The SCMP is such an easy target, so here we go again.

They currently have a letter column and also a section called ‘Talkback’ (for emails).  I cannot figure out what difference there is between them – presumably most of the letters they receive come via email, so it can’t be that.  You might think that the best stuff goes in the letter column and the rest goes in Talkback, but both contain a mixture of interesting stuff and drivel.

Anyway, the latter is what I love, and two recent examples (both from Talkback) have caught my attention.

The first was hilariously mundane (and believe me, I know all about that): a reader wanted to complain that the Delifrance in Festival Walk had stopped doing set meals (this week’s special: a sandwich, red soup with cabbage and a tiny cake) and that you now have to queue up for a table.  Er, that’s it. 

Hello? If you don’t like it, go somewhere else for your lunch.  Thanks. 

Today’s drivel is definitely in Fumier territory.  A reader complains that he was driving along happily in the overtaking lane on one of Hong Kong’s many fine highways, when he was stopped by the police.  Not for speeding, but rather for driving badly (staying in the overtaking lane whilst not overtaking).  He seems upset about this, claiming that he thought the road signs were just advising him to stay in the inside lane).  Idiot.   

I received a traffic ticket on April 7 at about 10.30pm. I was leaving the airport, heading towards Kowloon. I was driving in the fast lane at 110km/h. My focus was on not speeding. There were hardly any cars and I was pulled over by a motorcycle police officer because I was driving in the fast lane for an extended period and received a ticket because I was not passing another car.

My problem with this law lies on several levels. First, driving in the fast lane at the speed limit poses minimal danger. Second, I feel that cutting back and forth from the middle lane to the passing lane at night would pose more of a danger. Third, I have always thought the signs posted on the expressway were meant as a courtesy to other cars which wanted to exceed the speed limit.
 
This law makes sense as a courtesy but it doesn’t make sense if it is punishable by a fine of $450. My advice to other drivers is to do the more dangerous thing and avoid driving straight on the "passing" lane. It will save you money.

Good grief.  It’s not dangerous to change lanes – that’s why you have two eyes and three mirrors.  Oh, and a brain.  Well, maybe…

Posted in

5 responses to “Idiots”

  1. fumier avatar

    That was an excellent letter, wasn’t it? His ‘focus was on not speeding’, therefore he couldn’t handle any other thought processes. Magnificent.
    “M’Lud, my client’s focus was on not jaywalking. That is why he mugged three people instead.”

    Like

  2. George Adams avatar
    George Adams

    You must be a real idot for reading the Post. No one else does except idiots. Right? Hence their idiotic letters pages. I read it sometimes out of a sense of duty. But you surely are not bound to do so. Give it a miss and get back to good hearty articles about cheese and pickles. We love ’em.

    Like

  3. Chris avatar

    It’s a public service I perform. Didn’t you used to spend most of your time attacking the SCMP?

    Like

  4. Mother avatar
    Mother

    I also read the ticket article with incredulity. There were few other cars on the road so to avoid changing lanes I stayed in the outside lane. Duhhh! If there are few other cars on the road you don’t need to change lanes. Besides, this being HK you could have safely driven in the inside lane knowing that nobody else would be using it.
    I read the SCMP exactly because it is so bad – it is compulsive reading for its awfulness. Just like I only look at 2 things in the Standard each day – Dilbert and Alex.

    Like

  5. fumier avatar

    That was a fine cheese post you put up this morning, Mother. I think someone may have to look to his laurels.

    Like

Leave a reply to Mother Cancel reply