitable when it happens! ;) ;)
Sorry about the delay in this reply, had a keyboard failure which required some effort to rectify.
Lizzie, my life and my career have been about taking calculated risks, including rallying with co-drivers, flying, motor cycle scrambling (now known as motocross), but to the best of my knowledge, I have never deliberately, unless it was a 'joint risk' enterprise, put other people at risk OF THEIR LIVES, because I enjoyed risking mine.
I have no problem with your beliefs, as we are all entitled to our own, but we should also remember that if God created us, he also created our free will, and that we should use this free will to deliberately put innocent people in harms way is not acceptable to my beliefs. :y
But I never stated the opposite to that S! When I said take risks in that one sentence I meant that we cannot be wrapped up in cotton wool, and we must all live life to the full not in a state of constant protection. Life is a risk, and as a trained risk assessor I know exactly what that means in both the domestic and commercial world. I would never deliberately go out and put others at risk, and that it why I never fit cheap brakes or tyres to my cars, or cut corners in their maintenence as I know some do on this forum!!
But, as I repeatedly state in my previous posts, we live a life full of risks from beginning to end regardless of what we think or do.
As I have also previously stated in my "philosphy" posts, I strongly support the teachings of John Locke. He made it clear that we all have a natural, God given, right to our freedom, but we have a duty to ensure that freedom hurts no one else, and we support the general 'social contract' when we live within our societies.
All that does not change my belief that shit in life happens, and for a reason only known to God who is orchestrating the whole universe! We have no control on that 'fate' ;) ;)
Well we can certainly agree on that, while perhaps disagreeing on the why it happens! Unfortunately, having travelled the world and seen death, destruction, and children dying of starvation, or deliberately maimed by parents to aid in begging, has destroyed my belief in any loving and all-knowing God. :y
-
IMO
Oh dear there does seem to be a lot of uninformed or unthinking or inexperienced opinion on this subject.
About 2,500 people a year a killed on Britain's roads. I have driven around 20,000 miles a year for 30+ years and I have never seen a fatal accident. I never saw the fatal accident on the A34 near here which caused the local authority to reduce it to 40mph. But, might it not be just a bit arrogant of me to think that because I don't see the accidents and I didn't see the person killed on the A34, that I know better than the LA as to what a suitable speed would be on that stretch of road?
K
Yep, but to put everything into propestive, 156,720 people died from all cancers in the UK in 2009. 1 in four people who die will do so due to cancer.
On the 1st July 1916 the first day of the First Battle of the Somme claimed 60,000 casulties, with another 60,000 the next day. When HMS Hood blew up on the 24th May 1941 1415 men were lost, with just 3 left bobbing around in the water wondering why they had survived.
I do not aim to trivalise the loss of 2,500 people a year in road collisions, but let us put it into prospective. Yes we should make the roads safe, but still recognise that no matter what, as I stated in my previous post, life is a risk from the second we are conceived. God has planned our life and it is meant to be lived. Live in a small room for life and your risks are very limited, but who wants that type of existence? No, live life to the full; take risks, have faith, and accept the inevitable when it happens! ;) ;)
Sorry about the delay in this reply, had a keyboard failure which required some effort to rectify.
Lizzie, my life and my career have been about taking calculated risks, including rallying with co-drivers, flying, motor cycle scrambling (now known as motocross), but to the best of my knowledge, I have never deliberately, unless it was a 'joint risk' enterprise, put other people at risk OF THEIR LIVES, because I enjoyed risking mine.
I have no problem with your beliefs, as we are all entitled to our own, but we should also remember that if God created us, he also created our free will, and that we should use this free will to deliberately put innocent people in harms way is not acceptable to my beliefs. :y
But I never stated the opposite to that S! When I said take risks in that one sentence I meant that we cannot be wrapped up in cotton wool, and we must all live life to the full not in a state of constant protection. Life is a risk, and as a trained risk assessor I know exactly what that means in both the domestic and commercial world. I would never deliberately go out and put others at risk, and that it why I never fit cheap brakes or tyres to my cars, or cut corners in their maintenence as I know some do on this forum!!
But, as I repeatedly state in my previous posts, we live a life full of risks from beginning to end regardless of what we think or do.
As I have also previously stated in my "philosphy" posts, I strongly support the teachings of John Locke. He made it clear that we all have a natural, God given, right to our freedom, but we have a duty to ensure that freedom hurts no one else, and we support the general 'social contract' when we live within our societies.
