Unashamedly lifted from Gadget's blog, here is a video posted on YouTube from a lady who thinks she was unfairly arrested after speeding.
Skip the intro blarney and start it at 4:42 if you like.
Even at my most grumpy I think I'd have seen which way the wind was blowing if I were in this situation.
www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ELxWnstCJOU#!
|
|
Wolfie(ette) Smith lives - "I got my Mum to help me...." A real badass anarchist.
Last edited by: R.P. on Fri 4 May 12 at 09:15
|
|
All the stuff she was quoting, was she right? And did she successfully defend the case at court and get off?
|
|
In fairness it only happened on 30 April .....
|
What a horrible obnoxious woman.Speeding over 40 mph in a 30 zone is totally irresponsible.All the quotes she was making are totally unfounded and she deserves everything she gets.
The polices job is hard enough without silly little women thinking that they know the law.The policeman in the video was well in his rights to arrest her and i would have done the same if i had been in his shoes.
|
It will be very interesting to see what happens!
Someone saying to a police officer "You can't arrest me, I've done nothing wrong" doesn't, in my limited experience, give one justification for resisting arrest.
I thought the copper kept his cool very well. I not sure what I would have done if someone was continually interrupting me while holding a video camera in my face.
Does anybody know where this happened? Is it in the local rag?
Edit. Just realised it was East Sussex.
Last edited by: Duncan on Fri 4 May 12 at 10:02
|
|
The Woman is right in Law.
|
I think her conduct gave the copper reasonable suspicion to believe that a crime - possibly speeding, possibly something else - may have been committed or was about to be.
Stupid bint.
|
|
The arrest is under SOCAP 2006 - replacing the old S25 PACE general arrest powers.
|
|
I suspect this woman is going to have a fair bit of conflict in her life.
|
|
Maritime Law?? - she needs to eat less "Admirals Pie" and more "Humble Pie"!
|
10 out of 10 to the Bobby for professionalism.
Clearly she will not have a Driving Licence or Insurance, claim benefits, enjoy the privileges of the NHS etc - all catered for under Statute Law.
The reaction of the witness was not untypical and many bar room stories are based on those type of accounts which tend to criticise the Police.
|
>>>10 out of 10 to the Bobby for professionalism.
Agreed.
In some other places it would be the tazer or baton before it got that far!
|
The rant from the woman seems to stem from the beliefs of the "British Constitution Group", which she mentions in responding to comments on you-tube. Link to a commentary on the BCG activities: tinyurl.com/4j2zc3z
Wonder if she thinks she's also exempt from insuring her vehicle etc?
|
>> Dozy bint.
>>
Objection, your honour!
tinyurl.com/w89bc
|
overruled !
please continue
|
The British Constitution Group
link thereto:-
www.thebcgroup.org.uk/
|
|
She's getting all sorts of derogatory comments on here, yet "Mr. Loophole" manages to find the inadequate way law is applied to roads/drivers and manages to deal with it in a manner for his clients that doesn't appear to covet the same abuse. If there are genuine loopholes in the Acts applied in her case, then good luck to her. Maybe things need to be tightened up. Though I do agree the PC involved acted in a very mature manner, though he look flustered when she countered his spiele.
|
This is one (of many) reasons I could never be a police officer. I couldn't deal with people like this without getting angry.
Wonder if she has a roadworthy car with MOT, tax, and insurance? After all, those are enforced by 'Acts' too.
I would have actually laughed if she had been CS sprayed and truncheoned to the ground. Like I said, I have the wrong temperament to be a copper. :-)
|
|
I am quick tempered but I wouldn't have slong her over the car bonnet.Not my style.
|
I am actually really laid back most ofthe time. I just find people like this who think they somehow can opt out of the inconvenient / expensive aspects of society to be incredibly annoying.
I bet she's first in the queue for NHS treatment.
|
The young woman seems to be in thrall to a new group of swivel-eyed nationalist theologians... the whole demeanour has a strange similarity to the attitude of eccentric minority religious cults.
