Q
Quote Originally Posted by xsnaggle View Post
But if you went to court how would the judiciary interpret local??
I recall many years ago when a driver appealed his conviction for hitting a cyclist who he said had changed direction. The cyclist said he had wobbled even though he was several feet from the car before he changed course. Sitting in the high court of appeal Lord Chief justice Parker ruled that "The cyclist is entitled to his wobble" When asked what constituted the difference between a wobble and a change of direction he declined to answer. The entitlement to a wobble was then enshrined in case law.
I think 'local' may suffer the same fate. I also believe it is vague deliberately.
How can somewhere about forty miles away be interpreted as local?