All that does not change my belief that shit in life happens, and for a reason only known to God who is orchestrating the whole universe! We have no control on that 'fate' ;) ;)
Well we can certainly agree on that, while perhaps disagreeing on the why it happens! Unfortunately, having travelled the world and seen death, destruction, and children dying of starvation, or deliberately maimed by parents to aid in begging, has destroyed my belief in any loving and all-knowing God. :y
Yes I agree and admit that all tests my faith and makes me question why??!! :'( :'( :'( :'(
But my beliefs make me think that this is a test for all of us to do something, as mankind has the power to help, but do any of us really meet that challenge, but pass it on to others?!! God, for me, knows the answers, as I certainly do not, and those who suffer now, especially the children, will inherit the Kingdom of Heaven. So in the end, one way or another, the situation will be resolved to the good. Have no fear about that ;) ;)
-
theres a slight shift in the story there.
from god putting the cyclist in the line of harm to a bigger plan of looking after the universe.
probably looking at the bigger picture might answer why he would sacrifice his son on behalf of mankind.
then to meddle with or have a hand in the day to day misery of mankind does not make any sense?
-
IMO
Oh dear there does seem to be a lot of uninformed or unthinking or inexperienced opinion on this subject.
About 2,500 people a year a killed on Britain's roads. I have driven around 20,000 miles a year for 30+ years and I have never seen a fatal accident. I never saw the fatal accident on the A34 near here which caused the local authority to reduce it to 40mph. But, might it not be just a bit arrogant of me to think that because I don't see the accidents and I didn't see the person killed on the A34, that I know better than the LA as to what a suitable speed would be on that stretch of road?
K
Yep, but to put everything into propestive, 156,720 people died from all cancers in the UK in 2009. 1 in four people who die will do so due to cancer.
On the 1st July 1916 the first day of the First Battle of the Somme claimed 60,000 casulties, with another 60,000 the next day. When HMS Hood blew up on the 24th May 1941 1415 men were lost, with just 3 left bobbing around in the water wondering why they had survived.
I do not aim to trivalise the loss of 2,500 people a year in road collisions, but let us put it into prospective. Yes we should make the roads safe, but still recognise that no matter what, as I stated in my previous post, life is a risk from the second we are conceived. God has planned our life and it is meant to be lived. Live in a small room for life and your risks are very limited, but who wants that type of existence? No, live life to the full; take risks, have faith, and accept the inevitable when it happens! ;) ;)
Sorry about the delay in this reply, had a keyboard failure which required some effort to rectify.
Lizzie, my life and my career have been about taking calculated risks, including rallying with co-drivers, flying, motor cycle scrambling (now known as motocross), but to the best of my knowledge, I have never deliberately, unless it was a 'joint risk' enterprise, put other people at risk OF THEIR LIVES, because I enjoyed risking mine.
I have no problem with your beliefs, as we are all entitled to our own, but we should also remember that if God created us, he also created our free will, and that we should use this free will to deliberately put innocent people in harms way is not acceptable to my beliefs. :y
But I never stated the opposite to that S! When I said take risks in that one sentence I meant that we cannot be wrapped up in cotton wool, and we must all live life to the full not in a state of constant protection. Life is a risk, and as a trained risk assessor I know exactly what that means in both the domestic and commercial world. I would never deliberately go out and put others at risk, and that it why I never fit cheap brakes or tyres to my cars, or cut corners in their maintenence as I know some do on this forum!!
But, as I repeatedly state in my previous posts, we live a life full of risks from beginning to end regardless of what we think or do.
As I have also previously stated in my "philosphy" posts, I strongly support the teachings of John Locke. He made it clear that we all have a natural, God given, right to our freedom, but we have a duty to ensure that freedom hurts no one else, and we support the general 'social contract' when we live within our societies.
All that does not change my belief that shit in life happens, and for a reason only known to God who is orchestrating the whole universe! We have no control on that 'fate' ;) ;)
Well we can certainly agree on that, while perhaps disagreeing on the why it happens! Unfortunately, having travelled the world and seen death, destruction, and children dying of starvation, or deliberately maimed by parents to aid in begging, has destroyed my belief in any loving and all-knowing God. :y
Yes I agree and admit that all tests my faith and makes me question why??!! :'( :'( :'( :'(
But my beliefs make me think that this is a test for all of us to do something, as mankind has the power to help, but do any of us really meet that challenge, but pass it on to others?!! God, for me, knows the answers, as I certainly do not, and those who suffer now, especially the children, will inherit the Kingdom of Heaven. So in the end, one way or another, the situation will be resolved to the good. Have no fear about that ;) ;)
I do envy you your faith, but am very happy to believe that Heaven and Hell, to use commonly known terms, are here and now with us as we live, and to paraphrase Karl Marx, I agree that religion is the 'opiate of the masses'. It seems no accident to me that so many different 'True' religions exist throughout the world, and lets be honest here, they cannot all be 'True'. So what happens to those who are unlucky to believe in the 'wrong' religion when they pass on? Tough luck I guess. :y
-
I do envy you your faith, but am very happy to believe that Heaven and Hell, to use commonly known terms, are here and now with us as we live, and to paraphrase Karl Marx, I agree that religion is the 'opiate of the masses'. It seems no accident to me that so many different 'True' religions exist throughout the world, and lets be honest here, they cannot all be 'True'. So what happens to those who are unlucky to believe in the 'wrong' religion when they pass on? Tough luck I guess. :y
This topic has really been an interesting discussion.....`nice to see such a topic not deteriorate into 'factionism'. :y
My personal maxim is simple:
"Primum non nocere"
I`ll feel that I`ve 'succeeded' in life, if on my funeral-day, people could honestly think; "she didn`t do anyone any harm and she tried (always) to be kind"......perhaps that`s the only 'afterlife' that we may expect: to be remembered kindly by others. ;)
-
I do envy you your faith, but am very happy to believe that Heaven and Hell, to use commonly known terms, are here and now with us as we live, and to paraphrase Karl Marx, I agree that religion is the 'opiate of the masses'. It seems no accident to me that so many different 'True' religions exist throughout the world, and lets be honest here, they cannot all be 'True'. So what happens to those who are unlucky to believe in the 'wrong' religion when they pass on? Tough luck I guess. :y
This topic has really been an interesting discussion.....`nice to see such a topic not deteriorate into 'factionism'. :y
My personal maxim is simple:
"Primum non nocere"
I`ll feel that I`ve 'succeeded' in life, if on my funeral-day, people could honestly think; "she didn`t do anyone any harm and she tried (always) to be kind"......perhaps that`s the only 'afterlife' that we may expect: to be remembered kindly by others. ;)
I agree Debs, there is no doubt that we get a better class of blogger on OOF. 8-) 8-) 8-) :y
-
theres a slight shift in the story there.