I think the young copper found her funny. A bit annoying but not seriously anti-social like a drunk or violent person. One imagines the fuzz get a fair amount of that sort of thing.
She of course will now have time to consider the wisdom of making a mountain out of a molehill. 40 in a 30 isn't usually dangerous and often goes no further than a scolding.
She did look a bit pleased with herself, not for any reason that seemed obvious to me.
|
|
What a stupid tart. She knows nothing and spouts crap.
|
>> She knows nothing
She knows a lot. A lot of ill-digested visionary legalist autodidact crap that isn't worth even a second glance. Like being a Mormon theologian for example.
|
>> She knows a lot.
>>
She knows very little. What she was trying to state was utter piffle. She may even be suffering from some form of mental illness.
|
Yeah, that has just triggered a line of thought and curiousity WP. I really do hope you don't mind me asking?
But, as a layman, so to speak, I would at least imagine potential arrestees might fall into 3 categories. As in "yeah, you're right I did it, do what you need to do", or "I'm gonna argue for a bit but we both know what's next" or I'm gonna scream all the way|"
But when faced with someone who is not just agitated but clearly disturbed, what on earth do do ?
|
>> She knows very little.
No FFS! She knows plenty, but it's valueless rubbish.
Why don't people understand this phenomenon? Not all learning is equal. That's what makes it possible for people like this woman to come on strong.
>> 'Section them'.
Steady on Rob. You want to weigh down the loony services with mere uneducated idiots? Have a sense of proportion.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Fri 4 May 12 at 20:46
|
|
Should have added a smiley AC !
|
|
She should be sectioned alright, in 4. And Hung, and drawn.
Last edited by: Zero on Fri 4 May 12 at 21:06
|
sheesh - just read some of the other threadson that forum, and they all seem to be along the same theme: "Hi. I broke the law/didn't pay my debts, and how outrageous that the authorities/creditor actually get upset with me. Now, who do i wriggle out of this?"
|
>> She's getting all sorts of derogatory comments on here, yet "Mr. Loophole" manages to find
>> the inadequate way law is applied to roads/drivers and manages to deal with it in
>> a manner for his clients that doesn't appear to covet the same abuse. If there
>> are genuine loopholes in the Acts applied in her case, then good luck to her.
>> Maybe things need to be tightened up. Though I do agree the PC involved acted
>> in a very mature manner, though he look flustered when she countered his spiele.
Mr Loophole would not rant against the authorities in such a manner. He plays their game, according to their rules, although they might not have intended them to be used in such a manner. This woman is a 25 carat copper bottomed nut job. The copper deserves praise for a restrained manner. Being a copper really is partly social work! I like the way he smirks and looks bemused when she refers to admiralty law. He probably has reason to suspect that she might be on drugs, and driving under the influence is a crime, so there are many reasons to arrest her. As well as the fact that she is best placed in a dark cell for a long time ...
|
>> I suspect this woman is going to have a fair bit of conflict in her
>> life.
:) Hee hee.
|
What a nuttter. If I was the cop too I would have given the car a full check over. I am sure a 14 year old CInquencto is going to have some issues with it!
What is wrong with a good sorry copper, I was speeding, I admit it. I was stupid, I will pay the fine. Imagine being married to a person like that! [the woman in the video that is]
Last edited by: RattleandSmoke on Sat 5 May 12 at 12:52
|
A little too much conformity, and condemnation of non-conformists, here for my liking.
Just because a authority figure tells you that the law is X, doesn't necessarily mean that its true, and that you shouldn't question it.
It was only a few weeks ago that I saw a video (maybe posted here) where a PCSO and a couple of police officers tried telling an activist that she couldn't film in a public place, and started trying to play the "terrorism" card.
In that case the activist was right, and in this case it seems very likely that the woman was completely wrong.
So, in the case of the activist should she have just said "yes officer, sorry officer" and made sure that she passed the "attitude test"? No, absolutely not.
