I advocate free speech.... Now shut up!

The irony involved in the recent events with one Catriona Stewart and the editor at The Herald Scotland, is nigh on unbelievable.

I will start my latest rant with the news that in response to the ridiculous article written by Ms Stewart, and subsequently published by The Herald, being ridiculed by the public in mass, the editor made a statement saying, while he didn't agree with the article, he advocates free speech. This ironically was around the time that comments on the original article were deleted, and all future comments prevented. If that's not a good show of free speech, I don't know what it.

And by free speech I mean, free speech for the media, who feel they have the right to make outrageous comments about certain categories of society, incite acts of vandalism towards owners of expensive cars, and defend themselves with vague off point comments. And of course when it all gets a little too real world for them, they just block you from the conversation, be it on Twitter, or by turning off comments to an article.

In a twist of irony, it would seem a few months back Ms Stewart herself was the victim to her car being damaged in a supermarket car park. This of course was different, it was a car being driven at breakneck speeds, dangerously reversed in the car park. When the damage occurred, the driver of the other recklessly driven vehicle got out and said "its OK" or words to that effect. This alone would suggest the damage was minimal. Being that it was a car reversing would limit the speed somewhat too. But no, not according to the victim of the episode, Ms Stewart. No you had to be there to see it. It was dangerous driving, it was bad, it was wrong, she was a victim. Amazing how things change when the boot is on the other foot, eh!

A number of replies and tweets from the paper all indicate that there is little support for the piece within the upper echelons of the organisation. With most comments saying how it is not a shared opinion. One even commenting that as the editor he does not agree with the piece, but it wasn't on his watch, so its nothing to do with him. Sod responsibility and morals right, "ain't my fault" works every time.

Further questioning on the piece has lead to another gem, this time Ms Stewart passing the buck. You see the original seemed to have a gripe with Audi. In fact it was name dropped a few times in a couple of sentences. I can almost see her punching the four letters on the keyboard each time she typed it. Such focused hatred. Maybe you should speak to someone about that.

I often feel like keying swanky cars. I particularly feel like keying Audis.
One day someone will buy an Audi and decide to be the one person to change the reputation of Audi drivers. They'll drive their Audi and they'll be a decent guy.

That's right, get it off your chest now.
Now the problem was, Audi is quite a big company, and writing hateful things about a company the size of VAG is likely to quite quickly land you in trouble. So a copy reader was kind enough to look the article over, find the bit that would land them in deep do-do, and leave in the remainder of the nutty mindless rant. Of course, Ms Stewart is quick to point out that it wasn't her, it was the copy reader who made the changes from Audi to performance-car. I wonder how much more she would suggest was re-written, and how little is actually her doing. Hey I bet she doesn't even have an issue with people of better means than her own.

Following my first blog on this matter, which I would like to thank people for taking the time to read and share, I have actively been using Twitter to try and get some answers on her deluded approach to vandalism of cars. This, along with a little mocking of her car park accident, and re tweeting of other insightful tweets, landed me.... SILENCED ! That's right people, I have been not only muted but blocked from her Twitter now. As I believe have a whole host of other people who have also tried to engage with her about the matter.

All the while, as comments are disabled, twitter feed blocked, and comments on other mediums (like this one) ignored. The story remains front and centre. Editors disagree with the story, public figures in the motoring world have questioned the intentions of the piece, hell even Hackney Police have commented with a very simple "Wow, speechless" about the matter.
But we forget (OK some have pointed it out already on forums), this is the media we are talking about, and even more importantly the online media. For every person who clicks on the story, which I might add is close to going viral now, its a click through, a hit on their website, and looks amazing when they sell their next advertising spot.
So what was an outrageous story, written by an attention seeking, Hopkins wannabee nut job, has turned into something as simple as click bait now.

Anyone who works in the public eye knows they are only as good as their last piece or act. A massive history of great reporting can be destroyed by a single mindless piece with an agenda (like this one). I have no doubt Ms Stewart was employed based on fantastic qualifications and reporting abilities. None of which would appear to have been present when this last piece was written.
Attention is attention right, any press is good press, and all that. A name not to be forgotten. But its the title that goes next to the name that is important, not just having one. And when it is Catriona Steward - Imbecile Reporter, I would not consider it a great one.
There are plenty of examples in history to relate to.

In short, dear Herald, you have had your fun, five minutes of fame, now its time for the story to go. It's hate filled, its immoral, and its glorifying illegal activities.

I would of course love to see a full, official response to the article, hey maybe even reply on here. I promise not to turn off comments ;)

That's me for now. Only other thing to say is I really do hope the owner of the Aston who was the victim of a crime, and has been made out to be some arrogant, dangerous driving, idiot here, pursues a complaint against the writer and organisation for deformation of character, and somehow making out that he deserved the damage, just for owning a car.

One more thing Ms Stewart... Just an idea. If you feel so strongly  that his actions deserve a medal, and you really believe that keying expensive cars is the right way to go. When the man you admire so much, dear Gary, is next in court, why don't you offer yourself as a character witness, and tell a judge how you feel. I dare ya!

Dear Catriona Stewart and Herald Scotland...

Firstly may I apologise for the poor penmanship and structure of this open letter. I left school before taking any exams, and am therefore illiterate, uneducated and a smear on society. (Lets get the generalisations out of the way early on, eh!)

Now, lets get to the point of this blog entry.
Mid August some stills, and then a video of a man vandalising a car in a supermarket car park went viral. 48 year old Gary Brissett, while out on a walk with his child in a buggy, had taken it upon himself to cause £7,000 of damage to a parked Aston Martin. The reason for this, still unknown as he has not disclosed it in his court appearance to date.

The reason SO many were taken aback by this action varies from social group to social group. There are car enthusiasts who appreciate the beauty of the car,  and craftsmanship which goes into every vehicle. There are people who are sick of mindless idiots causing damage to cars, and forcing their insurance premiums up. Then of course there is the majority. Law abiding citizens of the country, with morals and who know right from wrong.

On the flipside you have your eco-loving, mindless, jealous, judgemental fools who feel they can pigeonhole people, and build up a non-existent social structure. Drawing divides, makings judgements on people based on their choice of clothing, food, or transport. I would firmly put Ms Stewart into the latter. (You know what, you are right, it feels good to judge!)

So, somewhere in your deluded mind, while viewing the world through your eco-green coloured glasses, you decided that because a man decided to buy an expensive car, he deserved to fall victim to every narrow-minded vandal that passes by the car. How dare he work hard for a living and treat himself to a material item. How dare he be individual and stand out from the crowd. In fact, there lays the first issue. I assume you have done your research on this, and are sure this car is indeed an outright purchase, and not a company lease, private lease, a very expensive credit agreement?

You applaud and celebrate a criminal act, but then on Twitter claim you don't condone or encourage the action. All while saying "I often feel like keying swanky cars. I particularly feel like keying performance-cars". If nothing else, you glorify the act, and suggest it is rational to want to cause damage to someone else's property, based on your preconceived judgements of the person.

We are in agreement at one point, and that is that there are some people out there who drive like utter arseholes. However to suggest that either it is only performance car drivers, or that ALL performance car drivers fall into this pigeonhole of yours is ludicrous to the extreme. Some of the most horrific high speed accidents in the UK involve non performance cars. In fact I would go as far as to say that had some of the cars involved in some of these accidents had the equipment of a performance car, they may have been able to stop or turn, rather than crashing. When the arse biscuit behind the wheel decided he was a racing driver for the day.

Judging someone simply on a vehicle they drive, while being somewhat uneducated on the whole automotive world (which I will hazard a guess you are) is plain pathetic. To then play judge and jury on a high profile criminal matter, belittle the work done by the Metropolitan Police in finding Mr Brissett. Giving your character reference to the courts suggesting imprisoning poor nasty little Gary will be bad for his child, well that bit is just laughable. Are you familiar with the phrase "roll model"? Or do you think by putting up the hood on the buggy, Mr Brissett was shielding his child from the act, and would never encourage such behaviour from his children as they grow?