from god putting the cyclist in the line of harm to a bigger plan of looking after the universe.
probably looking at the bigger picture might answer why he would sacrifice his son on behalf of mankind.
then to meddle with or have a hand in the day to day misery of mankind does not make any sense?
There is no shift in the story from me Tapper ;) ;)
The universe is us, is part of us, and we are a very tiny part of it. It is the creation of God, and all that happens within it is under the control of our maker. That is what I, and billions of others believe, those who believe in THE one God, who is the centre of the major world religions, although I do not consider myself part of a religion. I do not like the politically motivated meddling middle men of the churches, which may prove to be my great mistake!! ::) ::)
As I have stated before everything is interlocked, with nothing in the universe operating independently, so something "localized" can/does affect the general situation. We move, we act, we live, and have an effect on that around us. Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) was virtually the first to recognise that there was a stream of atoms (not fully understood at the time) radiating across the universe, and our actions deflected them, altering events without God's intervention. I disagree with that point, but like the Quantum scientists of today know that atoms play strange games and are full of hidden reason of movement. That for me is where God comes in, but I cannot prove it!! I just know and understand how events in history have acted on, and are due, to other events, and 'strange' happenings have transpired that make it clear an intelligent being is at it's heart. Some scientists will disagree with "the God" theory, whilst others are convinced that is the answer. They all seem to agree though that we live in an interlinked universe, where nothing is random, but for a given purpose.
There, now I have bought science into it, because to me God is THE greatest scientist who has created nature in all is wonder, majesty, and sometimes terrifying destructive power to control the Great Picture of evolution. ;) ;)
-
I do envy you your faith, but am very happy to believe that Heaven and Hell, to use commonly known terms, are here and now with us as we live, and to paraphrase Karl Marx, I agree that religion is the 'opiate of the masses'. It seems no accident to me that so many different 'True' religions exist throughout the world, and lets be honest here, they cannot all be 'True'. So what happens to those who are unlucky to believe in the 'wrong' religion when they pass on? Tough luck I guess. :y
This topic has really been an interesting discussion.....`nice to see such a topic not deteriorate into 'factionism'. :y
My personal maxim is simple:
"Primum non nocere"
I`ll feel that I`ve 'succeeded' in life, if on my funeral-day, people could honestly think; "she didn`t do anyone any harm and she tried (always) to be kind"......perhaps that`s the only 'afterlife' that we may expect: to be remembered kindly by others. ;)
I agree Debs, there is no doubt that we get a better class of blogger on OOF. 8-) 8-) 8-) :y
Agreed again!! :y :y :y :y :y :D :D
-
theres a slight shift in the story there.
from god putting the cyclist in the line of harm to a bigger plan of looking after the universe.
probably looking at the bigger picture might answer why he would sacrifice his son on behalf of mankind.
then to meddle with or have a hand in the day to day misery of mankind does not make any sense?
