If there was a law firm that specialised in defending doctors and surgeons who were facing charges of medical malpractise, would we happily let taxis be mobile billboards for them?
If there was a law firm whose gig was food vendors who’d poisoned their clientele, would it be ‘just the done thing’ for their website to have page after page of testimonials from ropy burger vans and curry houses of ill repute, all showering them with praise for the fact they could still sell unspecified meats with exotic and glamorous bacterial residents?
If, immediately under the harrowing RPSCA adverts of neglected pets, there was an advert saying “Is that your old dog just up there? We can let you be allowed to own another!” would that paper’s name be any better than the Sun’s in Liverpool?
I will hazard a guess that you agree with me that the answer to all of the above is a resounding negative. And yet, the firms that enable re-offending of motoring offences haven’t caused any outcry of which I am aware. Unless you count this blog, but I’m too lazy to blog enough to get any momentum of readership going, so it doesn’t count.