So, I'm all for challenging what authority figures say and do, if you genuinely believe that it is wrong.
You should really just make sure you have your facts right first!
With regards to the police officer in this case, I think he did very well. I have a lot of respect for police officers who can remain composed, yet firm, and go about the job professional including, within reason, letting people have their say (misguided as it may be).
I can't stand it when they try to do otherwise.
|
I'd do someone the courtesy of listening to any reasoned argument, and they may have a point.
However when someone shoves a camera in your face and does not draw breath to give you the opportunity of giving your side, continually interrupts, challenges everything and will not listen then there is only one solution and that's the way it went.
Single cause obsessives can be extremely hard work.
Last edited by: Fullchat on Sat 5 May 12 at 13:58
|
>> However when someone shoves a camera in your face and does not draw breath to
>> give you the opportunity of giving your side, continually interrupts, challenges everything and will not
>> listen then there is only one solution and that's the way it went.
Yes, she could have conducted herself better, but then it's a high pressure situation for a member of the public who may never have spoken to the police before and the police officer is the experienced professional in these situations, so the onus is really on him to keep control and have a bit of patience. Which I think he did in this case.
I could be misreading the situation, but it didn't seem to me that he nicked her because of her conduct, rather that he had to because she wouldn't provide her details and accept the FPN.
Even if she had behaved "better", I think that the outcome would have been the same, if she had still refused to give her details and accept the FPN.
I may well be wrong there, but that is my reading of the situation.
|
I was stopped for taking pictures in the dock lands area with my old FZ7. I ended up having to give my details to the PCSO and I was annoyed about it, but I didn't vent my anger on her. I just wrote a strong letter of complaint to to the Metropolitan police, not about the PSCO as such but at who ever gave her those instructions.
I got a nice letter back apologising and was told all the PSCOs have now been instructed that photography is allowed in the Docklands area.
I remember writing a thread about the ordeal at the time. But I was perfectly civil with the PCSO who stopped me. If I had given a load of attitude I can only imagine it would have made things far worse.
|
SS your reading of the situation is correct. The Officer did try and explain why she could be arrested if she failed to give details but she just kept on ranting. She was not prepared to listen. I have regularly come across people who try and bully you, by displaying outrage or verbal onslaught, into either making a total hash of process or in the hope of letting them go.
It can be a steep learning curve for the newbie but you soon learn how to deal with them. Knowledge is power.
An interesting model is Betaris Box which is how attitudes and behaviours between two factions interact with each other. The model is behind 'The Attitude Test'
Last edited by: Fullchat on Sat 5 May 12 at 15:06
|
>> I have regularly come across people who try
>> and bully you, by displaying outrage or verbal onslaught, into either making a total hash
>> of process or in the hope of letting them go.
I'm sure that's very common. I'm sure it can be difficult to judge whether somebody is legitimately trying to challenge (whether or not they are correct), and when there are just hoping to make such a fuss as to deter the officer from proceeding.
As you say, if the officer knows their stuff, then can give somebody a reasonable hearing, without been derailed by nonsense.
>> An interesting model is Betaris Box which is how attitudes and behaviours between two factions
>> interact with each other. The model is behind 'The Attitude Test'
Thanks. I've not heard of that before. I googled it and found this
www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newCS_82.htm
I'll have a read later when I get a bit of time.
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Sat 5 May 12 at 16:09
|
A lot of it is a taking control issue. Some members of the public think that by taking control, by whatever means, will allow them to dictate the end result.
So by being a loud mouthed fool, constantly over talking, never listening, feigning outrage or getting yourself worked up, so the outrage becomes real...etc..will allow you to get your own way. Any officer with a modicum of experience will see it for what it is....and carry on as they were.
By the time i retired i'd exhausted my patience on such things. I'd instruct my staff to give them one warning then 'bring them in', couldn't be bothered to listen to it any more. Funny thing was, most folk would pick up on the fact that someone experienced had lost their patience and wasn't going to take any crap....and they'd then comply. Wish i'd done that years before.
|
Yup, keep calm and professional and let them bluster. They get even more annoyed if there's no reaction.