There is no shift in the story from me Tapper ;) ;)
The universe is us, is part of us, and we are a very tiny part of it. It is the creation of God, and all that happens within it is under the control of our maker. That is what I, and billions of others believe, those who believe in THE one God, who is the centre of the major world religions, although I do not consider myself part of a religion. I do not like the politically motivated meddling middle men of the churches, which may prove to be my great mistake!! ::) ::)
As I have stated before everything is interlocked, with nothing in the universe operating independently, so something "localized" can/does affect the general situation. We move, we act, we live, and have an effect on that around us. Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) was virtually the first to recognise that there was a stream of atoms (not fully understood at the time) radiating across the universe, and our actions deflected them, altering events without God's intervention. I disagree with that point, but like the Quantum scientists of today know that atoms play strange games and are full of hidden reason of movement. That for me is where God comes in, but I cannot prove it!! I just know and understand how events in history have acted on, and are due, to other events, and 'strange' happenings have transpired that make it clear an intelligent being is at it's heart. Some scientists will disagree with "the God" theory, whilst others are convinced that is the answer. They all seem to agree though that we live in an interlinked universe, where nothing is random, but for a given purpose.
There, now I have bought science into it, because to me God is THE greatest scientist who has created nature in all is wonder, majesty, and sometimes terrifying destructive power to control the Great Picture of evolution. ;) ;)
:y especially the events bit.
-
the truth is, i've been known to creep over the limits on some roads now and again, and by that i do mean creep over, i.e. 34-35 in a 30, 75-80 on the motorway
i'm not one of these who'll see an empty quiet uninterrupted 30 and floor it to 60 for the rush of it, or hit 110 on the motorway
i drive sensibly, i find it very calming
-
jerry, please define religeon for me please.
I believe my brother to be religeous in the fact he religeouus;y gets a lift to the club on a thursday night at 7pm to save seats for all his mates to that turn up at 8pm.
Plus Millwall is religeous in the fact he never misses a match. :-/
amen ;D
-
jerry, please define religeon for me please.
I believe my brother to be religeous in the fact he religeouus;y gets a lift to the club on a thursday night at 7pm to save seats for all his mates to that turn up at 8pm.
Plus Millwall is religeous in the fact he never misses a match. :-/
amen ;D
;D ;D
-
i take it nows not a good time to admit i ignore speed limits quite a lot :-X on boxing day i hammered it from london to portsmouth to watch the football cant be late for the match ;D
It's your licence, and if you get caught up doing a ton up then it's an instant ban. :-X
which team do you support then? you've never made it clear :o
i will give you a clue its not wet spam or crippled alice :y ;D ;D
-
i take it nows not a good time to admit i ignore speed limits quite a lot :-X on boxing day i hammered it from london to portsmouth to watch the football cant be late for the match ;D
It's your licence, and if you get caught up doing a ton up then it's an instant ban. :-X
which team do you support then? you've never made it clear :o
i will give you a clue its not wet spam or crippled alice :y ;D ;D
Queer rangersa :-? ::) ;D ;D
-
i take it nows not a good time to admit i ignore speed limits quite a lot :-X on boxing day i hammered it from london to portsmouth to watch the football cant be late for the match ;D
It's your licence, and if you get caught up doing a ton up then it's an instant ban. :-X
which team do you support then? you've never made it clear :o
i will give you a clue its not wet spam or crippled alice :y ;D ;D
Queer rangersa :-? ::) ;D ;D
you win how did you guess skyblue :y ;D ;D ;D
-
i take it nows not a good time to admit i ignore speed limits quite a lot :-X on boxing day i hammered it from london to portsmouth to watch the football cant be late for the match ;D
It's your licence, and if you get caught up doing a ton up then it's an instant ban. :-X
which team do you support then? you've never made it clear :o
i will give you a clue its not wet spam or crippled alice :y ;D ;D
Queer rangersa :-? ::) ;D ;D
you win how did you guess skyblue :y ;D ;D ;D
FACK OFF ;D BUT well done on beating the inbreads from the wrong end of the M69 :y :y ;D ;D ;D
-
I've watched this thread with interest and have voted.
I'm no angel when it comes to speed but honestly feel I drive to the conditions. 20, 30, 40 and 50 mean 20, 30, 40 and 50 (maximum) to me but in National speed limits I drive to the conditions... A clear stretch of motorway/dual carriageway with good visibility and conditions and I will break the limit sometimes but generally will sit at about 75 most of the time. Whilst I accept that this is "over the limit" it is within the accepted leeway.
That said... There is still the odd time when I am in an area of National limit when I have driven faster than I should. If we were all completely honest I doubt there's a person with a licence who can say they have never broken the speed limit, including temporary ones posted on the matrix signs on motorways ;)
As Amigo said at the start... No if's/but's... The question is, have you/do you break the speed limit.
As for the religion side of things... Yes Lizzie, I agree that your time is up when it is up. I have witnessed the aftermath of many fatal accidents when I was working recovery... They are awful, sobering scenes but if I had let everything I ever saw/witnessed bother me then I would never leave the house ::) It's about risk assessment and reaction. The majority of accidents I have seen/been involved in/tidied up after have been in built up areas with the vehicles involved travelling within the posted limits. As someone else has stated, it's the distractions that cause accidents, not speed ;)
Just my opinion mind :y :y
-
I've watched this thread with interest and have voted.
