are enrolled at university, degree in computer science and are seriously off course. One of the tests that I still missing is that of mathematical logic. Ok, I am also an ass, but I've learned the basics and if I have to do with something clearly illogical and irrational, I see that now. Today I have had in hand a copy of E Polis Torino, an excellent free newspaper that goes to Turin and my attention was focused on an article "linked" from the first page where he described a climate of polemche on the camera Course Moncalieri near the intersection with the bridge Isabella, located in following the investment of a pedestrian in that stretch of road. You can discuss everything that speed cameras are useless for security purposes because their presence is enough to slow down and then reopen the gas after 100 meters, which serve only to make the common case that the real problems of modern society are more , etc ... In the article there is one thing that is a real bullshit era, both from the logical point of view and from that legalistic: "The speed limit will remain in Moncalieri course of 50 miles per hour, but next Monday will be fined only utomobilisti that cross the 75 ". Splendid: the law imposes a limit but, since all it SODDING and then go crying justice of the peace when they are stapled to be clever, the application will decide at will to raise this limit to satisfy everyone. And in fact, without penalty, the limit rises to 75. Then there's also a giant of contemporary thought, far-sighted statesman and politician from the keen sense of the institutions by the name of Joseph Lonergan's argument that, according to what is written in the article, go along Corso Moncalieri within 50 to 'is now impossible. Stop, ipse dixit. The gears are used all 5 (or 6 for the sportsmen) and the gas is squeezed right. It matters little whether we are in town, the road is lined sidewalks and roadways are separated by a simple line drawn on the asphalt. No less than 50 per hour, you can not. Turning serious for a moment
I must stress that such an abomination further assumes negative value - in addition to that already inherent in the phrase - precisely because it is spoken by a person, political affiliation, should precede all respect for the law. A little 'I understand: the average motorist is a fucking frustrated, often obese, sentenced to pay for each applicant who is to occupy the road and obsessed with speed as he sees 100 meters free for several minutes then nailed the next tail. But hear me say that it is impossible to meet the law is civil intolerable. Following the same line of thought then I might feel entitled to break the skull with the steel arch of my u-lock to the next asshole that opens a door in my face because "anyone who rides in the city knows that can not stand it. "
Shame.