40 years ago, she'd have got a slap at the nick...more than likely from the duty policewoman.
I remember one snotty, posh, arrogant student refusing to speak anything but French at the charge office counter. The ' linguistic headphones ' applied to his ears soon got him back to his native tongue ! Not me your honour !
Ted
|
|
I like Humph's 3 types of arrested person. Very accurate.
|
I have been stoped a few times for speeding always on the Motorway.
Never argued with the coppers didn't see the point.I knew I was driving to fast and they always wished me a safety journey home.I didn't mind the fine its the three points what hurts.>:)
|
>> I could be misreading the situation, but it didn't seem to me that he nicked
>> her because of her conduct, rather that he had to because she wouldn't provide her
>> details and accept the FPN.
>>
>> Even if she had behaved "better", I think that the outcome would have been the
>> same, if she had still refused to give her details and accept the FPN.
>>
>> I may well be wrong there, but that is my reading of the situation.
You are right. In the event of a suspected offence, if the policeman on scene can not verify the suspects identity, you get arrested and taken to the nick. The copper has no choice or leeway in the situation, and being nicked these days means being cuffed, (for the coppers safety) and is probably going to lead to DNA and prints taken.
HAd she provided details, she would have been been given a ticket for the FP30 offence, and been on her way, 3 points and 60 quid lighter at some point in the future.
As it was she asked for, and got, the downward spiral.
Had it been me, I could probably have wormed my way out of the ticket.
Last edited by: Zero on Sat 5 May 12 at 18:22
|
>> Had it been me, I could probably have wormed my way out of the ticket.
Yes. Look abashed and flutter your eyelashes prettily and the copper might easily just urge you to mind how you go.
It would have been even easier for this woman than for Zero, had it not been for her demented attitude to the police.
|
|
I have tryed fluttering my eyelashes A.C.didn't work..:)
|
|
I feel sorry for her. She's obviously swallowed this Freewoman nonsense and the associated script. She's run into conflict with the Police, spouted her nonsense at them, had her collar felt and now seems to be posting almost desperately for help. Seems its going viral in a way as well. If she is "vulnerable" might cause her further pain.
|
>> If she is "vulnerable" might cause her further pain.
That's a point Rob. She didn't look it to me but I'm no expert.
My impression though is that there are others with these views, that it's a sort of cult. She may be being egged on.
|
All that 'I am an anarchist' nonsense tends to pale into insignificance once the cell door slams.
Still having a good giggle at the tpuc site - 'I was nicked with 1kg of cannabis. Not fair!" or 'nicked for riding my bike through a readv light. But I was in a hurry!'
wasters.
|
Seen 'em all over the years. Every conceivable excuse. We were asked to access some YT footage from "Freeman" cult when on the second phase of the census - there were/are clips of confrontations with Census collectors - some rather funny ones actually, some quite sad specimens (from the ONS) - some of the householders were quite clearly in Social Housing - I remember wondering at the time how they reconcile that with their beliefs. It reminded me very much of this:-
www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAaWvVFERVA
As usual Monty Python were there first.
|
>> some of the householders were quite clearly in Social
>> Housing
One wonders how some of them can weigh up their 'beliefs' with taking the benefits they no doubt grab every week...
|
|
In my line of work I've encountered plenty of people who see themselves and indeed are at least temporarily seen by some others as alternative and interesting. The reality is most of them turn out to be simply dysfunctional and ultimately pretty boring. Maybe someone should get her a cat to look after or something.
|
|
Don't many of society's dysfunctional and boring end up frequenting intern..... hang on!
|
|
Yeah, the very worse end up posting videos on Youtu......... OH!
|
|
Or hanging around chat rooms at all hours of the.........Ahh !
|
I think I've only ever 'lost it' once with the BIBs once.