I'm no angel when it comes to speed but honestly feel I drive to the conditions. 20, 30, 40 and 50 mean 20, 30, 40 and 50 (maximum) to me but in National speed limits I drive to the conditions... A clear stretch of motorway/dual carriageway with good visibility and conditions and I will break the limit sometimes but generally will sit at about 75 most of the time. Whilst I accept that this is "over the limit" it is within the accepted leeway.
That said... There is still the odd time when I am in an area of National limit when I have driven faster than I should. If we were all completely honest I doubt there's a person with a licence who can say they have never broken the speed limit, including temporary ones posted on the matrix signs on motorways ;)
As Amigo said at the start... No if's/but's... The question is, have you/do you break the speed limit.
As for the religion side of things... Yes Lizzie, I agree that your time is up when it is up. I have witnessed the aftermath of many fatal accidents when I was working recovery... They are awful, sobering scenes but if I had let everything I ever saw/witnessed bother me then I would never leave the house ::) It's about risk assessment and reaction. The majority of accidents I have seen/been involved in/tidied up after have been in built up areas with the vehicles involved travelling within the posted limits. As someone else has stated, it's the distractions that cause accidents, not speed ;)
Just my opinion mind :y :y
how true.
rep mobile in the middle doing the usual distracted speed of 65 far more dangerous than someone on the max section of an autobahn , doing the ton.
-
the other thing that affects how i drive is wether im alone or have family or friends in car i generally wont speed if i have passengers
-
I've watched this thread with interest and have voted.
I'm no angel when it comes to speed but honestly feel I drive to the conditions. 20, 30, 40 and 50 mean 20, 30, 40 and 50 (maximum) to me but in National speed limits I drive to the conditions... A clear stretch of motorway/dual carriageway with good visibility and conditions and I will break the limit sometimes but generally will sit at about 75 most of the time. Whilst I accept that this is "over the limit" it is within the accepted leeway.
That said... There is still the odd time when I am in an area of National limit when I have driven faster than I should. If we were all completely honest I doubt there's a person with a licence who can say they have never broken the speed limit, including temporary ones posted on the matrix signs on motorways ;)
As Amigo said at the start... No if's/but's... The question is, have you/do you break the speed limit.
As for the religion side of things... Yes Lizzie, I agree that your time is up when it is up. I have witnessed the aftermath of many fatal accidents when I was working recovery... They are awful, sobering scenes but if I had let everything I ever saw/witnessed bother me then I would never leave the house ::) It's about risk assessment and reaction. The majority of accidents I have seen/been involved in/tidied up after have been in built up areas with the vehicles involved travelling within the posted limits. As someone else has stated, it's the distractions that cause accidents, not speed ;)
Just my opinion mind :y :y
I could not have said that better myself, fully agree with LD here..... :y
(Worried) :D :D :D
-
Around town I will stick to the speed limitbut on a trip back home on the motorway I will give her a push along aslong as its safe to do so and I wi=ont go sitting on the bumper of a car either if Ive caught them up.
But the thing I do hate are the plonkers who set their CC at 70 and then sit in the middle lane overtaking nothing..... FFS it winds me up no end that they dont think to pull over to the nearside lane when not overtaking anything
-
Re Zulu's homily above; Do/did you have access/permission to exceed posted limits either off the public highway or on it? If so that can remove the desire to drive fast in "normal" mode.
. ;D
No Chris I haven't driven professionally for some time now so I have no special dispensation to drive at speed (either in excess of the posted limits or the prevailing road conditions) either on or off the public roads.
-
the other thing that affects how i drive is wether im alone or have family or friends in car i generally wont speed if i have passengers
If you generally don't speed when you have passengers, what is the reason behind that? I think I'd be safe in saying that it's because you care about their safety and wouldn't want them hurt????
So from this statement could one assume that when you don't have passengers you generally do speed?!?!?! For the same reason?!??!
If you caused a crash, where other people were injured, whether or not the injured the people were travelling as your passengers is irrelevant, as you would've caused their injuries regardless of their location.
So I think to try and justify ones speeding by saying that no passengers are being carried is wrong, because an innocent sod stood at the side of the road minding his own business could be hurt.
-
Getting caught doing 100 mph isn't an instant ban
-
Re Zulu's homily above; Do/did you have access/permission to exceed posted limits either off the public highway or on it? If so that can remove the desire to drive fast in "normal" mode.
. ;D
No Chris I haven't driven professionally for some time now so I have no special dispensation to drive at speed (either in excess of the posted limits or the prevailing road conditions) either on or off the public roads.
Thanks for that Zulu.
I suspect there are three ways that inherent speeders can overcome the desire. One is to let it out off the public roads, another is to get old and 'past it', and the third is to somehow just get over it.
I hope I'm in the last set but I've used some tricks to get myself there. Like buying cars that don't suit going fast in my mind as mentioned above.
-
How can people say that when you're number's up it's up?!?! And say about fate and what have you?!?!
Well then what's the point in having speed limits, traffic lights and safe systems of work and road design?
