Two excellent comments in blogs I have been reading this evening appealed to my sense of humour.
First up, The Magistrate who in response to calls from the chief executive of Network Rail’s call for harsher penalties for the who ignore lights and drive round barriers at level crossings (my emphasis):
Now that’s what I call a kneejerk reaction. The idea that heavier penalties deter offending is embedded in our culture, and very often wrong. If the idea of being hit by a hundred tons of train doing 60 mph doesn’t deter you, I don’t think that an extra year’s driving ban is likely to do the trick any more than the reclassification of cannabis is likely to make stoners give up the weed. Breaking the rules at a rail crossing already carries a non-judicial penalty of death. We JPs can’t top that.
Next from an excellent post by The Fat Bigot Opines. He has a go at the Home Secretary over her rather liberal use of the rules to fleece us of another Â£100k or so:
The allowance exists and it is up to each MP to decide whether to use it and, if so, to what extent. In this respect it is different from tax avoidance. Tax avoidance is about people investigating how much (more accurately, how little) they are obliged by law to pay from their own pocket. MPs’ second home allowances are about how much the MP requires the taxpayer to pay. In other words, one is about spending your own money and the other is about spending other people’s money. If there is one lesson to be learned from the universally bankrupt religion of socialism, it is that nothing is easier than spending other people’s money.
Its good to laugh, as they saying goes, and I did feel better.