Does anyone on here ever get along there? It's Newbury's treasure for live music and comedy.

Last night we saw Marriage of Figaro by Kennet Opera, but really it's more of a blues venue. Next week I'm seeing Bernie Marsden, but over recent months I've seen Elles Bailey (up and coming blues singer) supported by my cousin, Hugh Cornwell, Joanne Shaw Taylor and lots more besides.

In the past we saw a fantastic and poignant show by Sean Hughes.

It is a great venue and deserves support.
Seen some brilliant acts there over the last few years.

It is OK for a sit and watch event, but the bar is sparse and the venue is a little out of the way compared to, say, The Corn Exchange.

The seats in the Corn Exchange are a r s e killers though!

Parking's a lot cheaper.

Last time we patronised the Corn Exchange I miscalculated the finishing time of the performance and had to rush out at the interval to feed the Wharf ticket machine . Not exactly helped by the fact the wretched things don't give change .
Little wonder everyone parks in Sainsbury's , but they are tightening up on the 2 allotted hours .

In the evening on street parking is free at least.

They already have.
Woe betide anyone who exceeds the 2 hours determined by the ANPR system now installed.

I've been a few times and seen some great acts: PP Arnold, The Blues Band, Cerys Matthews, Muddy Water's son, Wilko Johnson and many more.

Have you seen "newres does politics". Its fooking hilarious!!!😂

I went on a speed awareness course there once... was disappointed to find we had to pay for our coffee! Otherwise I have always been tempted but never gone along.

Did you and AC go as a team? Newbury Speedsters?

Law breaker. Shocking. Never had a ticket in my life. Or broken the speed limit. Send him down...

Oh I was on that too. Quite fun actually.

I don;t think that is the intention................is it??
Never been on one.

How does the saying go ? " Don't speak to soon ".

Newres is a liberal, thinks the law don't apply, Newres is speshule!

It's interesting to note that an element of society consider it perfectly acceptable to break the law , vis a vis speeding , making light of their punishment , yet become apoplectic over a "non pc" remark . The law is the law , contravening it is , in my book , unacceptable .

In my case my indiscretion was accidental, often what people say is deliberate. I also disgree that breaking the law is always unacceptable, especially if the law is ‘unacceptable’.

Which laws are 'unacceptable' in your book?

There we go then, save billions, don't bother with a legal system or indeed government, just ask AC what laws we should obey! Perfick!

Having no laws is unlikely to save billions.

Didn't say we shouldn't have any, just that we should rely on your undoubted expertise to be the arbiter of which ones need obeying.

Were unacceptable? Most if not all those that have been removed or overruled, including ‘anti-gay’ and blasphemy laws.

Ok, but who said I wanted the job?

Well, it would seem to suit a self opinionated spazzy gob****e, an your just standing around, so?

Exactly; I didn’t say I wanted to decided what was right or not, but it stands to reason that just because something is the law that breaking the law is always unacceptable.

Maybe the ones that he has "contravened".
If you don't accept the laws of a Country then either lobby for Parliamentary change or live somewhere else .

Judge Cap!! Here come da judge!

Considering I had no intention if breaking the law, despite my being cynical of its motives, you have no foundation for that argument.


Sorry, no can do I’m afraid.

I wouldn’t say unacceptable but I do think a 70mph speed limit is daft often. I also think it should be open season on middle lane huggers. I confess to never driving under 85/90 on motorways when able.

My record speeding offence is 104 on the A34. No ban.

We all agree that one driver may safely be in control at speeds in excess of the limit while the next is dangerous at 50 mph., but raising the limit gives only a green light to the bad as opposed to exonerating the competent .
Instead of wasting money on "driverless " technology , would it not be sensible to have onboard monitors which would record the ability of the driver at the time as opposed to a thick red line which , as you freely admit , is mainly ignored ?

Already here, most large fleet operators use them to the chagrin of their drivers! For high end vehicles this technology also locks into theft tracking etc. However, the 'Clarkson Tendancy ' keeps it commercially limited.

In any event, I'm not sure I'd like Newres insurance bill! (It's likely to be this sector pushing for greater adoption)

From a lay perspective I consider the average car driver a great deal more dangerous than an HGV operator , indeed one of the major causes of accidents are drivers not being aware that a lorry is not going to overtake as quickly as an Audi A3 . Now we can argue ad infinitum about HGV overtaking procedure but the reality is that they are as entitled to drive at a speed that conditions dictate as the euro hatchback owner that believes it is somehow privileged .

Back in the day it was "acceptable" to go down the local have five pints and drive home. You were "unlucky" if you got caught. Now you are seen as a danger to all and quite rightly so. Perhaps in a few years when driverless cars ensure people stay under the speed limit your actions will be deemed senseless and moronic. Just saying...

Drinking 5 pints then driving would usually be deliberate; my speeding was not; I didn’t want to speed.

Enlighten us please . If you did not intend to exceed the speed limit then why did you ? Or was it a case of a "dodgy" speedometer ?

I didn't want to speed! What an arsehat, did the Devil make you do it? Or did your 'dyslexia' stop you from reading the roadsigns? Unbelievable!

I wasn't paying attention to my speed; had I known I was doing a bit more than the limit, I'd have slowed down.

I would imagine in both your lives there have been countless moments you have done things that you had not intended to do so I fail to see how outrageous a claim mine is.

Could've, should've, would've! Not great as a defense if you'd knocked a child down is it.

It wasn't a defence, but at least while I am not looking at the speedo, I'm paying attention to my surroundings.

Which presumably were going past at a fair lick? Ooh! Good defense! "Sorry M'lud, didn't know how fast I was going like, too busy looking at te clouds an such". Classic!

It's not a defence, just being honest, but rest assured it was not in close proximity of any pedestrians and I was driving at a safe distance from the car in front of me.

LOL, just yanking your chain.

I know

I do the same too!

Yeah, but I'm better at it.

Agreed; no-one can pull my wire quite like you!

The point I make is that what is acceptable 30 years ago is not acceptable now. This might well be the same as speeding. If a child had run out in the road from a field in the middle of nowhere would you have stopped in time? Would you have been prosecuted for manslaughter? Just playing devils advocate... To make light of a speeding class that you "volunteered" to go to in order to avoid paying a fine in some eyes may seem insensitive.

I didnt make light of my penalty, but it cost a £100.00 so no fine is avoided; however, we were told fewer people are caught speeding after attending a speed awareness than those who take the points.

It seems you and others are replying to arguments I have not made.

Odds are that driverless cars will eventually go faster - because they are better driven they will be safer at high speeds.

But you don't need driverless cars to speed limit cars - all you need is a GPS, a link to the engine management computer thingy and a bit of software - absolute doddle costing very little to implement. They should have been fitting them in cars for ten years - many would use them even if there was an off switch. After a few years it would be socially unacceptable to use the off switch.