Originally posted by Hatts
So you'd rather keep a set of rules that practically can not be enforced? Doesn't hanging grimly on to a set of rules that you can't police just make everyone look a bit silly? Is that not just having rules for the sake of having them?
If evolving the rules to take into account new developments and advances in technology is not the answer then what is?
I think your reaction is somewhat OTT. On what grounds do you base your asessment that this is "DANGEROUS" or is a "time bomb"? For what exactly? "Some kid dies..." my god, what bed time stories were you told as a child?
Alarmist comments like this do little to help. If you have some hard and fast evidence that this proposed rule is dangerous or could in anyway cause someones demise then be so kind as to present your case in reasoned manner and I'll listen to it.
Look, take my speeding example, its the law....it cant be effectivly policed.....but its there for a reason.
just cos you choose to sweep the problem under the rug dont mean its gonna go away.....
like i said it will all be back in six or ten months or however long it takes for people to cheat this new rule. in my opinion, and thats what it is, you should find ways of inforcing the current rule.
alarmist, maybe.....but whos to say it will not happen. one pull, 15bps in the head, spine, neck whatever. ANd by your 'new rule' thats ok
how can that be right??!!?!!