I was stopped for the second time one evening within a couple of miles. I got out ranting about the journey was going to take me all night at this rate when it was pointed out I had a rear light out. They were able to confirm over the radio it had been OK a couple of miles ago.
They understood my frustration, as I understood their reason for stopping me and that there was no way I could have known about the light.
We parted amicably (and I fixed the light that evening).
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 11 May 12 at 00:47
|
When you are a 19 year old lad in the 70's, running around in nearly new Ford Capris, late at night, you get used, really used, to a pull. Every night, sometimes twice a night, was common.
I have done some damn silly things, a lot of them seen by the old bill, and I have been able to talk my way out of all of them.
Except the time I raced a couple of plain clothes bill at 60 mph in a 30 mph limit. Mother Theresa delivering the baby jesus couldn't have talked her way out of that one.
|
|
Thinking about only been stopped 3 times ever. Once overtaking a Police car on my little Honda 250N just off the M4 in a 40 - I fluttered my eye-lashes and got off with it (around 1982 ?). Sort of stopped - in a car must have been around 94/5 for having front fogs on (I was sneered at through a half open window) - Stopped and booked for er..making progress on the M6 on the way to Heysham and the TT - fixer for an entirely fair 110mph (again on a bike) - must have been about 1987 or 8....if I'd have been summoned which they were perfectly entitled to do it would have been a potential disqualification....
|
>>if I'd have been summoned which they were perfectly entitled to do it would have been a potential disqualification....
One of my friends was pulled over on the M73 doing over the ton. According to my friend the PCs said they would charge him at 84mph so they could give a FP notice, as otherwise it would be a court effort (presuming the PCs didn't want the added hassle).
Not sure if that story was 100% true or if it was embellished - would any of our resident BIBs have done that?
|
|
I'd like to think it was down to the "attitude" tried the fluttery eyelashes thing but I think it was pretty common practice in those days - EFP ticket and "end of" so to speak, Officer gets a ticket, biker heaves sigh of relief, everyone's happy.
|
The young get pulled disproportionately often, both in or on vehicles and on foot. Stands to reason. Just for a start they are more likely to draw attention to themselves with some piece of harmlessly-intended, as a rule, extravagant behaviour.
If the young are drunk or wrought up when pulled, given that they are more volatile than their elders, the attitude test failure rate can be quite high. I speak from experience, sometimes verging on the bitter. All my own fault of course. Lost in the mists of time now thank goodness. Butter hasn't melted in my mouth for decades.
However, I've never tried to refute the legitimacy of the modern legal system by arguing angrily with a front-line copper when I've been caught speeding a bit. Never occurred to me to do that. Howling imprecations is more my speed.
|
I just don't get it - why the vile, nasty, personal attacks posted about this woman, both on her youtube link as well as here?
|
|
The video has now been made private so you cannot view it any more.
|
In a nutshell, John, because she is a halfwitted bint who thinks that hiding behind some obscure pseudo-legal nonsense will exonerate her from the fact that she was driving at 40-something in a 30 zone.
|
>> In a nutshell, John, because she is a halfwitted bint who thinks that hiding behind
>> some obscure pseudo-legal nonsense will exonerate her from the fact that she was driving at
>> 40-something in a 30 zone.
>>
+1
....and, she unnecessarily took an expensive resource off the road for hours....when that taxpayers resource could have been addressing other issues.
|
>> +1
>> ....and, she unnecessarily took an expensive resource off the road for hours....when that taxpayers resource could have been addressing other issues.
>>
Westpig, we again are reading from the same page.
I recall a few years back when I posted about my night in the cells after a DUI, and many members wrote how refreshing it was that somebody had actually put their hand up and said 'It's a fair cop!', as opposed to 'how do I get out of this, then?'
It appears that the whole world has gone blame-crazy, and anti-authoritarian, and feel sweet FA that their actions may have a negative outcome on other people. This may sound Colonel Blimpish, but my observations are that idiots in the general population couldn't give a damn any more.
Local examples: Idiots NOT getting out of the way of police cars/fire engines/ambulances. Is this not common sense?
Idiots graffiti-ing road signs. Hold on, was THAT a sign saying STOP that I didn't see?
Morons trying to 'run interference' on the police trying to do their job at a crime.
I despair, I really do.
|
>> It appears that the whole world has gone blame-crazy, and anti-authoritarian, and feel sweet FA
>> that their actions may have a negative outcome on other people. This may sound Colonel
>> Blimpish, but my observations are that idiots in the general population couldn't give a damn
>> any more.
>> Local examples: Idiots NOT getting out of the way of police cars/fire engines/ambulances. Is this
>> not common sense?
>> Idiots graffiti-ing road signs. Hold on, was THAT a sign saying STOP that I didn't
>> see?
>> Morons trying to 'run interference' on the police trying to do their job at a
>> crime.
I think it's an unfortunate consequence of freedom. A more educated, affluent, free society has the down side of breeding a load more clever dicks who think that they know best, on all occasions.... and can have their say whatever the circumstances.
There obviously has to be a balance....although as i don't want to lose my freedoms, it looks like we'll have to put up with it.
|
There have always been clever dicks.
Its also a natural consequence of authority trying to impose much more onerous rules, regulations, do's and don'ts upon us, usually financially motivated,
Speed cameras, banning access to web sites for example. Its little wonder they are fostering a lawless society.
|
"There have always been clever dicks"
How very true!
|
>> I think it's an unfortunate consequence of freedom. A more educated, affluent, free society
>> has the down side of breeding a load more clever dicks who think that they
>> know best, on all occasions.... and can have their say whatever the circumstances.
>>
>> There obviously has to be a balance....although as i don't want to lose my freedoms,
>> it looks like we'll have to put up with it.
Indeed. And a society that is more tolerant, and which has a safety net in the form of the welfare state, which allows some people to become political activists at our expense. Some people seem to think they have entitlements and no responsibilities. As you indicate, perhaps this is the price of freedom.
|
I wasn't vile or nasty, merely factually descriptive.
Mind she has finally realised what a pickle she is in, and someone has advised her that leaving the video in place is not in the best interests of her defence.
|
>> Mind she has finally realised what a pickle she is in, and someone has advised
>> her that leaving the video in place is not in the best interests of her
>> defence.
If she is to appear in court, then this could be contempt of court, or whatever the phrase is. In other words, she could be committing a further crime.
|
|
Not in her little world of Common Law...
|
...then this could be contempt of court...
Contempt of court is a phrase - rather like health and safety - which is bandied about but rarely used correctly.
There is no contempt here, posting a video of your encounter with a copper is not an offence or contempt of anything.
What court is there to be in contempt of?
|
>> ...then this could be contempt of court...
>>
>> Contempt of court is a phrase - rather like health and safety - which is
>> bandied about but rarely used correctly.
>>
>> There is no contempt here, posting a video of your encounter with a copper is
>> not an offence or contempt of anything.
>>
>> What court is there to be in contempt of?
>>
With proceedings either active or imminent 'published' comment might be risky though?
|
...With proceedings either active or imminent 'published' comment might be risky though?...
Not at such an early stage.
The big risk is an imminent, or even more so, a proceeding jury trial.
I don't know what this woman's been charged with, but drink driving, speeding, obstruct or assault PC are all summary only, so it isn't going to see a jury.
A magistrates' bench or district judge is deemed to be harder to prejudice than a juror, although it can be done.
|
>> ...With proceedings either active or imminent 'published' comment might be risky though?...
>>
>> Not at such an early stage.
>>
According to the link I posted:
"Proceedings become active when there's an arrest, oral charge, issue of a warrant, or a summons."
For all I know you might be correct that for a relatively minor offence a You Tube video would be seen as irrelevant.
Are you a legal professional, such as a criminal lawyer?
|
...Are you a legal professional, such as a criminal lawyer?...
We are talking about published comment here, so yes, I am trained in contempt of court in relation to published comment.
I've had a couple of near misses too - reporting on courts is the sharp end when it comes to contempt and other reporting restrictions.
|
>> ...then this could be contempt of court...
>>
>> Contempt of court is a phrase - rather like health and safety - which is
>> bandied about but rarely used correctly.
>>
>> There is no contempt here, posting a video of your encounter with a copper is
>> not an offence or contempt of anything.
>>
>> What court is there to be in contempt of?
The point I was making is that if she is due to appear before a court, then publishing her own version of events in a public forum may be seen as prejudicial to the case. You often hear the BBC, on programmes such as Any Questions, asking panelists not to discuss a particular incident because it is about to go to court. I believe the media can be prosecuted for going into details in such a case. And I assume that an individual could also be prosecuted.
This does suggest I may be correct although I claim no knowledge of our legal system:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub_judice
|
...This does suggest I may be correct...
As per the third par of the wiki link, the phrase used for published comment is 'substantial risk of serious prejudice'.
Judges in several proper cases - unlike this case which is a bucket of poo - have found both must apply - ie the published comment must cause a substantial risk of prejudice, and that prejudice must also be serious.
In this instance we are light years from that.
Last edited by: Iffy on Tue 8 May 12 at 18:35
|
A proper contempt prosecution here:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18005905
The offending article was published during the trial, which any trained journalist will tell you was a daft thing to do.
Strictly, it's contempt with a small 'c' because the Spectator is being done under one of the Criminal Justice acts.
Good news for them, because the maximum penalty is a fine.
A prosecution under the Contempt of Court Act can mean prison for the editor - and the reporter.
|
Whilst there are clearly places where speed even below the limit is inappropriate, there are now so many more places where it is the limit that is inappropriate that the whole idea of enforcing them starts to look ridiculous.
Sadly, limits are also much more likely to be enforced where there is the least harm to be done (yes I am thinking of my two recent 'nicks' on empty country roads at 40 something mph). Actually deploying police officers to hide behind bushes to do it makes them look rather pathetic, and I am sorry they have to put up with it.
I have just spent a weekend in West Yorkshire, land of my fathers. It's no exaggeration to say I've barely got the car into top gear all weekend. The whole conurbation is a forest of signs, mainly relating to the man made obstacle course that is now the road system, and with an absolutely unbelievable number of cameras.
The woman was urinating in the wind of course, and the only person who suffers as a result of that behaviour will be her. But we do need to be made to think now and again. I cannot reconcile the control-freakery that hamstrings all compliant citizens, who must either bend over meekly or be humiliated and roughed up, with the absolute contempt for society shown by a large minority of low-lifes who just don't play the game at all, so can't lose.
I'll be too busy getting on with my life to join in any civil disobedience, but sadly I think the country is too far down the plughole to recover.
It's been a long day ;-)
|
>> Sadly, limits are also much more likely to be enforced where there is the least
>> harm to be done (yes I am thinking of my two recent 'nicks' on empty
>> country roads at 40 something mph). Actually deploying police officers to hide behind bushes to do it makes them look rather pathetic, and I am sorry they have to put
>> up with it.
When does it become a money-making racket, as opposed to a law enforcement racket? That is the question.
My route into town, on a good day, round dawn, can see me do some rather brisk travelling.
On other days, with mist coming in from the sea, my desire is only to... Oh wait! ...with mist coming in from the sea means that 40km/h is pushing it, safety wise.
Now, where do the authorities (a) set the limit; (b) start enforcing said limit?
Dual carriageway, visibility a mile ahead. road clear - 120 is fair. Same road, same Wings song? set it at 60, and trust that common sense (whassat?) will make sure drivers slow down.
Sadly, the muppets who drive the road every day at 80+ drive at 80+ when visibility is down to sweet FA...
|
Too late to edit. maybe it should be on page one of the driving test that a speed limit is just that: a limit, not a target or recommendation?
|
>> When does it become a money-making racket, as opposed to a law enforcement racket? That
>> is the question.