If someone has a heart attack let's just leave them to die, or if someone has cancer don't give them any treatment, just leave them, it's their turn to kick the bucket! What's all that about?!?!
I don't think so. Yes there are many things that we can't change or do anything about, but as has been mentioned it's all about risk assessment and taking action to mitigate the risk.
Everyone on this forum, countless times everyday without even thinking about it will take action or not take action to change outcomes, or to increase or decrease the likelihood of something happening or not happening.
This thing we call fate is just our brains looking for patterns and trying to find a reason for things we can't explain or don't want to accept.
-
How can people say that when you're number's up it's up?!?! And say about fate and what have you?!?!
Well then what's the point in having speed limits, traffic lights and safe systems of work and road design?
If someone has a heart attack let's just leave them to die, or if someone has cancer don't give them any treatment, just leave them, it's their turn to kick the bucket! What's all that about?!?!
I don't think so. Yes there are many things that we can't change or do anything about, but as has been mentioned it's all about risk assessment and taking action to mitigate the risk.
Everyone on this forum, countless times everyday without even thinking about it will take action or not take action to change outcomes, or to increase or decrease the likelihood of something happening or not happening.
This thing we call fate is just our brains looking for patterns and trying to find a reason for things we can't explain or don't want to accept.
I agree that came across as a bit fatalist in the discussion but I don't think it was meant that way.
There are some circumstances where you know that YOU have no control over whether you live or die. At those times it might be appropriate to say our number's up. However, we find ourselves in situations daily where we can choose if we live or die, and if someone else lives or dies. That's where social responsibility comes in.
As for God intervening... I am sure he does on occasion but generally he relies on the ordered nature of what he's created to determine outcomes.
I have a nephew who shouldn't be alive but his non-God-believing neurosurgeon says it's a miracle that he is alive. Three years on from his collision he is starting to walk again. Not a complete healing by any stretch of the imagination, but his parents are mighty happy to have him around.
-
Getting caught doing 100 mph isn't an instant ban
Nor is getting caught at 125 - but you have to be very very lucky. :-X ;)
-
Getting caught doing 100 mph isn't an instant ban
Nor is getting caught at 125 - but you have to be very very lucky. :-X ;)
Talking of bikes (which I suspect you are Albs) it is VERY easy to wander over a limit while you're not watching the speedo.
Anyone who has not ridden a powerful bike would be amazed how far the speedo can move while you're concentrating on the road for a few seconds. ;D
-
Yep - many modern sportsbikes will do 0- 100 in around 5 seconds, luckily brakes and suspension design have kept pace with advances in power output. Not always the case with the nut attached to the bars though. ;)
-
Getting caught doing 100 mph isn't an instant ban
Nor is getting caught at 125 - but you have to be very very lucky. :-X ;)
Best keep that one quiet!! ::) ::) ::)
-
How can people say that when you're number's up it's up?!?! And say about fate and what have you?!?!
Well then what's the point in having speed limits, traffic lights and safe systems of work and road design?
If someone has a heart attack let's just leave them to die, or if someone has cancer don't give them any treatment, just leave them, it's their turn to kick the bucket! What's all that about?!?!
I don't think so. Yes there are many things that we can't change or do anything about, but as has been mentioned it's all about risk assessment and taking action to mitigate the risk.
Everyone on this forum, countless times everyday without even thinking about it will take action or not take action to change outcomes, or to increase or decrease the likelihood of something happening or not happening.
This thing we call fate is just our brains looking for patterns and trying to find a reason for things we can't explain or don't want to accept.
I agree that came across as a bit fatalist in the discussion but I don't think it was meant that way.
There are some circumstances where you know that YOU have no control over whether you live or die. At those times it might be appropriate to say our number's up. However, we find ourselves in situations daily where we can choose if we live or die, and if someone else lives or dies. That's where social responsibility comes in.
As for God intervening... I am sure he does on occasion but generally he relies on the ordered nature of what he's created to determine outcomes.
I have a nephew who shouldn't be alive but his non-God-believing neurosurgeon says it's a miracle that he is alive. Three years on from his collision he is starting to walk again. Not a complete healing by any stretch of the imagination, but his parents are mighty happy to have him around.
I agree with you there, in that there are circumstances where you have no control, but how many really do you not have control over? Really?
1. A madwoman pointing a gun to your head. You can reason with her. It might not work and she might shoot you, but at least you could argue you had a small amount of control.
2. People who skid on black ice, then say 'I didn't see it, it's not my fault' etc etc! They know it's cold, there should be a reasonable expectation as to the road conditions. Yes we all can be caught out, but we still have control. I for one love going fast, but appropriately, I hate inappropriate speed, it's not fun it's daft.
3. A cancer sufferer. They might not be able to treat it themselves. But if they seek treatment that is an element of control.
