Skip to content

The Mail and Speeding

July 20, 2009

As everyone knows; there are some laws that good, god-fearing readers of the Daily Mail need not adhere to. Laws like speeding and paying your TV licence. They’ve been deliberately invented by ZanuLiebor just to make your life miserable, and so it’s perfectably acceptable to break them. This pick ‘n’ mix approach to law and order is championed in yesterdays editorial from the Mail on Sunday. It begins with:

Anyone can tell the difference between breaking the speed limit and mugging a pensioner.

Which could just as easily have read: “Anyone can tell the difference between killing a small child as a result of speeding and pick-pocketing”. It’s a reverse polarisation of the crimes involved and brings about a completely different meaning to the next paragraph, which reads: “One is a regrettable offence against the law. The other is a shameful crime.”

You see, in the world of the Daily Mail reader there are some crimes which aren’t really crimes. The Mail tells you that it’s OK not to pay your TV licence if you don’t like what’s on TV, and that if you need to get somewhere quickly then you need to drive faster, regardless of any silly ‘speed limits’.

However much the Daily Mail would like to tell us that speeding isn’t really a crime, that it’s only there to bleed you dry, and that there are no victims, the statistics say otherwise:

Speeding is not just inconsiderate driving – it contributes to the 36,000 serious injuries and 3,400 deaths that occur on Britain’s roads each year.

But nevertheless, looking at the world through Mail-tinted eyes, it is an outrage that people who break the law by speeding should be treated the same as people who break the law by thieving. As far as the Mail is concerned they are both completely different crimes, perpetrated by completely different people. Mugging, as the opening sentence of the editorial implies, is something committed by hooded youths who target frail elderly people, whilst speeding is committed by, and I quote, “the respectable and the employed”.

It’s almost as if the Mail is suggesting that there should one law for their Jag-driving, middle-to-upper class readership and another for everyone else…

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: