4 ms·
Can you take an ox to Oxford?
- tt_dev 1y agoThe person didn’t actually ride an ox cart anywhere. They looked at the law, saw “motor vehicle” and said that an ox cart doesn’t have a motor so should be fine.
- tylerrobinson 1y agoMust one personally be subject to a law in order to interpret it?
- immibis 1y agoYou must in order to know whether you can do something. The set of things you can do is rarely equal to the set of things the law says you can do.
- fl7305 1y ago> The order defines Class M1 vehicles as “those falling within class M1(a) and class M1(b) as specified in Schedule 1 of the Vehicle Classes Regulations, which refers to another bit of UK legislation. > Oxford’s congestion charge is almost certainly enforced by cameras that scan your number plate. An ox-drawn cart doesn’t have a number plate, so it won’t be charged. Other vehicles like a Renault Twizy or Reliant Robin do have number plates, so they’ll be charged even though they’re technically exempt. So there's not much to it: Plates are scanned -> the number is checked in the vehicle registration database -> not class M1(a) or class M1(b) -> no charge. This goes for ox carts, Twizys and Reliant Robins.
- voidUpdate 1y agoBut if a vehicle is required to have a number plate, and doesn't (potentially an ox-cart), then you won't be charged for the congestion charge, but you will get charged for something entirely different
- swores 1y agoI get that the article is light hearted, but given how easy it is to confirm that yes cameras reading number plates is indeed how the system works, I don’t understand taking the time to write that article and not bothering to go further than guessing “almost certainly enforced by cameras that scan your number plate”.
- orthoxerox 1y agoBut can an ox still ford the Isis at Oxford?
- BoxOfRain 1y agoAs an Oxford native I'd advise that anyone attempting to do this checks Thames Water's sewage dumping schedule beforehand!
- volemo 1y agoDoes Oxford really dump raw sewage into the river? No fancy treatment plants that make the water practically drinkable?
- BoxOfRain 1y agoThe water infrastructure isn't great in the UK (there's a lot of first-mover curses in UK infrastructure generally), specifically there's quite a lot of shared sewage and storm drains. As a result sometimes the local water monopolies end up dumping sewage in the waterways. It'd cost a lot to build enough infrastructure to prevent this, and even if the companies wanted to they tend to get opposed by NIMBYs at every turn. Also you definitely wouldn't want to treat the Isis (or the wider Thames) because it's a full-blown ecosystem, I doubt the fish would appreciate us pumping it full of chemicals as well as sewage.
- thomassmith65 1y agoThe last time I was in Ireland, you'd still occasionally encounter a horse-drawn sulky on the roads. I've no idea if that is also the case in the UK, but a horse is more practical than an ox.
- shevy-java 1y agoI can only speak of London - it is very rare to see oxes there. In fact, in my various visits to this city, I actually never saw an ox on the streets. In Oxford I would expect some, though. Oxford is in Oxfordshire - look how many ox-names there are. It's actually not so far away from London.
- seanhunter 1y agoCan confirm. Used to commute daily through Oxford Circus in the centre of London for work and don’t recall seeing a single ox even there. Therefore since we know there are oxen and they are not in London (even in Oxford circus) they must be in Oxford.
- thunderbong 1y agoClovelly in Cornwall still uses donkeys and sleighs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clovelly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clovelly
- cjs_ac 1y agoWest Oxfordshire District Council is currently trying to find a way to stop a certain demographic from racing ponies and traps on the A40 dual carriageway.
- EliteGadget 1y agoCalling them travellers and/or gypsies (I know they are technically different groups of people but generally the terms are often used interchangeably) is not in itself a slur.
- 1y ago
- BoxOfRain 1y agoYou probably can take an ox to Oxford, there's horses there so I don't see why oxen would be ruled out. What you probably can't do is get an ox through the traffic on Abingdon Road if you're taking it to work.
- shevy-java 1y agoRight - but it is called Oxford, not Horseford. I think names need to own up to themselves from a legal point of view. Oxford must allow for oxes everywhere.
- diogolsq 1y agoWell, the name only points to the fact that there was a ford (a crossing) on the River Thames where oxen used to cross. Nothing suggests it would have been free — in fact, if I owned a ford (a shallow crossing point) running through my property, you can bet I would charge for it.
- herodoturtle 1y agoAn affordable fee I hope.
- TRiG_Ireland 1y agoExcept that it's called the Isis at that point, not the Thames.
- iso1631 1y agoThis legal argument has been tried many times in Penistone
- cjs_ac 1y agoDid we ever find out who is/was the hero of Clitheroe?
- 1y ago
- Etheryte 1y agoThe whole technically zero emissions bit is not really convincing. Cattle makes up a considerable part of global emissions, to the point that there are entire industries focused on bringing that down. Surely the same would apply here?
- im3w1l 1y agoThe thing is it depends on how you define your numbers. Personally I'm a fan of the carbon-above-ground accounting, where if you grow a tree it counts as 0 emissions, and if your burn the tree for fuel it also counts as 0 emissions since there wasn't any new carbon being dug up not was any carbon permanently sequestered. Giving credit for the tree and taking it away when it is burnt is another choice. It shifts the focus to short term effects over long term ones. Which has both pros and cons.
- shevy-java 1y ago> if your burn the tree for fuel it also counts as 0 emissions since there wasn't any new carbon being dug up not was any carbon permanently sequestered. Ok but ... that definition makes not a whole lot of sense, right? The only thing that should be considered is CO2 in the atmosphere / troposphere.
- iso1631 1y agoI think the idea is that the CO2 emitted from burning the tree is the same as is removed by the tree growing, so it cancels out. The tree is effectively a capacitor. Fairly irrelevant when it comes to cattle though, as it's the methane that's the problem there.
- ErroneousBosh 1y agoYou're going to get the methane anyway, even if you let all the plant matter the cows eat sit and rot.
- 1y ago
- shevy-java 1y agoThere should be a legal right to this. After all it is part of the name: Oxford.
- kitd 1y agoCareful. You'll make the residents of Cockermouth nervous.
- messe 1y agoGood luck making it drink.
- Pinus 1y agoMeanwhile, Cambridge has, or at least had a few years ago, at least one combined pedestrian/cattle tunnel (there was a fence down the middle!) under a major road.
- Gormanu 1y agoOxford is heading straight back to the Middle Ages )) Soon we’ll have horse-drawn carriages at the city entrance (if they aren’t there already), shuttling people around instead of taxis. People still want to get from point A to point B quickly — that need isn’t going anywhere.
- ionwake 1y agoIm not sure if this is of interest, but in the city of london (the bit that doesnt even "belong" to the crown ) , you are legally allowed to walk sheep across to it over Tower Bridge if you are a freeman "Gentleman of the City" ( right into the heart of london!). Also in Newcastle Upon Tyne I believe you are allowed to take yoru sheep to eat from the grassland in the city center too.
- foldr 1y ago> (the bit that doesnt even "belong" to the crown ) This is a myth, incidentally.
- seanhunter 1y agoYeah the way this goes is before the monarch enters the city of London, the Lord Mayor of London presents them with a sword as an act of swearing fealty. This ritual has been turned by urban myth into the monarch having to ask permission to enter (which is not true- they don't have to ask permission and they don't ask permission). The crown also doesn't own most of the UK or even London. The monarch is the Duke of Lancaster[1] so if you die without a will in some areas of the North the crown can actually get all your stuff and they own a bunch of castles and estates etc. The Duke of Westminster is one of the UK's richest people as he really does own most of the real estate in Mayfair and Westminster so everyone in a building owned by "Grosvenor Estates" is paying rent to that dude.[2] What is true is if you go to London you can see the boundaries of the city of London which are a set of cast iron dragon markers you see around and about on all streets marking the ancient boundary between Westminster and London.[3] [1] Weirdly this was true even when Queen Elizabeth was the monarch. She was the Duke of Lancaster, not the Duchess. Apparently a female spouse of a Duke is a Duchess but if it's you and you're female then you're the Duke. I don't make the rules. https://www.duchyoflancaster.co.uk/ https://www.duchyoflancaster.co.uk/ [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Grosvenor,_7th_Duke_of_Westminster https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Grosvenor,_7th_Duke_of_We... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon_boundary_mark https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon_boundary_mark
- ionwake 1y agook buddy. "So the reality: it’s a hyper-powerful, weirdly structured local authority with its own capital pile and special roles in policing and court infrastructure, but it does not legally own the country’s wealth or sit outside UK jurisdiction."
- troymc 1y agoI wonder about a Ford F-250 owned by an ox (an ox Ford).
- EliteGadget 1y ago> Surprisingly, UK legislation doesn’t define “mechanically propelled”. Lawyers usually define everything, even words that seem obvious. The terminology is self explanatory. Therefore it does not need any further explanation even for legal purposes. Also generally smart ass workarounds don't work with the magistrate and/or courts.
- another-dave 1y agoYou say that, but "mechanically" in the dictionary gives "In a mechanical manner." "Mechnical" gives "Of or relating to machines or tools." "Machine" gives "A device consisting of fixed and moving parts that modifies mechanical energy and transmits it in a more useful form." and "A system or device for doing work, as an automobile or jackhammer, together with its power source and auxiliary equipment." An ox & cart fits the bill for "machine" with that lens. Not sure it's a smart-alec workaround, any more than the likes of McVities arguing the biscuits vs cakes in court for Jaffa Cakes. Anything not defined is fair game.
- EliteGadget 1y agoIt is perfectly obvious to me and to the vast majority of people. That is why they didn't bother defining it further. > An ox & cart fits the bill for "machine" with that lens No it doesn't. I don't think you thought this through. The cart itself cannot do anything without something else acting on it. An ox is obviously not mechanical (it being an animal) which is what is propelling the cart. Therefore it is not mechanically propelled. If it was a person a bicycle then would be more ambiguity. But it is commonly understood that a bicycle (excluding e-bikes which are mopeds) is not a "motor vehicle", because it is propelled by the rider.
- dredmorbius 1y ago"Propelled" is the other term in that definition. A conveyance might be mechanical in the sense you describe without being propelled by a machine. At the same time, an individual person being blown forward by a sufficiently large fan might meet the qualification of "mechanically propelled" without being in a mechanical conveyance per se. But more generally, a vehicle plus a motor of some description would seem to meet the definition. ICE, steam, electric, spring-wound, whatevs.
- unangst 1y ago“motor vehicle” implies having a motor ;)
- WillAdams 1y agoAmusingly enough, a text by J.R.R. Tolkien, (Oxford Don who wrote some books which the _hoi polloi_ seem fascinated with) which decries the industrialization of Oxford has just been published: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/232514895-the-bovadium-fragments https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/232514895-the-bovadium-f... which is a hoot, esp. when paired w/ his _Mr. Bliss_.
- 1970-01-01 1y agoOxen are not zero emissions. If they were, we would still be using them.
- hagbard_c 1y agoThey are circular though and with that should count as zero-emission: 1: steer calf is born from cow 2: calf gets his goolies cut off turning him into an ox 3: ox eats grass, burps and farts and shits it out on both ends. Some of his shit ends up as fertiliser for the grass he or one of his fellow bovines eat 4: eventually ox gets eaten The input: grass -> cow -> oxen The output: oxen -> shit -> grass From grass they came, to grass they return. If someone were to be so kind as to shrink bovines down to, say, bumblebee-size it would be easy to do an experiment with that in one of those glass-sphere closed ecosystems. I'm pretty sure they'd thrive.
- 1970-01-01 1y agoThe methane they burp/fart (output) is a massive greenhouse gas and isn't returned until 100 years after their death.
- hagbard_c 1y agoBovines of all sorts have been (mostly) burping and (sometimes) farting methane since they decided to become ruminants. Imagine the methane produced by the massive herds of bison roaming the plains before they were decimated. Earth abides, still.
- 1970-01-01 1y agoI think you lost the point that a mass adoption of bovine as transportation would accelate the greenhouse effect.
- thumbsup-_- 1y agoSomeone should try pulling a ford with an Ox in OxFord.
- jojomodding 1y agoI was expecting this article to be about wading through the River Thames with an ox. In order words, making the ox ford the river.
- Ancapistani 1y agoI read the article, so I realize this is only relevant to the title… but others might find it amusing. I recently found out that my state university has livestock stalls for rent for student use. My daughter is considering attended and asked if she could take her sow with her. She said they didn’t even react like it was an uncommon request!