Motorists could face £20 spot fines if they leave their engines running while stuck in traffic.
Traffic wardens will be able to issue the penalties - after a warning - in a bid to cut down on pollution.
A pilot scheme is due to be launched in January in Shoreham-by-Sea, West Sussex, and will be expanded if it proves successful. West Sussex Council said it would target areas where exhaust emissions build up unnecessarily, such as rail crossings and town centres.
But drivers branded the plans yet another round of the war on the motorist. The AA pointed out that to switch off an engine and start up again within a minute actually uses more fuel than letting it idle.
It is simply another stealth tax and, frankly, a disgusting imposition.
Cabbie Roger Turner, 30, said he was disgusted with the idea, adding: 'Who gave them the right to tell us to switch off our engines?
Well, Roger, we did. A minority of idiots elect these fuckers and then we call it "democracy".
'The ones I feel sorry for are the old dears, who won't know what's going on...
Maybe they shouldn't be driving then?
... and could end with a £20 fine for not turning off the engine in their Fiat Panda. It's another example of the nanny state.'
This isn't "a nanny state"—it has gone way beyond nannying. It is another example of the totalitarian state: little bureaucrats making up laws as they go along, and enforcing them with state violence.
Fucking hell, I am so tired of this continual bullshit.
The thing that really grips my shit is that much of the time, these queues of traffic are almost entirely caused by the councils themselves, through the installation of vast numbers of traffic lights, pedestrian crossings, sleeping policemen, chicanes and the rest of the congestion-causing paraphernalia.
Edinburgh City became particularly adept at fucking up the flow of traffic when the y were attempting to ram through a Congestion Charge for that city, as I wrote back in February 2005.
Q) What is congestion?
A) Long queues of slow moving vehicles.
Q) What do "traffic-calming" measures - narrowed roads, chicanes, sleeping policemen, etc - do?
A) They slow down traffic, thus creating long queues of slow moving vehicles.
Q) What have Edinburgh City Council been spending their road budget on?
A) Massive amounts of traffic-calming measures.
Q) Has this caused congestion?
A) Yes, quod erat demonstrandum.
Q) Is it conceivable that ECC have been deliberately installing traffic-calming measures in order to create - or at least inflate - congestion in the city centre, and thus emphasise the problem and force through the congestion charging so that they can carry on with their grand scheme for trams (or plug a big hole in their finances)?
A) If you can possibly credit the city councillors with "joined-up thinking" of that deviousness, yes.
In fact, the only use that I can possibly see for this man-made global warming hysteria is that it might be feasible to introduce a bill banning councils from deliberately slowing down traffic on the very good grounds that the longer that a motor vehicle takes to get to its destination, the more fuel it burns and thus the more CO2 it emits.
Oh, and now that I have been driving regularly for some months (on the speed camera-less A3), high speed crash notwithstanding, I am definitely of the opinion that we ahould emulate the Germans and abolish upper speed limits on motorways and multi-lane A roads: there is simply no need for them.