London Banter - View Single Post

Colin Rosenstiel · June 1st 08, 10:10 PM posted to uk.transport.london

In article ,
(James Farrar) wrote:

On Sun, 1 Jun 2008 17:06 +0100 (BST), (Colin
Rosenstiel) wrote:

In article ,
(asdf) wrote:

On Sun, 1 Jun 2008 06:11:05 -0700 (PDT), MIG wrote:

There's not much history of drinking either, so it was lazy piece
of non-policy addressing a non-existent problem*, on the lines of
the charm at my front door that has had 100% success in preventing
elephant-attacks since I hung it there.

*Drunkenness may be, but sipping it while on public transport is
not
the issue.

And, significantly, drunkenness was already illegal under the
railway
by-laws:

"No person shall enter or remain on the railway where such person is
unfit to enter or remain on the railway as a result of being in a
state of intoxication."

As is typical of politicians (particularly the current government),
when a problem is caused by legislation not being enforced, they try
to solve it by simply adding more legislation. Those who are
law-abiding have their freedoms slowly stripped away, while those
who
ignore the law continue to get away with it.

Yes, punishment of the innocent because of a few guilty people they
are
unable or unwilling to deal with under existing powers. So New Labour.
I didn't expect it of the Tories too.

You didn't read his manifesto then.

You mean he promised the people of London he would punish the innocent?

--
Colin Rosenstiel