By Dave Yorkshire. A little while ago, I wrote an article about the inequality between British and foreign drivers on Britain’s roads with regard to road tax. I wish now to continue to give a comprehensive vision of a potential holistic nationalist policy for Britain’s highways and byways.
I will begin by stating that a list has now been published of the most uninsured drivers per capita by postcode. The list is given below:
|Rank||Change from 2009||Postal district code and district name|
|1||Up by 1||Birmingham B9|
|2||Down by 1||Birmingham B10|
|3||No Change||Birmingham B8|
|4||Up by 2||Bradford BD9|
|5||Down by 1||Bradford BD3|
|6||Up by 1||Bradford BD8|
|7||Up by 6||Birmingham B6|
|8||Up by 2||Manchester M12|
|9||Up by 8||Birmingham B11|
|10||Down by 5||Birmingham B21|
|11||Up by 8||Halifax HX1|
|12||Down by 4||Bradford BD7|
|13||Up by 1||Birmingham B12|
|14||Down by 2||Manchester|
|15||Up by 23||Wolverhampton WV2|
|16||Up by 5||Bradford BD5|
|17||Up by 41||Birmingham B18|
|18||Down by 7||Birmingham B66|
|19||Up by 7||Birmingham B19|
|20||Up by 184||Romford RM20|
Source: MIB Top 20 Uninsured Driving Hotspots (2008 – 2010)
It will be apparent to any non-Guardian reader that these postcodes represent areas of high ‘enrichment’, that is to say third-world immigration. Is this a coincidence? The liberal left would probably have us believe so.
This is not to say that all immigrants do not play by the rules, but a significant section do not, joined by those indigenous British living in those areas that have, as the historian and television presenter has recently said, ‘become black’ in adopting immigrant norms and values. One notes from this table, however, that predominantly Asian areas seem to be overrepresented.
Typically, it is these uninsured drivers that cause many of the accidents on our roads – the ‘ethnically diverse’ gang members that drive around our towns and cities. And what is the penalty when these young delinquents are caught without insurance? Usually, they just receive a driving ban (they usually have no licence anyway), a fine they have no money to pay, an anti-social behaviour order they can frame and hang above the mantelpiece, and possibly a few hours community service.
This is obviously quite simply unacceptable. The Conservatives might well point to this being the legacy of the last Labour government, but I sincerely doubt that anything will alter during David Cameron’s administration, for Cameron is already committed to bringing in more of the third world.
Indeed, enlisting the aid of Bill Bratton, the police chief who ‘cleaned up’ New York during Mayor Rudolph Giuliani’s term, is a mere publicity stunt. Without radical changes in British law, or rather a radical return to the true spirit of British law, nothing of significance will change.
Ask the man in the street: he knows what Bill Bratton knew in 1990s New York without needing the exorbitant salary Bratton’s advice will demand: the only way to restore law and order is to crack down on petty crime, for those who do the petty crime tend also to do the bigger crimes. Remember that Al Capone was eventually jailed not for murder or racketeering, but for tax evasion.
If drivers without car insurance are imprisoned for the offence, we would see a reduction in other crimes, such as gun and knife crime. It is important to remember that prisons under a nationalist government would not be the same luxury hotels they are now. Furthermore, it ought to be self evident that such criminals of non-British origin have outstayed their welcome if they are so flagrantly breaking the law. Once their term in prison were served, where they would be made use of through the effectuation of menial labour, they would be sent back to country of origin upon release.
Uninsured drivers also ensure that insurance premiums are constantly increasing in price. It is becoming so that young law-abiding drivers can no longer afford to drive, often limiting them in the already overcrowded job market. Even so, it is clear that insurance companies are exploiting the situation and artificially augmenting premiums. An easy solution to the problem would for the state to create an optional competitive insurance for drivers to opt into that would force private insurers to keep their premiums at a reasonable rate.
As mentioned, uninsured drivers are often those who tend to drive recklessly – but they are not the only ones. Governmental propaganda that ‘speed kills’ is misleading, giving the idea that slow driving will negate all accidents, when, in reality, it is the recklessness or inattentiveness of the driver, which can include driving too fast in inappropriate places, that is often at fault.
This is why speed cameras are of little use, except around schools, where they are usually noticeable by their absence. Instead, they tend to appear on motorways, especially when coupled with a ‘variable speed limit’, which tends towards confirming the views of various motorists’ campaign groups that believe the primary reason for speed cameras is to make money for the state.
Governments and their NGOs have always defended speed cameras with statistics based on a reduction of fatalities at a given point, but, as Jeremy Clarkson has also pointed out, if a camera is placed at a motorway site where a pile-up with multiple casualties has occurred, the chances of such a pile-up happening there again in a time frame of one year is considerably smaller. Therefore, the government can claim the camera has saved X amount of lives.
Speed cameras are rather a danger to road safety. How can a driver be aware of the traffic around him if his eyes are glued to his speedometer? Speed cameras make motorists feel ill-at-ease, oppressed and frustrated – not a healthy combination when one is driving what is in effect a deadly weapon.
Indeed, it seems like other highway policies are designed merely to frustrate motorists and I suspect this is a product of typical Marxist thought, where everything has to be turned on its head to ‘prove’ the impossibility of living in the modern industrial world. Have you ever noticed that roundabouts and approaches to roundabouts are now built up to negate vision and forethought? Have you noticed the insane appearance of the double mini-roundabout? How many traffic lights are now designed to change to red on approach? How many roads are now riddled with speed bumps so abrasive that the driver is jolted if he even goes above 10mph?
I would suggest ridding our country once and for all of these insanities. Successive governments have, after all, been punishing the decent motorist along with the idiot with their policies. Isn’t it always so? This is the problem with trying to negate the potential for crime instead of tackling the criminal. To the boy racer or joy rider, a speed bump is, in any case, all part of the rollercoaster.
What we need instead are police in unmarked cars with instructions to arrest those who drive dangerously. We all know who they are. They are the weavers between lanes of high traffic on motorways. They are those who overtake in inappropriate places. They are usually boy racers, little gangsters and company executives who do not care about anyone or anything beyond themselves. They are those who drive too fast for the conditions, whatever the speed limit.
What does it matter if a car drives at 85mph down an empty motorway? It does not and therefore should not be punished. Yet a car doing even 25mph outside a primary school at home-time is going too fast. These are not issues about exact speeds, but common-sense issues that anyone driving a vehicle ought to be aware of instinctively.
At one time of day, we had police officers who also used common sense and sound judgement, but today’s Marxist bureaucracy has negated it through a series of unworkable directives that must be followed to the letter. I believe the suggestions I have given will work, but they will only work with the aid of a non-politicised police force – a police force, while never perfect, that we once had in Britain.