I once watched a TV program about a so called haunted area/road. A woman said that she was driving along this stretch of 'haunted' road when suddenly the steering wheel jerked to the left and she nearly crashed. She didn't crash, but tried to say that it was a ghost that had grabbed the wheel and tried to make her crash. More like she was gassing to her mate/on the phone/not paying attention or didn't have a proper hold of the steering wheel or something else plausible or a combination. Either way she had control.
I'm sorry about your nephew Chris H, I hope he gets better, like I hope everyone lives a healthy life. I know nothing about his collision, but speaking generally I would say this.
If, owing to the nature of their driving, an individual has a crash, then so many months/years down the line there is medical complications, I would say they do have control. Bear with me. Yes they might not be a doctor, and can't treat themselves, but theie injuries are just a consequence of their driving, which they had control over, however long the injuries or recovery last.
Yeah I believe there are situations where we have no control, but they are very very rare.
-
coming back to the discussion after a gap ...
I still have problem with the idea that the fatalist argument, death by cancer etc has any relevance at all to speeding. When you're approaching the blind bend, you make a decision as to how fast to go round it. If the idea of god's plan enters your mind at all, then you are giving up part of the responsibility for what happens. "It was god's foot on the gas pedal"
Now the fatalist approach to life and all that may have been OK for a peasant farmer 500 years ago, when there wasn't much they could do to influence the course of their life: being dependent on forces outside their control as to whether the crops grew, illness came. It would give some comfort for the misery. And undoubtedly would have been encouraged by the ruling classes to stop the peasants thinking for themselves.
Also, the peasant would never have had much power (instant power) over other people's lives. You could deliberately chase them with a plough, maybe? But you wouldn't regularly have had the power to hit them with 2 tons of metal at 40mph, as a result of a fractional wrong decision or lapse of attention when safety margins had been deliberately eroded, and you had clear knowledge of the possible consequences.
So nowadays we need a rather more mature, thoughtful and developed approach to what we do with our free will - whether that free will is exercised in a god's plan paradigm, or a completely secular one (like mine).
And the secular amongst us are well aware that there are things outside our control - we don't need to wear them on our sleeve.
As Solomon said, ... there is a time to reap, and a time to sow, a time to live, a time to die ... etc. (see Ecclesiastes) And a time to race (private road), and a time to keep to the limit (public road)!
-
coming back to the discussion after a gap ...
I still have problem with the idea that the fatalist argument, death by cancer etc has any relevance at all to speeding. When you're approaching the blind bend, you make a decision as to how fast to go round it. If the idea of god's plan enters your mind at all, then you are giving up part of the responsibility for what happens. "It was god's foot on the gas pedal"
Now the fatalist approach to life and all that may have been OK for a peasant farmer 500 years ago, when there wasn't much they could do to influence the course of their life: being dependent on forces outside their control as to whether the crops grew, illness came. It would give some comfort for the misery. And undoubtedly would have been encouraged by the ruling classes to stop the peasants thinking for themselves.
Also, the peasant would never have had much power (instant power) over other people's lives. You could deliberately chase them with a plough, maybe? But you wouldn't regularly have had the power to hit them with 2 tons of metal at 40mph, as a result of a fractional wrong decision or lapse of attention when safety margins had been deliberately eroded, and you had clear knowledge of the possible consequences.
So nowadays we need a rather more mature, thoughtful and developed approach to what we do with our free will - whether that free will is exercised in a god's plan paradigm, or a completely secular one (like mine).
And the secular amongst us are well aware that there are things outside our control - we don't need to wear them on our sleeve.
As Solomon said, ... there is a time to reap, and a time to sow, a time to live, a time to die ... etc. (see Ecclesiastes) And a time to race (private road), and a time to keep to the limit (public road)!
;D ;D
1 Kings 11:3
He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray.
The paradox of wisdom
-
coming back to the discussion after a gap ...
I still have problem with the idea that the fatalist argument, death by cancer etc has any relevance at all to speeding. When you're approaching the blind bend, you make a decision as to how fast to go round it. If the idea of god's plan enters your mind at all, then you are giving up part of the responsibility for what happens. "It was god's foot on the gas pedal"
Now the fatalist approach to life and all that may have been OK for a peasant farmer 500 years ago, when there wasn't much they could do to influence the course of their life: being dependent on forces outside their control as to whether the crops grew, illness came. It would give some comfort for the misery. And undoubtedly would have been encouraged by the ruling classes to stop the peasants thinking for themselves.
Also, the peasant would never have had much power (instant power) over other people's lives. You could deliberately chase them with a plough, maybe? But you wouldn't regularly have had the power to hit them with 2 tons of metal at 40mph, as a result of a fractional wrong decision or lapse of attention when safety margins had been deliberately eroded, and you had clear knowledge of the possible consequences.
So nowadays we need a rather more mature, thoughtful and developed approach to what we do with our free will - whether that free will is exercised in a god's plan paradigm, or a completely secular one (like mine).
And the secular amongst us are well aware that there are things outside our control - we don't need to wear them on our sleeve.
As Solomon said, ... there is a time to reap, and a time to sow, a time to live, a time to die ... etc. (see Ecclesiastes) And a time to race (private road), and a time to keep to the limit (public road)!
;D ;D
1 Kings 11:3
He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray.
The paradox of wisdom
Ha ha I didn't know that. Forget all that gathering stones together stuff - I expect he didn't have time to do much at all other than what he was told - so much for free will!
-
coming back to the discussion after a gap ...
I still have problem with the idea that the fatalist argument, death by cancer etc has any relevance at all to speeding. When you're approaching the blind bend, you make a decision as to how fast to go round it. If the idea of god's plan enters your mind at all, then you are giving up part of the responsibility for what happens. "It was god's foot on the gas pedal"
Now the fatalist approach to life and all that may have been OK for a peasant farmer 500 years ago, when there wasn't much they could do to influence the course of their life: being dependent on forces outside their control as to whether the crops grew, illness came. It would give some comfort for the misery. And undoubtedly would have been encouraged by the ruling classes to stop the peasants thinking for themselves.
Also, the peasant would never have had much power (instant power) over other people's lives. You could deliberately chase them with a plough, maybe? But you wouldn't regularly have had the power to hit them with 2 tons of metal at 40mph, as a result of a fractional wrong decision or lapse of attention when safety margins had been deliberately eroded, and you had clear knowledge of the possible consequences.
So nowadays we need a rather more mature, thoughtful and developed approach to what we do with our free will - whether that free will is exercised in a god's plan paradigm, or a completely secular one (like mine).
And the secular amongst us are well aware that there are things outside our control - we don't need to wear them on our sleeve.
As Solomon said, ... there is a time to reap, and a time to sow, a time to live, a time to die ... etc. (see Ecclesiastes) And a time to race (private road), and a time to keep to the limit (public road)!
I thought that a fine analysis K which I'm happy to qoute in full.
I've seen a lot during the time I've been dealing with people - great things and woefully disturbing things so I've had to become somewhat of a practical bugger.
This may not be particularly fashionable when entering the realms of esoteric argument such as we've witnessed up to the moment but in my view most things in life involving human behaviour are inherently tied to basic motivational traits.
Bearing that in mind I'll simply say to those who like to push the envelope - keep poking that dog with a stick and eventually it'll bite you.
And no, that’s not an excuse to become reclusive and absent oneself from the norms of society it's simply an invitation to think about what you're doing - and of the possible consequences - and if you still enjoy taking risks (having regard to the OP) by all means do so in a suitable environment – not in one where the lives and welfare of others can be compromised
-
Some really excellent posts on this thread; it's a difficult subject, and honesty is important to add anything meaningful to what's gone before.
Yes, I do speed. Like many others on here, I WON'T speed in built-up areas or when road conditions make fast travel inappropriate, but, like many of you, I have a large-engined executive express at my disposal that is more than capable of doing double the UK speed limit, and has been engineered accordingly. I have no intention of ever attempting to discover exactly what my car is capable of on a UK road, but on a lightly populated motorway in good road conditions and assuming a reasonable degree of driving proficiency on my part (licence for 30 years, no accidents in the last 28 years, some competition experience), I don't see momentary 100+ miles an hour travel as akin to devil-worship.
The Police, should they be interested, are entitled to their view and sanction should they see fit, and I'll deal with that with equanimity should it happen.
Having said all that, I deployed the cruise control on my relatively-recently purchased 3.0 Elite for the first time today on my way home from my mum's in Wales - firstly at 66 mph on the A4042 to Newport, then at 71 mph on the M4 to Bristol. I rather liked it.....I might do it some more...... [smiley=laugh.gif]
-
Some really excellent posts on this thread; it's a difficult subject, and honesty is important to add anything meaningful to what's gone before.
Yes, I do speed. Like many others on here, I WON'T speed in built-up areas or when road conditions make fast travel inappropriate, but, like many of you, I have a large-engined executive express at my disposal that is more than capable of doing double the UK speed limit, and has been engineered accordingly. I have no intention of ever attempting to discover exactly what my car is capable of on a UK road, but on a lightly populated motorway in good road conditions and assuming a reasonable degree of driving proficiency on my part (licence for 30 years, no accidents in the last 28 years, some competition experience), I don't see momentary 100+ miles an hour travel as akin to devil-worship.
The Police, should they be interested, are entitled to their view and sanction should they see fit, and I'll deal with that with equanimity should it happen.
Having said all that, I deployed the cruise control on my relatively-recently purchased 3.0 Elite for the first time today on my way home from my mum's in Wales - firstly at 66 mph on the A4042 to Newport, then at 71 mph on the M4 to Bristol. I rather liked it.....I might do it some more...... [smiley=laugh.gif]
Hotel 21 fitted cruise to the MV6 before i bought it & i luvvit! helps keep the speed down on long runs. :y