I don't disagree with your post. I know this topic has been rehashed online a multitude of times, but I will add my bit. Locally we have very few speed cameras, which does not make me unhappy. But I was pleased to see mobile speed cameras out in force during the recent rains. They were everywhere. That strikes me as sensible policing, as anyone who sped in those conditions was a maniac and needed to be taken down a peg or two. As many will add, fixed site speed cameras make no distinction between good conditions and bad ones.
|
I have never considered speeding enforcement to be a money making racket for the people making the policy, though as with the gold rush the industries making and selling the picks and shovels will have done very nicely.
To focus on the revenue generation misses the point that, done badly as it often is, it is another brick in the wall of insulting, nannying, restrictive measures that make ordinary people's lives that bit worse than they should be. It makes criminals of decent citizens and impinges hardly at all on the lives of parasitic, sociopathic, useless elements who actually need to be the target of a campaign of severe harassment and persecution until they behave themselves.
I know this rant sounds quite near to the hackneyed "why aren't the police out catching rapists and burglars" line, but I don't blame the front line police at all - the resources are misdirected, or otherwise taken up by tip-toeing around the whining, binge-drinking, drug-addled dregs of society who basically ignore any sanction that doesn't involve loss of liberty.
The world's gone mad I tell you;-)
|
|
I doubt whether there was any money making on this - this type of enforcement would be the old fashioned type, with money going to the Treasury and the admin process in the Courts - nothing will have gone into the Police Service.....
|
>> I doubt whether there was any money making on this - this type of enforcement
>> would be the old fashioned type, with money going to the Treasury and the admin
>> process in the Courts - nothing will have gone into the Police Service.....
Spot on Manatee/Rob. A figure was published a few years ago for the net income of the SCPs. Cannot remember the exact number but it was chicken feed compared with a penny on a single night's rounds in the nation's pubs.
The only enforcement cash cow is parking in Westminster/City/Camden/RBKC.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 8 May 12 at 21:23
|
|
I don't think that these would be hypothecated fines.
|
Are they like, fines for chemists then?
:-)
|
>> I have never considered speeding enforcement to be a money making racket for the people
>> making the policy, though as with the gold rush the industries making and selling the
>> picks and shovels will have done very nicely.
The speed camera partnerships are in effect little empires, and they will do their best to advertise their 'benefits' in order to further the careers of the senior management. And police forces will see it as a way to get a prosecution with little inward investment, in a time of cut backs.
Sadly I think you will find people here are a minority and most people abhor speeding, just go to the 'other forum' and you'll be surprised how many people tow the party line.
|
|
Any news on the court case?
|
Nicole got zapped by a copper with a gun and flagged down today 40 in a 30.
She talked her way out of a ticket. The Nurses uniform helped.
|
>> She talked her way out of a ticket.
That's what she told you...
|
>> That's what she told you...
>>
Who would have believed that Zero could be so naive? :-)
|
>> Who would have believed that Zero could be so naive? :-)
Surely the reference to the nurse's uniform is knowing rather than naive? Of course I would be the last to idealize Zero, petulant fellow that he is, but fair's fair what?
|
|
Blimey......i'm imagining a sort of 'Carry On' sketch
|
|
Clearly none of you have seen a modern nurses uniform.
|
|
Most of the real staff at our local hospital seem to wander about in green pyjamas.
|
I was nearly T boned by a Nurse (judging by her uniform) this afternoon, I was on the bike. I was in no mood to donate my organs in this NHS sponsored attempt ! I'd already latched onto her some way back. She was emerging from a private entrance and I looked in to the whites of her eyes before she pulled out.....
|
>> none of you have seen a modern nurses uniform.
(Drools like Homer Simpson) 'Modern nurses... Mmmmm....'
|
>> >> none of you have seen a modern nurses uniform.
>>
>> (Drools like Homer Simpson) 'Modern nurses... Mmmmm....'
I presume the bath cap and face mask are the icing on the cake.
|
Failing the attitude test - R.P.
