Poker machines are revenue raisers, and people need to be protected against themselves. Speed cameras are to stop the carnage on our roads. You don't have to contribute to any of these devices, but some people can-not help themselves. So we need laws to protect the people against those who think they are above the laws.

579, it must be all the younger people who need protection from yourselves, that & those city people Cactus reckons I sling off at.

50 years ago it was legal to drive at 100 MPH on country roads., & main highways, even dirt back roads, & you know, we didn't kill as many on the roads as we do today.

So I guess it's all down to the education system.

"Speed cameras are to stop the carnage on our roads."

There are a fair number of people with a different view of that and seemingly little evidence that they have made any kind of real reduction in the carnage on the roads.

Unfortunately too many factors are changing to make it clear cut
- cars are being built with a lot more protection in them (air bags, smart braking systems, better padding etc)
- there are more drivers and cars on the road
- better roads in many places
- there seems to be little evidence that minor speeding play's a significant role in road carnage, most of the horror smashes seem to revolve around some combination of massive speed, alcohol, fatigue, trucks etc.

I try to stay under the speed limit and not contribute to the revenue streams of speed camera's but I'm less than convinced that most are there to reduce road carnage.

Some people do have problems controlling their gambling, that does not mean that the particular plans for poker machines will do less harm than good. I don't use poker machines (once in Vegas) and the clubs I get involved in don't have premises or poker machines, generally a non-issue other than another point where to partially protect some others are required to deal submit to yet more government intervention.

R0bert

in re reading my post it might have sounded
like i was attacking mr bell...[belly knows i use you genericly..never specificly]

i guess im more against the revenue raising aspect
where the new law is clearly to get money
or get compliance via threat

for egsample my local council has half a million fine plus a demolition order..[threat]..it used to get an extra 250 dollars from me..[to get another final egsamination..[10 years after the fact]..for a bit of the house i built..

this next lot is the abc putting backon a repeat
[i watched/heard the same words..sometime previously
so program must be a repeat]

that matches the poker machine tax adgenda
[noting toney is saying he 'might' repeal it
after he takes it to lib council policy meeting

[when he does]..that will be taking the 'no'..too far
we got gambling problems...the cure is of course to take away all that extra line form of gambling..[ie simply delete that multiple option that alows 20 'win' options]..that sucks away the line credits

ITS THE REVENUE RAISING
and the beurorockrat's created
plus..these extra INCOME streams these nanny laws raise

[and those who want more 'powers'
over use of extreem statements..[that if they cant get any new ones..we are canceling..all those govts at all levels allready got]

thats just bull

we had alp say..no new laws
without loosing other laws

lol
yeah right
it should be
NO NEW BEUROCRACIES for revenue raising

Well Belly I would definitely remove school zones on major roads and simply demand they be barred off from pedestrians (who shouldn't be there anyway), and I would definitely support Citizen Initiated Referenda taking a higher position in our governance than the actual government (like Switzerland does and clearly to a superior result).
But I would not support anarchism from governance and reduction of laws. We are clearly a society that needs a lot of both.

belly,
Yes we do have a nanny state, but the question is 'Where to draw the line'

The latest thing that will impinge on me is an about to be introduced law for farmers to wear helmets when riding quad bikes. What stupidity! The sun is my biggest enemy and danger when riding. Do they not realise that spending hours crawling along behind a mob of sheep or spot spraying weeds all day in a helmet will cook your head. A straw hat is more appropriate. So a few people get killed(12)a year riding quad bikes, but that is personal responsibility mainly. Like single vehicle road accidents.

One baby gets caught in a cot and regulations are brought in, or cords on a blind. Where does it end? A fool breaks his neck diving into shallow water and sues the council for not having a sign. A kid fell ove Nth Head in Sydney, because parents let him get too close and now the whole area is fenced. A pool has to be safety fenced even if there is a dam or creek nearby. Where does personal and parental responsibility come in? Fools swim outside the flags at all beaches.

A look at the gun laws will demonstrate how stupid the regulations are. I have to show my licence to buy 22 bullets, as if bullets go off outside a gun. I have to 'do a course' to purchasse weed poison at a huge cost and that has to be renewed at times. These are only a few examples! My septic tankl has to be inspected regularly by council, at my cost.

Far too much regulation and not enough common sense applied. The carefull and responsible people are continually penalised for the sake of the stupid and the criminals.

It is getting worse all the time.