Speaking of Mr Brissett and his buggy. Let us focus on that for a moment. Now, I am a little out of touch with fashion in both clothing and baby products, but am reliably informed that Gary was in no way dressed in rags, and the illusive buggy which was used to shield the child from his actions, is in fact close to £1,000 in value.
Now, taking the buggy for an example. Am I to assume by you fussy judgemental logic, that a person of lesser stature is well within their rights to put a slash down the side of the unoccupied buggy, based on someone daring to have such a materialistic item? Oh of course, that's right. On Twitter when asked about similar actions based on spending obnoxious amounts of money on an item, deserving it to be vandalised, you switched back to the "boy-racer" argument.

So which is it? Do people who drive like prize idiots on the public road deserve to have their car vandalised, or do people who work hard in life and reward themselves with a nice car deserve to have their cars wrecked?

The whole reason this case gained such public support isn't because it was the middle classes rising up against the social scum of urban society. If you are not familiar with London streets, inner and outer, there are plenty of cars which are priced £50k and up, sports car, luxury cars, they are all there. Not a rare nor eye catching sight.
No, the reason it got the support it did, was because a nasty spiteful little piece of work, was caught bang to rights, lining up the offence, preparing for it, and carrying it out. All in glorious HD thanks to modern tech and dash cams. For the majority of people, actually watching someone carry out such an act is almost sickening. It angers people to see someone  who believes they can judge someone, and in turn punish someone.

Suggesting the choice of car is in some way making up for a shortfall in his manhood. How very 1970's of you. Women drive Aston Martin's too you know. As well as Bentley's, Porsche's and other expensive cars. What do the cars say about these women? They have loose vagina's and a mono-brow? And by driving one it somehow makes us overlook this issues with them.
Not everyone is quite as judgemental as you think they are. Sure we all make brash judgements on some people who thrust themselves to our attention. Take you for example. I would guess that 90% of people who read your article think you are a lonely, bitter, electric car driving, cat loving, readymeal eating, Katie Hopkins wannabee,  eco-loony. Probably all wrong, but hey, it's fun to judge, right?

Now some facts. You say you can't spend more on a car than a house. Well again. This is London, if you can find houses for under £100,000 which are habitable, I suggest you snap them up now, as there has clearly been a mistake in its pricing.
Racing along suburban streets, again, a bit of a myth really. With speed humps and traffic calming increasing at a rapid rate, the idea of speeding around London is a thing of the past. Especially given the traffic. Sure it clears up and there is the odd occasional chance to squirt it, but that's hardly an everyday thing. Of course, it is easy to forget, which the UK's rich racing heritage, just how many race tracks and airfields there are to use these high-performance penis extensions on.

You don't get boy racers in a Fiat 500.. Nope, you are right, because they are girls cars! (Sorry I got all judgemental again there. Wow it really gets a hold of you doesn't it!)
The Fiat 500 Abarth, with 160bhp, 0-60 in the mid 7's, top speed of 130mph (almost double the UK limit) and coughing out 155g/km Hmmm no potential to be an arse biscuit in that now is there?

Your summary will draw my blog to a neat close I think. Suggesting that "ostentatious cars" are somehow a symbol of all that is wrong in the country. Forming an opinion on someone based on the car they drive, I would argue, is far worse.
It is in fact those who feel they can pre-judge someone, and understand everything there is to know about someone. Their wealth, morals, social position, purely based on what car they drive. THAT is where things go wrong. Not giving people a chance, taking no interest in a person, but merely the material objects which surround them. Deciding in a split second that you indeed stand on the moral high ground. My god, the irony is all too much.

Without knowing a single thing about someone, you have decided they because of the car they drive, they are beneath you, and idiots like Mr Brissett should take the law into their own hands, and serve a sentence on said person. To write such a piece, and for the media outlet to then publish it simply perpetuates everything that is wrong with this country. Not an economic divide with the wealthy brushing away the poor and working class. But narrow minded, big mouthed idiots with a little bit of an audience, inciting others in to acts of stupidity, while banging the social divide, tax the rich drum.

Take a moment longer to know someone, before judging them. A little consideration goes a long way.

Yours sincerely

Smart Car driving wanker.